209 
the original Aporea of Bailey, “ Micros. Obs. in 8. Carolina, &e.’’ 
in ‘Smithsonian Contrib.,’ Ist Dec., 1850), see ‘ Quart. Journ. 
of Micr. Science,’ vol. vi, n.s., p. 183, Dec., 1865. The monads 
are globose, whitish, their substance granular in appearance, with- 
out eye-speck, seemingly uniciliated. The long, flagellate, exceed- 
ingly delicate cilia, to be seen sometimes at the ends of the 
branches of this organism, had some time ago been detected by 
Dr. Barker and pointed out by him. Occasionally since then, 
opportunities to notice these cilia had presented themselves, but 
Mr. Archer could never before perceive the monads individually ; 
in the present examples they crowned the summit of every branch 
of this compressed, brownish, striped, granular-looking tree- 
like production, just like great clusters of some whitish fruit, thus 
presenting a remarkable and rather conspicuous appearance. 
There could be but little doubt that this production must be 
most probably very closely related to, if not congeneric with, 
certain organisms recorded on a previous occasion by Mr. Archer 
(‘ Quart. Journ. Micr. Sci.,’ vol. viii, n. s., p. 119), one of which, at 
least, he thought must be equivalent to Monas consociata (Frese- 
nius, “ Beitraige zur Kenntniss mikroskopischer Organismen,” in 
‘Abhandlungen der Senckenbergischen Gesellschaft,’ Bd. 2, p.237). 
If he were not wrong, this would prove another of the same type, 
yet still more distinct from the three previously adverted to by 
Mr. Archer than they from each other, inter se. This form in 
question is common ; in fact, gatherings from all parts of the country 
had shown it ; yet the presence of the “ monads’’ seems to be rare, 
or, at least, rarely seen, though, doubtless, every branch of the 
structure, at some epoch or other, must produce its “ monads.” 
The form named Monas consociata by Fresenius (loc. cit.), which 
is most likely equivalent to one, or perhaps to both, of the two 
first referred to by Mr. Archer (loc. cit.), if, indeed, the whole 
three be not states of one another, had been lately referred to a 
new genus by Professor Cienskowsky, and named Phalansterium 
(Cienskowsky, “ Ueber Palmellaceen und einige Flagellaten,”’ in 
Schultze’s ‘ Archiv fiir mikroskopische Anatomie,’ Bd. vi, p. 428), 
of which genus Monas consociata (Fresenius) makes one species 
(Phalansterium consociatum, Cuk.), and a new form occurring as 
comparatively long, brownish, slender, filamentary aggregations 
makes a second (Ph. intestinwm, Cnk.). Professor Cienkowsky’s 
figure of the former (t. xxiv, f. 29, loc. cit.) appears rather formal 
and rigid ; it is possibly the same as the second form referred to 
by Mr. Archer (loe. cit.), but there is not any reference to the 
irregularly divaricating and more or less radiate branching of the 
granular gelatinous matrix (Gallerthaufe, Cienk.) forming the 
“ monads’ ” habitations (Wohnstatte, Cienk.), characteristic of the 
first form previously referred to by Mr. Archer. There is, however, 
much probability that the latter may be only a more fully grown 
condition ofthe second. Cienkowsky, however, speaks of a brown 
colour and an irregular contour often eventually assumed by his 
form, thus approaching the third form referred to by Mr. Archer 
