Royal Microscopical Society. 203 



from. These then would either precede or form the main source of 

 divisions. On such grounds, most collectors of microscopic objects 

 and writers on Histology form or dwell on many subdivisions of 

 minute textural anatomy. Particularly was this the case with the 

 late Professor Quekett, who dealt largely and classified extensively, 

 according to the gradation of the elementary tissues. 



Time-honoured and sanctioned on good authority as is the case, 

 I nevertheless disagree with the custom of an elementary series 

 preceding the more regular natural arrangement of objects in 

 cabinets, except under certain conditions. I grant that intro- 

 ductory chapters on histological elements in manuals and text-books 

 are not only useful, but a necessary prelude to the thorough under- 

 standing of the composition of organs forming bodies treated on. 

 The circumstances of the case, however, are somewhat different, 

 namely, between a treatise on histology generally and a cabinet of 

 preserved specimens adapted for consultation and reference, where it 

 is su]3posed the primary elements are to some extent mastered. 



My reasons for divergence of opinion in the above point are : — 



1. That a separate elementary series causes an unnecessary 

 duplication of specimens; the same object being found in several 

 places in the collection. 



2. It mars the general harmony and sequence of the grouping. 



3. The elementary tissues are in reality part and parcel of the 

 main subdivision of organs and systems, and hence ought to be 

 looked for therein. 



4. The exception would be when a collection was used for 

 teaching the rudiments of histology. In such a case probably 

 nothing could be better devised than what has been done by Quekett 

 in the first volume of his histological catalogue, or by Kolliker and 

 other Continental authorities in their hand-books. Membranes, 

 fibres, woody tissues, cells, cartilages, bones, pigments, silicious 

 spicula and shell structures, are part and parcel of some organ. 

 Wherefore disjoin them from their respective vegetable or animal 

 organism, and render duplicates necessary when simplicity is the 

 mother of order ? 



I am aware objections may be raised against departure from the 

 ordinary routine, and the plea urged is that it is so convenient to 

 have the elementary textures apart for separate reference. I am 

 quite willing to acquiesce in this view if those who use it limit the 

 application to small private collections where necessarily little more 

 than types of fibre cell, &c., are present. But it becomes an entirely 

 different thing its being followed out with that wonderful detail 

 manifest in the great Quekett collection. There every variety of 

 primary vegetable and animal tissue — cellular, vascular, and sclerous 

 — is most elaborately represented, again to be repeated in a succeed- 

 ing part of the collection. 



