OcToBER 9, 1902] 
NATURE 
Byn) 
was repeated when the ejected cuckoo, together with a 
young titlark, was returned to the nest. Other experi- 
ments of a similar nature were made subsequently with 
nestling buntings. The volume closes with a few 
general, and by no means original, notes on the life- 
history of the cuckoo. We are afraid that we cannot 
congratulate either Mr. Craig or the author on the 
theory advanced to account for the peculiar breeding- 
habits of the cuckoo. It is argued that if the bird laid a 
clutch of eggs in the usual manner the offspring would 
quarrel among themselves owing to their aggressive 
habits, the author of this theory forgetting that the 
disposition in question in the young is doubtless corre- 
lated with the present laying habit of the parent. 
RoL. 
Physics: a Text-book for Secondary Schools. By Prof. 
Frederick Slate. Pp. xxi+414. (New York: the 
Macmillan Company ; London: Macmillan and Co., 
Ltd., 1902.) Price 6s. 
THIS book is intended for young people from sixteen to 
eighteen years of age, and consequently deals with physics 
of an elementary standard. It is for use in the class- 
room rather than in the laboratory, and details of practical 
work have been omitted ; whilst considerable stress is 
laid on ample illustration by means of lecture experiments. 
There are some diagrams, but no pictures of apparatus 
or phenomena ; these the student is to draw for himself 
from what he sees. Much of the text is written ina 
spirit of suggestion or question, with the view of making 
the student think and reason for himself. In the first 
section of the book there is very little about kinetics, and 
ideas concerning force are gained from weight. Newton’s 
laws are not stated formally, and work is not discussed 
until late in the section on heat. 
Altogether we think the standard is very elementary, 
and it is an open question whether students of the ages 
seventeen to eighteen would not profit more by a rather 
deeper study of one or two branches of physics in place 
of this wide review of the whole subject. This, however, 
must be left to the individual teacher ; some will certainly 
be delighted with this book, others, we feel sure, will 
prefer to treat the subject quite differently. 3. 5. 
LElectricité (déduite de ? Expérience et ramenée au Prin- 
cipe des Travaux virtuels). By M.E.Carvallo. Pp.9t. 
__ (Paris: C. Naud.) Price 2 francs. _ 
Les Phénoméenes électriques chez les Etres vivanits. By 
M. Mendelssohn. Pp. 99. (Paris: C. Naud.) Price 
2 francs. 
Boru these volumes belong to the valuable “ Scientia” 
series of short monographs upon important scientific 
topics. 
M. Carvallo’s book contains a concise mathematical 
treatment of electrical principles based upon the theories 
of Helmholtz and Maxwell and the principles of virtual 
work, 
The second book contains a complete discussion of 
electrical phenomena observed in the muscles, nerves, 
skin, glands, nerve-centres and sense-organs. Separate 
chapters are also devoted to electrical fish, to the pheno- 
mena observed in certain forms of vegetation and to a 
historical review of the entire subject. 
Elementary Chemical Analysis. 
and Tests. By Prof. P. Carmody. Pp. v+35. 
(Trinidad : D. Adamson and Co., 1902.) Price 2s. 6d. 
IN those laboratories where a course of qualitative 
analysis is the plan adopted to give a knowledge of 
practical chemistry, these tables may prove useful. The 
reactions for the metals and acids are arranged in a 
tabular form, and by means of the tables the student 
learns, not only the ordinary methods of separation for 
the metals, but also their other distingtive tests. 
NO. 1719, VOL. 66] 
Distinguishing Tables 
LEILERS LO VLAE EDILOR: 
[Zhe Editor does not hold himself responsible for opinions ex- 
pressed by hts correspondents. Neither can he undertake 
to return, or to correspond with the writers of, rejected 
manuscripts intended for this or any other part of NATURE. 
No notice zs taken of anonymous communications. | 
‘©The Primrose and Darwinism.” 
I DESIRE to make a short reply in answer to two or three of 
your reviewer’s criticisms on ‘*The Primrose and Darwinism,” 
and on its author, which appeared in your issue of August 28. 
“*We do not propose,” to adopt the words of your reviewer, 
“to go through the whole review, but to discuss one or two- 
points and to leave your readers to judge of the remainder.” 
My first and chiefest point is in reference to the charge which 
the reviewer makes in the following statement (p. 411) :—‘‘ The 
only point which is worthy of notice” (relative to the cleisto- 
gamic flowers) ‘‘is a quotation (Prim. and Dar., p. 191) from 
Darwin’s ‘ Form of Flowers,’ whichhas several copyist’s mistakes, 
and, moreover, contains interpolated words which do not 
occur in the original, the whole being within inverted commas. 
It is this sort of treatment of Darwin’s text that makes it 
almost impossible to read the ‘Field Naturalist.’ ” 
I give here an exact copy.of Darwin’s paragraph from ‘‘ Form: 
of Flowers,”’ p. 323, and an exact copy both of words and 
inverted commas of my own comments on Darwin’s statement, 
It will be evident to every reader that Darwin’s own observa- 
tions are always marked off by inverted commas, and that my 
own comments are not included within the commas. Your 
reviewer seems to have read my comment with exceeding 
carelessness. 
Darwin's Text. 
‘The most singular fact 
about the present species is 
that long-styled cleistogamic 
flowers are produced by the 
long-styled plants, and mid- 
styled as well as short-styled 
cleistogamic flowers by the 
other two forms ; so that there 
are three kinds of cleistogamic 
and three kinds of perfect 
flowers produced by this one 
species! Most of the hetero- 
styled species of Oxalis are 
more or less_ sterile, many 
absolutely so, if illegitimately 
fertilised with their own form 
pollen. It is therefore pro- 
bable that the pollen of the 
cleistogamic flowers has been 
modified in power, so as to 
act on their own stigmas, for 
| they yield an abundance of 
seeds ” (p. 323 of last edition, 
1892). 
My own comment. 
But in Oxadis Sensitiva ‘ the long-styled 
cleistogamic flowers are produced by long- 
styled plants ; the mid-styled as well as the 
short-styled cleistogamic flowers are pro- 
duced respectively by the other two forms ; 
sosthat there are three kinds of cleisto- 
gamic and three kinds of perfect flowers 
produced by this one species” (F. Fl., 
Pp. 323). Now, as Darwin, from his zet 
experiments, concluded that ‘‘most of 
the hetero-styled species of Oxalis are 
more or less sterile, many absolutely so, if 
illegitimately fertilised with their own form 
pollen” (F. Fl, p. 323), he had in some way 
to account for this extreme contradiction in 
results between the naturally abundant fer- 
tility of these cleistogamic flowers, and his 
own results, which we have given above, of 
Lythrum Salicaria, under the unnatural 
method of experimenting with his net. 
Under this difficulty, Darwin suggests, ‘‘it 
is probable that the pollen of the cleistogamic 
flowers has been sodiied in power, so as to 
act on their stigmas, for they yield an 
abundance of seed" (F. Fl., p. 323. The 
italics are ours). (Prim. and Dar., p. 191.) 
Again the reviewer states that the ‘‘ Field Naturalist’s” 
sentence (p. 11) :—‘‘ To attribute the capacity for fertilisation in 
the unprotected flowers to the bees is perfectly gratuitous, as the 
flowers under the net (when bees were excluded) ‘when they 
touched the net and the wind blew’ produced seeds without 
any cross-fertilisation ’—contains, in the words ‘ when they 
touched the net and the wind blew,’ an “ incorrect quota- 
tion” (p. 409). 
Darwin's words are i— 
“Salvia tenori. Quite 
sterile; but two or three 
flowers on the summits of 
three of the spikes, which 
touched the net when the 
wind blew, produced a few 
seeds” (Cr. and S.F., p. 362). 
My quotation. 
Salvia tenori under the net, Darwin tells 
us, ‘‘was quite sterile; but two or three 
flowers on the summit of the spikes, which 
touched the net when the wind blew, pro- 
duced a few seeds” (Cr. and S.F., p. 362. 
The italics are ours). (Prim. and Dar., 
p- 11.) 
The quotation is word for word from Darwin in the italicised 
words ; yet the reviewer takes no notice of this, but produces a 
merely shortened form a few lines below, and which though 
shortened conveys exactly the same sense, and calls it ‘‘ an 
incorrect quotation ” ! 
One more charge of this kind of your reviewer scarcely needs 
being noticed. But I notice it in order to avoid any misinter- 
pretation if I passed it over. The charge is one in reference to 
Sarothamnus scopartus. Darwin states concerning it (Cr. and 
S.F., p. 360) :—‘‘ Extremely sterile when the flowers are neither 
