VI ANIMALS AND PLANTS 179 



another, with as much semblance of individual 

 effort as a spectator on the Grands Mulets might 

 observe with a telescope among the specks repre- 

 senting men in the valley of Chamounix. 



The spectacle, though always surprising, was 

 not new to me. So my reply to the question put 

 to me was, that these organisms were what 

 biologists call Monads, and though they might be 

 animals, it was also possible that they might, 

 like the Bacteria, be plants. My friend received 

 my verdict with an expression which showed a 

 sad want of respect for authority. He would as 

 soon believe that a sheep was a plant. Naturally 

 piqued by this want of faith, I have thought a 

 good deal over the matter ; and, as I still rest in 

 the lame conclusion I originally expressed, and 

 must even now confess that I cannot certainly 

 say whether this creature is an animal or a plant, 

 I think it may be well to state the grounds of my 

 hesitation at length. But, in the first place, in 

 order that I may conveniently distinguish this 

 " Monad " from the multitude of other things 

 which go by the same designation, I must give it 

 a name of its own. I think (though, for reasons 

 which need not be stated at present, I am not 

 quite sure) that it is identical with the species 

 Nonas lens, as defined by the eminent French 

 microscopist Dujardin, though his magnifying 

 power was probably insufficient to enable him 

 to see that it is curiously like a much larger 



