Frenzel’s Mesozoon Salinella. . 481 
and its further consequences, and then term simply develop- 
ment. A continuous and inevitable change in the condition 
(mobile condition ?) of matter in general is the common 
destiny of the universe, and is the equivalent of existence and 
the progress of the world. In speaking of phylogenetic 
development we refer this general change only to one special 
case, to that of living beings, where it proceeds at different 
rates according to the qualities of the Protoblasts, but every- 
where essentially in the same direction and according to the 
same laws. 
Certain cells in the Metazoon, owing to their peculiarly 
favourable conditions of life, attain to more of the original 
independent vital energy of the unicellular ancestors than do 
the rest: these cells are the reproductive ones. The egg-cell 
of Salinella proves the originality (low stage of development) 
of the species also through the very fact that, as a simple cell- 
individual, it possesses even more vital energy than does the 
egg-cell in all Metazoa. In a general way it is perhaps pos- 
sible to advance the proposition, somewhat paradoxical though 
it appears, that THE HIGHER ORGANIZATION OF THE MULTI- 
CELLULAR INDIVIDUAL IS TO BE REGARDED AS THE CONSE- 
QUENCE OF THE GRADUAL DEGENERATION OF THE SEPARATE 
CELL-INDIVIDUALS WHICH COMPOSE IT. 
To briefly sum up what has been stated in the foregoing 
pages, I consider Salinella as a highly valuable and interesting 
discovery precisely because, in opposition to Frenzel’s view, 
it at once fits in thoroughly well with our present biological 
theory as to the origin of the Metazoa, and, so to speak, fills 
a gap in the series of facts for our deductions. Frenzel is 
certainly quite right when he states in the concluding words 
of his article (‘ Biologisches Centralblatt ;’ Ann. & Mag. Nat. 
Hist. doc. cit.) that there are isolated links in Nature “ for 
which we cannot find a place in our system, beautifully and 
ingeniously constructed though it is, and which tend to prove 
how little Nature is amenable to a dogmatic treatment on our 
part, a treatment which unfortunately appears to take the 
upper hand too much in the biological sciences, and which 
would gladly exclude everything which does not fit into its 
narrow frames.”’ Happily, however, this great truth does 
not apply to Salinella! *. 
Kolozsvar, 
October, 1891. 
* J have already given expression to views as to the simplest living 
beings, the impossibility of separating the ideas of life and individuality, 
and the import and causes of reproduction (fission) &c., which are in 
Ann. & Mag. N. Hist. Ser. 6. Void. ix. 36 
