i8 95 . NOTES AND COMMENTS. 291 



evidence of resemblances which, though striking at first sight, have 

 been shown by more careful research to be due to convergence, homo- 

 plasy, or some other cause than affinity or descent. For instance, the 

 stalked larva of Anted on, to which Professor von Zittel somewhat 

 sarcastically refers, has actually been brought forward by writers of 

 no mean reputation in confirmation of their peculiar views about 

 certain Carboniferous crinoids, although slight reflection might have 

 convinced them that no connection was possible. Spivula, as readers 

 of Dr. Pelseneer's beautiful monograph in the " Challenger " Report 

 may gather, has been another notorious instance. Just because it 

 happens to be coiled, and to have a spherical initial chamber, it has 

 been considered a connecting link with the ammonites, although, as 

 Dr. Pelseneer shows, it is really descended from some ancestor of 

 belemnites or cuttle-fish. It is against this foolhardiness of specula- 

 lation, based on ignorance and an insufficient appreciation of the 

 needs of the genealogist, that Professor von Zittel's protest should be 

 raised. So far we are in full agreement with our learned leader ; but 

 we would not carry his caution too far. We believe in the reliability 

 of palaeontology and embryology, so long as they are kept within their 

 proper limits, checked by one another and by the evidence of com- 

 parative anatomy and general ontogeny. We believe that palaeon- 

 tology especially is emerging from the mists of its first madness, and 

 arriving, through sober study and minute comparisons, at results of 

 validity and importance. Though every result may not at once be 

 accepted, yet we cannot doubt that the methods employed by Hyatt, 

 Cope, Jackson, and Beecher in America ; by Branco, Wiirtenberger, 

 Buckman, and a few others in Europe, are correct in principle, and 

 we are glad to find that they meet with the approval of so eminent an 

 authority as Von Zittel. The time may not have arrived for the 

 reform of the entire zoological system ; but that is no reason why all 

 reform should be refused. Zoology is a growing science, and it must 

 have its growing pains. It is only by the proposal of new classifica- 

 tions, and by the balancing of one against the other, that we shall be 

 enabled to select the best in the end. Change is inevitable ; and it is 

 better that it should take place gradually, than that all the spars and 

 tackle by which our voyage has been so far accomplished, should be 

 kept till they are rotten, and then, on a sudden, go by the board. 



Sir William Flower on the Principles of Nomenclature. 



The subject discussed by Sir Henry Howorth in recent issues of 

 Natural Science, and our comments thereon, have aroused no little 

 interest. A correspondent calls our attention to an extract from 

 part 2 of Sir William Flower's Catalogue of Osteology of Verte- 

 brated Animals in the Museum of the Royal College of Surgeons. 

 This was published in 1884, and as it seems to us of considerable 

 importance, we print it in full : — 



y 2 



