1897] SOME NEW BOOKS 205 
of conflicting authorities. We look for some pronouncement on 
debated points, and for some clue through the maze that perplexes 
us. In these respects the present work leaves us unsatisfied. There 
is no exposition of the principles of the classification adopted ; there 
are no keys; and there is little to indicate the relations of the species 
to one another. The authors suffer from an excess of caution: they 
tell us what Hyatt has written, what Haug thinks, what is the 
opinion of Branco, and what one will find in Zittel; but what their 
own views are, wild horses will not drag from them. It is the duty 
of people with such advantages as have our authors, not only to have 
opinions but to express them. It is not enough to tell us of so 
interesting a form as Clymenia that its derivation “is at present 
enigmatical” ; it has been that for half-a-century. But one doubts 
occasionally whether even the authors know their own minds. There 
is a vast deal of quotation as to the systematic position of Bactrites, 
but where it is placed after all, we cannot understand. In Part I. of 
the Catalogue, Dr Foord inserted it among the Nautiloidea; in Part 
II. he said that he would refer it to the Ammonoidea ; and now in 
Part III. it is hung up in the air, as though it were an Archi- 
cephalopod or a Schematic Mollusc. Again, among the quotations 
bearing on this, we find a passage from Hyatt and some of his 
figures ; but we find no quotation of the destructive criticism of this 
passage published by Mr Crick himself, in conjunction with Mr 
Bather, in Natural Science for December 1894 (vol. v., p. 425). It is 
less strange, but quite as inexcusable, that there should be no refer- 
ence to the important papers by J. M. Clarke in the American 
Geologist. There is always some excellent excuse for the suppression 
of evidence, and we shall no doubt learn that this is all for the good 
of the Government—or its officials. 
It is curious, in a volume dealing with the Goniatites, to find no 
family Goniatitidae and no genus Goniatites. The type-species of 
Goniatites is the Nautilites sphaericus of Martin, a perfectly well- 
known form, which appears in this book as a Glyphioceras. There 
seems no room for doubt that Glyphioceras must rank as a synonym 
of Goniatites, since the latter has some sixty years’ priority. 
With the few exceptions mentioned, the volume is brought well 
up to date, and the care with which it has been compiled augurs well 
for the continuation of the series. 
PorpuLAR NATURAL HISTORY 
Tue Concise KNowLepGE LinraRy—Naturau History. Edited by Alfred H. Miles. 
8vo, pp. xvi. and 771, with 530 original illustrations. London-: Hutchinson & 
Co., 1897. Price, 5s. 
TuIs volume is the first of a projected series, the purpose of which is 
shown in the title, and in the editorial preface. The volumes are 
intended to be “concise and popular . . . at once accurate in state- 
ment, handy in form, and ready of reference”; and the results hoped 
for are, “ that much time may be saved to busy people and much help 
afforded to students.” The plan is excellent, but the execution is 
scarcely so successful as one would expect from the names which 
figure on the title page. Mr Lydekker is responsible for the mammals, 
