Mr. W. Clark on the recent Foraminifera. 163 
by the pullulation of the parenchyme and exudation of calcareous 
matter from the enveloping membrane until the lobe is complete 
and receives the final stigma of eight new tentacula, the old ones 
being merged in or become the germs of the new production, 
and so on, until nature has finally completed her work. We thus 
see that this animal, when the first germ is cast, mereases by 
pullulation, and at the same time performs the function of re- 
production by committing its gemme to fix themselves in their 
natural habitats. From these circumstances it is probable that 
the calcareous organisms are solitary, distributed without order, 
and fixed to rocks, corals, and other hard submarine substances 
by the pointed stylet which is attached to the posterior terminus 
of many of the species ; and in fresh specimens of this genus and 
Marginulina legumen, the fracture of the attaching stylet is very 
visible by a lens of common power; but from the tenuity and 
fragility of the penultimate appendages, these organisms almost 
always come to us detached, as the substances on which they are 
naturally fixed are probably rocks and coral reefs ; we therefore 
can scarcely hope to see them in situ; and if they ever come into 
the dredge on fragments, they have from their small volume been 
passed over without observation, and again cast into the deep. 
I still however hope to see them in a state of nature: I have 
directed my dredger to bring in all masses from the coralline 
zone. 
To return to the animal, a curious question arises: Is it a com- 
pound being, though a solitary organism? Does the formation 
of gemmez on all the lobes indicate that each is a distinct being, 
which, instead of opening exteriorly as in many of the other sec- 
tions of the compound polypi, receives sustentation from the 
common canal? can this continuous tube be merely to serve as 
an oviduct ? is it not also to supply each lobe with water, food, 
and for depuration ? If these questions are answered in the affir- 
mative, each segment may be so far a distinct being, as a com- 
mon connection between the whole mass admits of ; on the other 
hand, does the isochronal development of gemme in all, the 
almost isolated lobes, evidence that the animal is a simple one? 
If this creature had the segments inclosed in a simple tube, as 
in the Annelidz, I should answer, it is not a compound animal ; 
and perhaps even in the first case, those better qualified to judge 
than myself, will decide it is a simple being, and that the con- 
temporaneous appearance of gemmz merely shows that each 
lobe is under a similar stimulus. 
As to the movement of the fluids, I cannot believe that the 
common canal serves for four distinct functions—for food, the 
dejections, regeneration, and aération, without an inconvenient 
interference of one organ with another; I am therefore in- 
11* 
