478 PROFESSOR E. RAY LANKESTER. 



elusion that all these forms, Gastrophysema and Haliphy- 

 sema, are hut variations of one species, necessarily referable 

 to the original Haliphysema Tumayioioiczii. 



At the same time Mr. Norman has no observations to 

 offer relative to the internal structure of the soft living 

 animal, and accepts (as all zoologists would gladly do at 

 this moment) Professor Haeckel's description as correct. 

 Accordingly Mr. Norman refers Haliphysema to the Sponges. 



In July, 1878, however, the ' Annals ' contained a very 

 important paper by Mr. SaVille Kent. Whilst other zoologists 

 had settled down to a belief in the Physemaria, Mr. Kent 

 had not rested content till he obtained living specimens of 

 these forms. These he procured in abundance at Jersey, 

 and was now able to offer some most astonishing observa- 

 tions on Haliphysema. He figured in a drawing, which 

 must be accepted as an accurate representation of fact, a 

 specimen of the tube of Haliphysema, from which was issuing 

 an abundant reticular protoplasm, spreading its filaments 

 far beyond the tube, even to a distance of five times its 

 greatest diameter (' Annals and Mag. Nat. History,' ser. 

 v, vol ii, pi. v). This drawing represents, Mr. Kent tells 

 us, Avhat he saw of a living specimen examined intact on 

 the field of the microscope. 



The conclusion which Mr. Kent drew from this observa- 

 tion Avas perfectly legitimate. He concluded that he had 

 before him a Reticularian Rhizopod. Further, he had no 

 reason to doubt, especially after Mr. Norman's discussion of 

 the subject, that the tube from Avhich the protoplasm issued 

 was that of Haliphysema (alias Squamulina, alias Gastro- 

 physema). Accordingly, Haliphysema was shown not to be 

 a two-cell-layered organism, but an arenaceous Foraminifer, 

 one of Dr. Carpenter's Lituolida. 



At the same time Mr. Kent is careful to point out that, 

 should there be organisms, as represented by Professor 

 Haeckel, corresponding to the forms identified by himself 

 (Mr. Kent) with Haliphysema, and having internal cavities 

 lined with collar-bearing flagellate cells, their sponge nature 

 would be unquestionable, and we should have in them 

 merely remarkable isomo7phs or external facsimiles of the 

 Foraminiferal type. 



Being deeply interested in this controversy, and not 

 knowing whom to credit nor how to explain discrepancies, 

 doubtiug very much the ''isomorph" theory, I applied to 

 Mr. Saville Kent for living specimens of his Haliphysema 

 Tumanowiczii. 



With my request he most courteously complied, and sent 



