2l8 



NATURE 



\yan. 9, 1890 



of the open sea. This Report extends to 47 pages, and 

 his six plates. 



The third Report is by Arthur W. Waters, and is 

 entitled a " Supplementary Report on the Polyzoa.' 

 From every point of view we regret that these " notes 

 the time for the preparation of which has been limited 

 by Mr. Murray," have been published as part of the 

 present series of Reports. 



If the Reports on the Challenger Polyzoa by the late 

 George Busk, which form Parts XXX. and L. of the 

 zoological series, had been defective, say, for example, 

 that a number of new or rare species had escaped de- 

 scription, then it would have been useful and perhaps 

 excusable to have had a supplemental Report issued, 

 noting such ; but out of the 41 pages of which this 

 Supplementary Report consists, not more than one and 

 a half are devoted to the record of the three new species 

 described, while the rest is simply a series of criticisms 

 on the late Mr. Busk's work. 



The very heading of the Report contains an implied 

 piece of criticism, " The term Polyzoa is used for sake of 

 uniformity." Into the argument pro and con for the use, 

 of this term it is not needful for us here to enter, but 

 remembering what Mr. Busk had written to justify its use, 

 this uncalled-for remark might have been omitted. We 

 read : — 



" Shortly after the death of Mr. George Busk, who 

 prepared the Report on the Challenger Polyzoa, I had, 

 through the kindness of his daughter, Miss Busk, an 

 opportunity of examining some of the duplicate speci- 

 mens, and I desire to thank her for sending me those 

 which, from published criticism, were most interesting to 

 me. I have also to thank Mr. John Murray, the director 

 of the Challenger publications, for allowing me to examine 

 the whole of the duplicate material in Edinburgh. I 

 communicated to Mr. Murray some valuable results 

 arising from an examination of sections of the Challenger 

 specimens prepared by a method similar to that employed 

 in the examination of fossil Polyzoa, and at his request I 

 have drawn up the following supplementary notes on the 

 Challenger species." 



We have been careful to quote the author's own 

 account of his work, which would have formed an in- 

 teresting communication to any of our scientific Societies, 

 but which seems to us to be quite out of place where it is 

 now published. There is probably not one of the eighty- 

 two Reports published on the zoological results of the 

 Challenger Expedition that could not be added to and 

 emended, and no one would wish that they should escape 

 every just criticism, but this is quite a different thing from 

 employing the funds placed by the Treasury for the pub- 

 lication of these Reports on the printing and illustrating 

 of critical notes on the already published ones. This 

 supplementary Report is illustrated by three plates from 

 drawings of the author. 



In the editorial notes to Vol. XXXII. we are told : — 



" This volume concludes the zoological series of Reports 

 on the scientific results of the Expedition, with the pos- 

 sible exception of a few supplementary notes to some of 

 the memoirs and Prof. Huxley's Report on the genus 

 Spirula, which may appear as an appendix to the con- 

 cluding summary volume." 



We must content ourselves with protesting against the 

 pubhcation of any further " supplementary notes " on the 



Reports unless these are contributed by the several authors 

 thereof. As to a " concluding summary volume," opinions 

 may differ as to the advisability of publishing a summary 

 of the thirty-two volumes in the same series as the 

 original volumes. For the scientific worker such a 

 summary would be quite useless, for any such would have 

 recourse to the full details. For the general reader, 

 anxious to know something of the facts stored away,, 

 beyond his reach, in these many ponderous volumes, a 

 summary would no doubt be of interest, and, if fairly well 

 executed, of value, but the size and cost of a volume like 

 those already published in this series would place such 

 far beyond the buying powers of most people, and to us 

 it would seem a waste of public money to undertake so un- 

 necessary a labour. If, indeed, the Treasury would pub- 

 lish, in a convenient handy volume, a carefull y prepared 

 sketch of the cruise of the Challenger, with a few chap- 

 ters added giving a summary of the additions to biological 

 knowledge, which were the [immediate results of the 

 Expedition, such a volume would be acceptable to the 

 general public, and would let them know more than they 

 at present do of the most important voyage of discovery 

 of this century. 



The first Report in Volume XXXII. is on the Antipath- 

 aria by George Brook, and we believe it to be one of the 

 most praiseworthy of all the Reports ; the time at the 

 disposal of the author was of necessity very short, and 

 perhaps no group of marine animals had been so little 

 attended to. Our Museums no doubt possessed numerous 

 specimens, but these being in the great majority of cases, 

 only the dried skeletons, presented little upon which to 

 work, there were therefore many and serious drawbacks 

 to a determination of the species or to a knowledge«of their 

 anatomy. In spite of all this Mr. Brook has succeeded in 

 making this Report an excellent contribution to our know- 

 ledge of the classification, distribution, and anatomy of 

 the group. There was one fortunate circumstance about 

 the Challenger specimens, most of them had the polyps 

 well preserved, so that their structure could be fairly 

 well made oiit. Mak ing the most of the material at his 

 disposal, the author has attempted a partial revision of 

 the group, and has placed the classification for the first 

 time on a natural basis. The study of the fine collections 

 made by Pourtales and during the voyages of the Blake, 

 would have greatly assisted Mr. Brook's labours, but as 

 in the case of the Alcyonaria, the specimens were not 

 available. 



Nearly all the forms collected by the Challenger were 

 new, which is to be largely accounted for, by the fact 

 that almost all the collections were made in localities 

 from which no Antipatharia had been previously recorded. 

 The collection is remarkably deficient in littoral forms, 

 but a number of species are now for the first time 

 described from great depths. In this monograph not only 

 are all the Challenger species described but a number of 

 new species in the British Museum are also described, so 

 that the Report forms quite a monograph of the group. 



The Report opens with a bibliography, not a very 

 extensive one, and one which up to the time of Pallas, 

 possesses little interest. Botanists like Bauhin, Tournefort, 

 and Breynius are among the pre-Linnaean writers who 

 refer to these corals, and it is worthy of note that the last 

 mentioned of these authors, describes and gives an 



