36 REVIEW. 
The unfortunate worms have also been greatly ignored 
by the anatomist, the labours of Cuvier, Audouin and 
Edwards, Claparéde and De Quatrefages, leaving large gaps 
to be filled up; while, as regards external morphology, 
Professor Huxley* alone has made the attempt to advance 
upon Grube’s useful though by no means perfect nomencla- 
ture. 
Matters being thus, the announcement of a work on the 
annuloid animals of the sea and fresh waters by one who has 
laboured so successfully during the last twenty years at their 
anatomy as M. de Quatrefages, was a subject for great re- 
joicing to those interested in the group, and high expectations 
were raised. The work has at length appeared, in two yo- 
lumes, with twenty illustrative plates. It does not treat of the 
whole sub-kingdom Annuloida (Annelés), nor of all worms 
which are sometimes classed as Annelida, but only of the 
Polycheta appendiculata and Gymnocopa of Grube, to which 
M. de Quatrefages restricts the class Annelida, and the 
Gephyrea, once regarded as Echinoderms ; the other classes, 
embracing the earthworms, leeches, &c., are, we believe, to 
be discussed in other volumes by other authors. 
We propose in the few following pages briefly to notice the 
various chapters of M. de Quatrefages’ work, which we may 
at once state contains a yast amount of information, and 
numberless valuable facts, never before placed so readily to 
the hand of the naturalist. Much, indeed, of the matter is 
quite new, and the plates are for the most part very good, 
though sometimes oyer-coloured. While fully acknowledging 
the value of the work, we cannot but express some disap- 
pointment at the absence of any general views and philoso- 
phical exposition of the facts treated of in the first few 
chapters. The author appears as a most diligent observer, 
but fails to go beyond this. In the systematic portion of the 
work he has done great service in characterising all the known 
genera and most of the species of Annelida and Gephyrea ; he 
has not, however, attempted to reduce the confusion in syno- 
nymy directly, and indirectly has added a little to it by not 
fully figuring and describing his new species. 
In the Introduction the author defends his views on the 
classification of the Annuloida, or worms, which he divides 
primarily into two parallel series—the monecious and 
dicecious—which contain groups presenting analogies to each 
other (the monecious to the diccious groups), but not 
affinities strictly so-called. In the following tables we give 
* Lectures in ‘ Med. Times and Gaz.,’ 1856. 
