NATURE 



[November 3, 1910 



cognise resemblances than to overlook differences; 

 and in the excessive multiplication of genera and 

 species (as distinct from division into races) there is 

 undoubtedly a great danger of losing sight of mutual 

 affinities. 



As instances of this multiplication, reference may 

 be made to the specific separation of the Irish from 

 the Scotch hare, of the Scotch from the English wild 

 cat, and of the British from the Continental water- 

 rats. On the other hand, the British squirrel is re- 

 garded merely as a local race of the Continental 

 species, a classification difficult to reconcile with that 

 adopted in the case of the species just mentioned. 

 Whatever may be individual views on such matters, we 

 venture to think that most naturalists will agree in 

 objecting to the principle of introducing the names 

 of one or more species between those of the typical 

 form and the races of another, as is done in the case 

 of the wild cats. In regard to generic grouping, it 

 may be mentioned that, in the case of mice, the 

 long-tailed species appears as Mus sylvaticus, and the 

 harvest-mouse as Apodemus minutus, whereas the 

 latter (if generic spHtting be adopted), should be 

 Micromys tninutus, and the former Apodemus 

 sylvaticus. The weasels, again, are included in the same 

 genus as the polecats, from which they are sundered 

 by many modern naturalists. As regards the distri- 

 bution of the European fauna, the author recognises 

 four distinct areas, viz., Central European, Arctic, 

 Eastern or Steppe, and African or Mediterranean. 



While congratulating Dr. Trotiessart on the com- 

 pletion of a laborious task, we may take the oppor- 

 tunity of mentioning that his work strongly em- 

 phasises and confirms a reply the present writer was 

 compelled to make some months ago to Dr. A. R. 

 Wallace, namely, that to give, even approximately, 

 the number of species of mammals inhabiting the 

 various zoological provinces is, under present con- 

 ditions, an absolute impossibility. It is very largely 

 a case of "go as you please." R. L. 



THE SCIENCE OF PATHOLOGY. 

 The Principles of Pathology. By Prof. J. G. Adami, 

 F.R.S., and Prof. A. G. Nicholls, F.R.S. (Can.). 

 Vol. II., Systemic Pathology. Pp. xvi+1082. 

 London: Henry Frowde and Hodder and Stoughton, 

 1910.) Price 305. net. 



THIS second volume of Prof. Adami 's great work 

 on the science of pathology deals with systemic 

 pathology-^the pathology of the individual tissues and 

 organs of the body, or special pathology, as it is often 

 termed^ — and has been written in conjunction with his 

 colleague, Prof. Nicholls. In the preface the authors 

 offer an (unneeded) apology for the bulkiness of the 

 first voluiTbe on general pathology (reviewed in Nature 

 of November 25, 1909, vol. Ixxxii., p. 94), and the 

 relative brevity of this second volume, for many would 

 consider that special pathology requires at least double 

 the space devoted to general pathology. They point 

 W't, howevfer, that, provided the student has acquired 

 a good grasp of general pathology, he has but to apply 



no". 2140, VOL. 85] 



those principles in order to become possessed of a 

 sound basis of special pathology, a proposition with 

 which we are in complete agreement. 



But for the inclusion, therefore, of the pathology of 

 the blood and cardio-vascular system, and also of the 

 disorders of function as well as of structure of the 

 various organs, even the present volume might have 

 been curtailed in length. At the same time, we think 

 that this attempt at brevity has in some cases been 

 carried too far, and although the subjects may have 

 been dealt with at length in the first volume on general 

 pathology, some repetition would not have been out 

 of place. As instances, we may mention the 

 bare reference to diabetes in the section dealing with 

 the pancreas, and the omission of blackwater fever 

 as a disease in which haemoglobinuria occurs. Other- 

 wise, we confess we have found little to criticise, and 

 the work gives a very full and accurate account of the 

 subject. 



Each organ is dealt with on a systematic plan ; first 

 a brief summary of its developmental history, ana- 

 tomical structure and physiological functions, followed 

 by a description of the congenital and acquired abnor- 

 malities, circulatory disturbances, inflammations and 

 parasitic Infections, and retrogressive and progressive 

 metamorphoses to which it may be subject. In the 

 division devoted to the blood and cardio-vascular 

 system, the sections dealing with leukaemia seem some- 

 what brief in view of the importance of the subject, 

 and no mention is made of cases of the lymphatic 

 variety in which the total number of leucocytes is not 

 markedly increased, but in which nearly all the leuco- 

 cytes present are lymphocytes. In the section dealing 

 with pernicious anaemia also no mention is made of 

 the almost invariable leucopenia present, a point of 

 considerable diagnostic importance in the numerous 

 cases in which the blood picture is not typical. In 

 discussing the origin of oedema, the authors hold that 

 the facts demand the assumption (with Heidenhain) 

 that the lymphatic and capillary endothelium is en- 

 dowed with a certain grade of selective secretory 

 activity. 



In the section dealing with the diseases of the nose 

 it is surely not expedient to refer to the common 

 polvpus as a "poljp," a term which now has a more 

 or less definite zoological signification. 



We congratulate the authors heartily on the com- 

 pletion of their labours; the work is not a mere com- 

 pilation, but is the outcome of a ripe personal know- 

 ledge of the subject. Divergent views are stated fairly, 

 and if the authors' views do not always agree with 

 those current, the reasons are given, and they merit 

 careful consideration. 



The book is profusely illustrated with plates and 

 figures (some coloured), drawn or photographed directly 

 from patients, specimens, and sections, which are 

 admirably reproduced. We think it a mistake, how- 

 ever, not to have given the magnification of the photo- 

 micrographs ; simply to state, as is done, the lenses 

 with which the photographs were taken does not 

 sufficiently indicate the magnification of the object 

 depicted. 



