156 NATURAL SCIENCE. March, 



studied in detail. We shall only make reference to one or two of the 

 incidental discussions which seem especially worthy of attention. The 

 division of the Decapod Crustacea by Dr. Boas into two suborders, 

 the Natantia and the Reptantia, is subjected to a searching analysis 

 by Dr. Hansen, with the result, as it seems, that the proposed divi- 

 sion must be regarded as thoroughly untenable. But that against 

 which Dr. Hansen fights most strenuously is, not any particular error 

 or any individual author, but, as the title of his essay implies, against 

 a modern tendency to " germanise " Danish science. While owning 

 the services to science rendered by Germany through her numerous 

 men of genius, he considers that Denmark has a scientific character 

 and spirit of her own distinct from that of Germany. The larger 

 country delights in hypothesis and theory, the smaller in thorough- 

 going accuracy of investigation. He rightly considers that it would 

 be a loss to the world to have that national characteristic overborne 

 by the predominating influence of Denmark's powerful neighbour. 

 He views with alarm the introduction of German books of education, 

 German modes of thought, the ambition of the rising generation to 

 study in Germany, to write in German, to win acceptance and com- 

 mendation in German periodicals. To counteract all this, he is 

 extremely desirous that in the scientific journals of his own country, 

 as an alternative to the vernacular or Latin, the accepted language 

 should be neither German nor- French, but only and exclusively 

 English. He urges that English ought to be thoroughly taught in 

 Danish schools, that though not in words, yet in construction, it is far 

 nearer to Danish than is the German language, and that both in 

 England and the English tongue Danish science would find a genial 

 welcome that could not be fraught with any mischievous consequences. 



The Giant Birds. 



The difficulties that beset the study of fossil vertebrates are 

 nowhere better illustrated than in the case of the Dinornithidas. 

 The remains of these extinct birds have been found in immense 

 numbers, scattered in the superficial deposits of New Zealand. Only 

 in rare instances is it possible to say that any two bones belonged to 

 the same individual, while the number of even moderately complete 

 skeletons is exceedingly small. As names have been founded upon 

 single bones, the greatest confusion has arisen in the nomenclature of 

 the family, owing to there being no means of correlating these bones 

 with one another or with the rest of the skeleton. The difficulties have 

 been further increased by the great individual variation to which 

 these birds were subject, and also by the reconstruction of skeletons 

 from odd bones which may belong to several species. 



Several attempts have been made to evolve order out of this 

 chaos, and perhaps the most successful is that of Mr. Lydekker in 

 the British Museum Catalogue of Fossil Birds. The only way, 



