PROCEEDINGS OF SOCIETIES. 185 
The Rey. E. O’Meara, A.M., showed a new Gephyria, which he 
proposed to name, after Professor Harvey, G. Harveyi, and which 
he characterised as follows :—Frustules much smaller than those of 
G. incurvata and G. media. In front view the costate margins 
are rounded, and elevated above the surface of the connecting 
zone, which is narrow, not costate; the side view is elliptical, the 
terminal spaces on ventral surface small, the median line indis- 
tinct ; the median line absent on dorsal surface, the coste running 
across the valve. Found on Haloplegma Preissii, from Port 
Fairy, Victoria. 
Mr. Archer exhibited several forms of fresh-water Rhizopods, 
all which occurred in the same pool, indeed on one slide. These, 
so far as Mr. Archer could identify them, and taken in the order 
of the comparative frequency of their occurrence in the gathering, 
were Difflugia pyriformis, D. corona, D. spiralis, Arcella vulgaris, 
A. aculeata, Euglypha alveolata, Gromia fluviatilis, Actinophrys 
sol, A. Hichornii, anda Plagyophrys (?). As so varied an assemblage 
of these forms in a fresh and vigorous condition, though indi- 
vidually, as regards some of them, not rare, does not seem very 
frequently to present itself, Mr. Archer thought the present would 
not be without interest. It is to be regretted, indeed, that Rhizo- 
podous creatures do not bear a transit from one house to another, 
spread out upon a slide, without more or less shrinking in, with- 
drawing their pseudopods, and ceasing to present their character- 
istic conditions; and this was more especially the case with the 
beautiful Gromia. <A fresh dip from the supply of the material 
brought down fortunately, however, amply presented a group in 
good condition of the Difflugize and Arcelle. Mr. Archer said it 
would, indeed, not well become him too hastily to put forward an 
opinion of his own opposed to tkose who had bestowed large 
attention upon these interesting organisms, such as Dr. Wallich 
or Dr. Carpenter, yet he would venture to suggest that, so far as 
the fresh-water forms of this group are concerned, they seem 
in themselves sufficiently constant to make it probable that the 
former writer at least was somewhat premature in the views set 
forth by him in the ‘Annals of Natural History,’ 3rd ser., vol. xiii, 
pp. 215 et seqq. The Difflugie and Arcelle seem to turn up again 
and again, and apparently so far duplicates of one another that 
one can at least say that such a given recurring form is at least 
the same thing one has seen before; though it may be possible, 
indeed, that some assumed as distinct may be younger states of 
other forms, and thus that Dr. Wallich may be right in part and 
wrong in his too comprehensive ultimate conclusions. Between 
the different forms now exhibited there did not seem any puzzling 
nondescripts. It may be said the next adjacent pond might pro- 
duce them: a gathering from another pond on the same heath 
was on the table, and though by no means so rich in Rhizopods, 
there unmistakeably were those frequent forms, Difflugia pyri- 
formis, and Arcella vulgaris, and A. aculeata. But, again, it might 
