which it most nearly resembles '; so that my original view as to the nature of 

 this organ seems to be thus confirmed." 



From what is herein quoted from Dr. Gray's paper, it will be perceived, that 

 while the microscopic examination showed it to be '"quite unlike that of Gor- 

 gonia and Pennatida," that Mr. Carter's subsequent exagiination of the second 

 species referred to Osteocella, " shows that it is simihu^y composed to that of 

 Gorgonia, =* *■ * and * * * like that of the stem of Osteocelhv Cliftoni, and 

 the other Pennatulidse," etc. 



Dr. Gray's paper implies a collision between the microscopic test and the ex- 

 amination with acid; and the description of his genus contains a doubt as to 

 which division of the animal kingdom Osteocella is related. With high regard 

 for the justly distinguished naturalist, it must be admitted that his genus is 

 quite indefinite, and could be construed to cover a wide range ; but as he has 

 attached it to the catalogue of Pennatulidte, it is perhaps fair to infer that in 

 his mind the balance of reasoning tends in that direction ; as between the micro- 

 scopic and the acid tests, the latter is of insignificant value. 



But returning to the " switches," I find that Mr. Sclater does not commit him- 

 self, but with apparent consideration for the intelligence of the parties who sent 

 him the specimens and their statement that they belonged to a species of fish, he 

 only says that, " supposing * * * * that these objects are really derived 

 from such an animal as is described and figured above, I can only suggest that 

 they may be the hardened notochords of a low-organized fish, allied either to the 

 Chim£eroids or to the Lampreys, in which the notochord is persistent throughout 

 life. It is quite certain, I think, that they cannot be any part of the true ver- 

 tebral column." 



On page 432 of the same number of " Nature," appears an article relating to 

 Mr. Sclater's paper, from Mr. H. N. Moseley, who, after what appears to have 

 been a rather careful examination of the authorities upon the groups to which 

 he thinks it belongs, as well as upon its microscopical structure, expresses an 

 endorsement of Prof. Kolliker's opinion, and closes by saying : " In the mean 

 time I cannot but conclude that Mr. Sclater has been misinformed, and that we 

 are very unlikely ever to see that marvellous fish in the flesh." 



Again : in " Nature," of October 24th, 1872,* Mr. J. W. Dawson, Principal 

 of the McGill College, at Montreal, writes that, presuming that the " disputed 

 organism * * is specifically identical with a specimen from Frazer River 



* * presented * * for the Museum of the University * * *. I at 

 once recognised it as the axis of a Virgularia, or some similar creature * * 



* *. I submitted it to Prof. Verrill, of Tale College, who had no doubt as 

 to its nature ;" and Mr. Whiteaves, of Montreal, noticed it in his report, " as an 

 undescribed Pennatulid." 



Then follows Dr. Blake, in " Nature," (of November 28th, 1872)f to which 

 previous reference has been made by me, as it is a part of this Academy's pro- 

 ceedings, in which, as the result of a microscopic investigation, he says : " An 



* Vol. VI, No. 156. t Vol. VII, page 161, 



