276 Miscellaneous. 



able as it doubtless is to a proper extent, has unfortunately led to a 

 multiplication of specific distinctions and names, often on the slen- 

 derest grounds, which subsequent investigation will have to largely 

 diminish, at some trouble to students. The members of the Welling- 

 ton Microscopical Section have steadily endeavoured to resist this 

 tendency, believing that much less error and confusion will result by 

 neglecting the frequently most minute differences from European 

 types observable in almost every Infusorian examined. Examples 

 of this may be found in Rhipldodendron Huxleyi, Amphileptus anser, 

 Metopvs sigmoides in our former paper, or Monas irregidaris, Codo- 

 siga botrytis, &c. in the present one. There are certainly minute 

 points of difference in such as these which might tempt some ob- 

 servers to raise them, if not to specific, at least to ' variety ' rank. 

 But in truth there is very often no absolute stability even in the 

 same individuals amongst the Infusoria ; and we have thought it 

 best to avoid to the utmost any more cumbering of scientific classi- 

 fication and nomenclature than was absolutely necessary. The 

 couple of dozen animalcules herein set down as new species are con- 

 sidered to be sufficiently deserving of the distinction. 



" But Professor Stokes's statement as to the New-Jersey Infu- 

 soria, compared with what has just been said, raises a question as 

 to the reason for the identities observed between the New-Zealand 

 and the European forms. It may be remarked that similar iden- 

 tities appear to be noticeable also amongst the freshwater Algae, 

 as several of our Desmidiese and Diatomacese are found at both sides 

 of the globe, and many others present differences so trifling as to be 

 unimportant. That specific similarity should be so rare as Professor 

 Stokes declares it between two countries in the same hemisphere, as 

 New Jersey and France or England, and so frequent in two so 

 nearly antipodal as England and New Zealand, is not a little curious ; 

 and it becomes still more so if, as seems to be the case, the differ- 

 ences in the ' higher ' zoological and botanical orders and families 

 are in a reverse ratio. The ' higher ' American fauna and flora 

 approximate to the European much more than the New-Zealand 

 fauna and flora do. It is therefore not quite clear why the micro- 

 scopical forms of animal and vegetable life should not follow the 

 same lines. The answer might possibly be found in an extension of 

 research, leading to comparisons between countries of about the 

 same latitude and climate. Yet New Jersey, France, and New 

 Zealand are not, in these respects, very differently situated." 



The apparent contrast between New Jersey and New Zealand 

 would be of much interest if absolutely demonstrated ; but Mr, 

 Maskell has indicated a very probable source of doubt. At the same 

 time he is, perhaps, a little uncharitable in the motives which he 

 ascribes to the describers of new species. Observers differ consider- 

 ably in their views of what constitutes a specific difference. 



