590.6 259 
- 
, The Zoological Congress 
HE fourth meeting of the International Zoological Congress was 
held at Cambridge between the 22nd and 27th of August, 
under the presidency of Sir John Lubbock. The attendance was 
more than twice as great as at any previous meeting, and the whole 
Congress must be regarded as an unqualified success. 
The plan of work comprised a discussion on some problem of 
general zoological interest in the morning, a series of sectional meet- 
ings for the consideration of more technical matters in the afternoon, 
with garden-party or reception in the evening. 
The proceedings opened on Monday evening with a reception 
by the Mayor of Cambridge to the members of the two Congresses 
of Zoology and Physiology, both of which were sitting during the 
same week. On Tuesday morning Sir John Lubbock began the 
work of the Congress by delivering his Presidential Address. Follow- 
ing the precedents set by the previous Presidents, Milne Edwards, 
Kapnist and Jentink, Sir John Lubbock confined his address to a 
welcome to the members, some interesting remarks on the great field 
of work still open to zoologists, and reference to the flourishing 
school of zoology which has its seat at Cambridge. The general 
report of the Congress was read by the treasurer, and Dr van Hoek 
announced some reforms in the postal charges for natural history 
specimens that were to be granted. Zoological nomenclature was 
brought up in reference to a report of a committee on that eternal 
question; but, to the general relief, any discussion was cleverly 
shelved until the next Congress. 
The two principal meetings of the Congress were held on Wednes- 
day and Thursday morning. At the former, Professor Delages and 
Mr Minchin opened a discussion on the “ Position of Sponges in the 
Animal Kingdom.” The fight soon resolved itself into a long-range 
skirmish between the old men and the young. Delages and Minchin 
both held that the inversion of the embryonic layers in the sponge 
precludes the reference of that group to the Coelenterata, though 
whether it is to be ranked as a separate group, or as directly descended 
from the Choanoflagellata seemed less certain. Haeckel and Schulze 
both clung to the Coelenterate theory. Vossmaer declined to ex- 
press an opinion, and Saville Kent reaftirmed his belief in the 
