VII. 



Owen. 



{Concluded from page 30.) 

 IV.— SIR RICHARD OWENS RESEARCHES ON THE VERTEBRATA. 



SIR RICHARD OWEN'S contributions to knowledge of the 

 vertebrate animals, both living and extinct, are so vast, and 

 relate to so many details of anatomy and zoology, that it is impossible 

 in a brief notice to do more than survey the broad features of his 

 work. He was placed, it is true, amid facilities for research that 

 have perhaps not been equalled either before or since ; he not only 

 benefited by the labours of John Hunter, and had the entire collec- 

 tion of the Royal College of Surgeons at his disposal, but for a long 

 period was favoured with the almost exclusive right of dissecting the 

 various animals dying in the Zoological Gardens. Nevertheless, 

 none but an enthusiast gifted with Owen's great intellect and in- 

 domitable perseverance could have taken the full advantage of these 

 facilities ; and the mass of new facts and detailed observations in 

 Comparative Anatomy and Zoology recorded in the Hunterian 

 Professor's publications, exceeds even the work of Cuvier himself. 

 His various catalogues of the collections in the Royal College of 

 Surgeons, his three volumes on the Compavative Anatomy and Physiology 

 of Vevtehrates, and his numerous memoirs published by the Royal, 

 Linnean, and Zoological Societies of London — all must be tested 

 to be appreciated ; and we fear there are few naturalists of the newest 

 school who refer to these old classics to the extent that they deserve. 

 Owen's detailed memoirs and descriptions, however, require 

 laborious attention in reading on account of their nomenclature and 

 modes of expression ; and there is, perhaps, some reason that those 

 now engaged in research should confine their attention to works of 

 reference in more familiar language. At the same time, it must be 

 remembered that Owen was the pioneer in a concise anatomical 

 nomenclature ; that many of our most familiar terms of everyday use 

 are due to him ; and that if the " laws of priority " are ever enforced 

 as regards anatomical terms, his influence on accepted nomenclature 

 will become still more conspicuous. It is, indeed, to be regretted 

 that Owen could never be induced to follow, at least to some extent, 

 the new school of anatomy and zoology that arose with the epoch- 



K 



