398 Progress in Science. iJuly, 
be excluded from the inorganic division. As to its physiological place, it may 
take rank among component elementary bodies, supposing there is such a 
group, and either form part of an embryological section, or come under a 
division accessory to the generative organs of birds. Its most natural position 
is illustrating the textural character and peculiarities of the enveloping masses 
of the young of vertebrates, and therefore subsidiary to development near the 
ovum.” Again, ‘insects in amber are kept not as typical of the stru€ture of 
the amber itself, but as exemplifying a peculiar nidus wherein an insect may 
become imbedded. I would incline, therefore, to place such an obje& among 
the groups of inseéts: here either close to the genus which the inse& 
represented, or in a separate and subsidiary heading devoted to ‘ Insects 
imbedded in foreign substances’’ at the end of Insect structure. 
“Ought pearls to go along with shells, or as examples of disease? This 
again depends somewhat upon the nature of the collection. Strictly speaking, 
pearls are but a morbid condition of the nacreous material of shells, and hence 
are true examples of disease. They therefore, according to principle, should 
be ranged among Pathological textures. Ina miscellaneous series, however, 
where pathology forms either an unimportant factor, or is not meant to be 
exemplified at all, then pearls necessarily come under the heading Mollusca, 
or shell ; and a sub-series either together or after the representative genus to 
which the shell belongs. 
Respecting cabinets, after discussing the merits of the various contrivances 
for storing objects, Dr. Murie advocates for large and increasing collections a 
system of small cabinets of similar dimensions, each devoted to a group or 
subsidiary division, and numbered and labelled accordingly, and so arranged 
that to all intents and purposes they represent but one vast cabinet. In 
support of this opinion, Dr. Murie calls attention to the great convenience of 
such a system as exemplified in the Botanical Department and Inse& Room 
of the British Museum. He says, ‘‘such is my beau ideal of a microscopic 
cabinet, compound yet harmoniously single; adapted to meet the wants of a 
limited, a moderate, or a numerous series; expansion being in the ratio of 
increment of slides. But, further- 
Gt more, the same principle is appli- 
cable to very modest microscopical 
collection; such, indeed, as even 
the amateur, or those of limited 
means may aspire to. As a 
closing sentence to this clause, I 
may even make bold to say that, 
like other fashions and hobbies, 
that of cabinets is an infectious 
one; a piece of handsome furni- 
ture is attractive. Would- that 
the zest for a thorough mastery 
of the contents was as powerful 
a stimulant. The whole paper, 
as well as the preceding one, is 
worthy the attention of those 
interested in the arrangement of 
microscopic or other natural 
history collections. 
Mr. J.W. Stephenson, F.R.A.S., 
brings before the Royal Micro- 
scopical Society an improvement 
on his erecting binocular. The 
prisms are very much reduced in 
size, and are placed in a small 
brass tube, which is attached to 
the nozzle of the microscope in 
such a manner that it projects 
and enters into the interior of the object-glass mounting, and is thus brought 
