5i4 RICHAUD EVANS. 



less closely related to the male geuital system in the dif- 

 ferent genera of the Peripatidae. 



la Peripatus Edwardsii the "anal glands " open on 

 either side of the anus as shown by Gaffron (7). In Peri- 

 patoides No vae-Zealandite, according to Miss Sheldon, the 

 '^ accessory glands" open outside the nerve-cords near the 

 posterior end of the body (16). In Peripatoides le u ch- 

 art i, Fletcher describes the " accessory glands " as opening 

 close togetlier between the generative poro and the anus (6). 

 In Peripatopsis capensis, accordingto Balfour, the'"' male 

 accessory glands" open into the ductus ejaculatorius (2). 

 Willey describes the " pygidial glands " of Paraperipatus 

 Nov£e-Bri tannine as debouching into a much-thickened bul- 

 bus, which in its turn opens to the exterior above the anus (18) . 

 In Eo])eripatus the male accessory glands debouch into a 

 median opening situated between the last pair of legs. 



From the above short statement it will be seen that the 

 glands found at the posterior end of the Peripatidas open 

 to the exterior in half a dozen different positions. As to 

 their homology two views have been put forward, and obvi- 

 ously two views are possible. Balfour thought the male 

 accessory glands of P. capensis were homologous with the 

 crural glands (2). Kennel thinks that the anal glands of P. 

 Edwardsii are homologous with the renal organs (9), and 

 Willey seems to accept this view (18). The latter author in 

 his most brilliant account of the anatomy and development 

 of Paraperipatus Novas-Britannia writes as follows of 

 the '' pygidial glands :" — " There are a pair of glands .... 

 homologous with the 'accessory glands' of the African 

 and Australian species, and with the ' anal glands ' of the 

 Neotropical species." On another page he has the following 

 expression: — ''It is advisable to give separate names to 

 structures, even though obviously homologous, when they 

 have such very different anatomical relations." (In both of 

 the above quotations the italics are mine.) Dr. Willey has 

 brought forward few or no reasons in favour of the view 

 that all these glands are " obviously homologous." At ihe 



