Bibliographical Notices. 69 
Fossil fishes occupy Lecture IX. They characterized the Upper 
Paleozoic (or Ichthyozoic) period. ‘There can be little doubt,’ 
says the author, “ that the Paleeozoic fishes approach the reptilian 
type more closely than the Neozoic fishes, and that they are entitled, 
if on this account alone, to be regarded as possessing a higher 
organization.” 
Lecture X. takes in the ‘‘ Phytozoic Period’’ (seemingly the same 
as the “Ichthyozoic”’), treating of fossil Plants, especially Conifers 
and Acrogens, Carboniferous plants, Sigillariz and Lepidodendra, 
Calamites and Ferns, and giving special and general remarks thereon. 
The Appendix contains the author’s elaboration of “the Phyllo- 
taxis of Whorls.”’ 
Lecture XI. begins the Neozoic Period, and takes up the fossil 
Reptiles, so abundant as to characterize the “Saurozoic Period.” 
We have a classification of Reptiles; and notes on the Chelonians, 
Saurians, Pterodactyles, Enaliosaurians (including a limbless tadpole 
Ichthyosaur! to be seen at Trinity College, Dublin), Labyrin- 
thodonts, Ophidians, and Batrachians, in succession, form a brief 
history of the group. The monstrous restoration (at p. 275) 
of Cheirotherium Anglorum (why attributed to the English we 
do not know) is enough to frighten even naturalists themselves. 
We saw it once figuring in some book of popular geology, and 
shut the book at once. Birds appear in Lecture XII., as far, at 
least, as the Connecticut foot-prints and the Moa are concerned— 
not much for 1862, seeing that bird-bones had then been recognized 
in the Trias (North Carolina), the Stonesfield Oolite, the Wealden, 
the Upper Greensand, and many Tertiary beds. We must correct 
two statements made, at p. 252: first, the great fossil foot-prints at 
Hastings are Reptilian and not Ornithic; secondly, Dr. Mantell 
found only one or two Wealden bird-bones, not ‘‘ many.’ The 
LEchinozoa then have a few pages of classification and useful remarks, 
the Lecture ending with a wholesome caution to those who are fond 
of theorizing instead of collecting facts; and this seems to be offered 
by the author especially to those who see any evidence of the pro- 
gression theory in the early appearance of the fixed Crinoids and the 
later predominance of the free Asteroids and Hcehinoids. Students 
will be glad of Lecture XIII. with its classificatory notices of Cepha- 
lopods and Bivalves, short as they are. Oldhamia, classed with Po- 
lyzoa on little or no evidence (it is either a Seaweed or a Sertularian), 
has more cuts than text; and Graptolithus (most probably a Sertu- 
larian) is grouped with them, and has but short shrift. 
Lecture XIV., on fossil Mammals, has their classification for its 
basis. The ‘‘ Mastozoic Epoch” of the author seems to have ex- 
tended from the so-called Miocene to the Glacial period (Dinotherium 
and Sivatherium, the Mammoth and Megaceros, being some of 
the characteristic mammals). The next epoch is his “ Anthropo- 
zoic;” and he says that the connecting links between these two 
epochs ‘are nowhere to be found.” Surely the Camel and Giraffe 
are fossil in the Sivalik Hills with the Dimothere and Sivathere ; 
surely Man and his works were contemporaneous with the old Ele- 
