38 
NATURE 

[Wov. 10, 1879 


on with extreme care, and mentioned that he had become con- 
vinced that the movements of the minute germs so much alluded 
to by experimenters was to be accounted for by the explanation 
that it was the well-known Brownian movement. The bearing 
of this important paper seemed to be to account for the presence 
of Bacteria on more ordinary principles than those of spontaneous 
generation. 
Mr. A. W. Bennett read a paper on the Zheory of Natural 
Selection, looked at from a Mathematical Point of View.* 
Prof, Huxley paid a high compliment to the author of this 
paper, which he said was the first that he could recollect 
having heard read at Section D, which, taking up the side against 
Mr. Darwin, still did so in a proper and philosophic manner. 
He had often mentioned objections that had struck him to Mr, 
Darwin, who always, however, had ready a quiver full of facts 
which generally settled the question, and he thought it probable 
that when Mr. Darwin read Mr. Bennett’s paper, he would have 
a few facts ready which might alter his view of the case. 
Dr. Anton Dohrn read a paper on the Fousndation of Zoological 
Stations. n this he insisted on the importance .of there being 
zoological stations throughout the world, just as there now were 
meteorological and astronomical stations. The author mentioned 
that he had commenced at his own cost the establishment of one 
such station at Naples. In it he would have large and small 
aquaria, a constant flow of salt water, microscope rooms, and there 
would bea resident working zoologist, a library, and a series of 
bed-rooms for foreign naturalists. At this station, not only would 
collections of living marine animals be made for purposes of 
study and for supplying the aquaria of Florence, Berlin and 
‘Vienna, but a collection in spirits would also be kept to supply 
working zoologists at a distance with the means of research. The 
President of the Section, Professors Newton and E. Perceval 
Wright, spoke strongly in favour of the station to be established 
at Naples, and expressed the hope that perhaps at some future 
day others would be established at such outposts as Dingle in 
Treland, Aden in the Red Sea, &c. &e. 
Dr. J. Barker read a paper in which he described an interesting 
little Infusorium called Plewvonema doliarium. 
Professor Dickson read notes Ox the Embryo of the Date Palm. 
The author criticised the descriptions given in the books where 
the slit of the cotyledon is represented sometimes as a transverse 
fissure near the upper part of the cotyledon (Schnizlein’s Icono- 
graphia), or as a vertical one near the upper part (Le Maout and 
Decaisne). Dr. Dickson described the slit as a vertical one, 
situated near the base of the cotyledon, and called attention to 
the fact that there was here no fixed relation between the medial 
plane of the cotyledon and that of the seed, an exception to the 
general rule for monocotyledons, as laid down by Hofmeister, to 
the effect that in vertical seeds (erect or pendulous) the medial 
plane of the cotyledon coincides with that of the seed, while in 
horizontal seeds the plane of the cotyledon is at right angles to it. 
Mr. Tyerman exhibited drawings of a young healthy plant of 
the double cocoa-nut (Lodoicea sechellarum), which he had suc- 
ceeded in growing at the Botanical Gardens, Liverpool. He 
mentioned that he had some difficulty in keeping the strangely 
elongated basal portion of the cotyledon from penetrating too 
deeply into the ground, but after it had grown to a distance of 
sonie two feet, the germ developed a single sheathing leaf, and 
then shortly afterwards two of the ordinary characteristic leaves 
of the plant made their appearance, 
Profs. Balfour and Wright congratulated Liverpool on haying 
such an interesting collection of plants as that they had seen at 
their Botanical Gardens, and on having so able and intelligent a 
curator as Mr. Tyerman, and hoped that when next they visited 
Liverpool they would find at the gardens a range of glass worthy 
of tht gardens and of the most interesting collection of plants at 
preset preserved in a few tumble-down houses. 
On the Staperaythr Whale of the Icelanders.—Mr. Bird. 
On the Affinities of the Sponges to the Corals.—Mr. W. S. 
Kent. The author criticised the views of Haeckel. 
On the Effects of the Pollution of Rivers on the Supply of Fish.— 
Sir James Alexander. This paper gave rise to a lengthened dis- 
cussion. 
Mr. Moore, director of the Liverpool Museum, exhibited 
some of Captain Mortimer’s Sea Aquaria, by means of which 
he had been enabled to transport from the tropics many delicate 
marine fishes, cruStacea, and sea anemones. He also exhibited a 
* This paper will be found in full at p. 30. 

young Lamatin and the jaw of a fish, the rami of the mandible 
of which, instead of being united by a ligamentous union and 
forming a bony symphysis, were most compactly hinged together, 
admitting of a considerable amount of lateral motion. Mr. 
Moore also exhibited a stuffed skin of that most wonderful — 
shark from the Seychelles, called Rhinodon typicus. This was — 
the only perfect specimen known in any museum. This shark, — 
which grows to the length of 50 feet and upwards, was known ~ 
to Mr. Swinburne Ward, jate Civil Commissioner of thi , 
Seychelles, as common off those Islands. ut it was not — 
known to be described until identified by Prof. E. Perceval — 
Wright as the 2. Zypicus of Smith. t 
A Statement in Reply to two Objections of Prof. Huxley rvélalivg 
to certain Experiments,—Dr, Bastian. 
~~ 
be 
t 
Department of Anatomy and Physioldgy ° = 
On Some of the more Important Facts of Suecession in 
Relation to any Theory of Continuity—Dr. Cobbold, This : 
paper—which by permission had been transferred from the 
Department of Zoology and Botany—Dr, Cobbold stated, — 
was generally of an elementary character, He said that for 
several years past the Biological Section of the Association had 
permitted, if it had not actually encouraged, the reading afid 
discussion of papers having for their object the popularising {er — 
it might be the unpopularising) of the theory of natural sélection, 
To many besides himself the separate papers and remarks which — 
followed were eminently unsatisfactory, perhaps arising not so — 
much from any want of ability on the part of the authors as from 
the unscientific method adopted by them. The discussion whieh \ 
followed the reading of the Rev. F, O. Morris’s paper at Norwich, 
‘©On the Difficulties of Darwinism,’ was lamentable in the — 
extreme ; for, so far as could be gathered, not one of those whe — 
sympathised with the reverend gentleman’s position had the — 
courage to advance a single fact in favour of the yiew which his — 
“difficulties” were intended to support. At Exeter Mr. Morris 3 
renewed his exposition, but a much more vigorous effort in thé — 
same direction was made by the Rey. A, Freeman. The seyerity } 
of the criticism which followed these final literary efforts in aid — 
of anti-evolutionism could only be understood by those who were 
present ; but the general conclusion of scientific authorities was 
significantly expressed in the statement made more than once to — 
the effect that ‘‘ neither of the papers ought to have been read,” 
For his part, he thought the utmost freedom should be allowed 
to all desirous of opposing this or that theory ; yet it should be — 
thoroughly well understood that the sectional committee depre- 
cated the employment of quotations from the Scriptures calen- — 
lated to excite religious prejudice. A purely scientific question — 
could only be satisfactorily discussed on a scientific basis—unless, 
indeed, it was insisted that theological speculations were inse- — 
parable from the domain of science. He then went on to say 
that to the mass of so-called educated men the acceptance of the 
views set forth by Mr, Darwin in his work “On the Origin ot 
Species” must naturally present a variety of difficulties, and it — 
appeared to him (Dr. Cobbold) that the best and truest way of — 
showing an intelligent sympathy with those who were so situated, 
was to select and present some natural group of observed facts 
in such a clear and, if possible, attractive light, that common 
sense alone might be trusted to recognise the reasonableness : 
or otherwise of honestly asserted deductions. The facts he — 
had selected for exposition were such as represented what } 
might be termed the apparent chronology of the organic 
series, or, in other words, the ascertained times of the a 
coming and flourishing of the larger animal groups. A true — 
conception of what was or ought to be understood by the 
éxpression ‘‘ equivalences ”—botanical, zoological, or geological 
—lay at the very basis of a correct appreciation of the signe 4 
cance of the records of animal, vegetable, or sedimentary ro 
distribution throughout all time. Further, he ventured to assert 
that the grandeur of the formative scheme of nature, whether — 
testifying to an evolutionary method of production or to a series © 
of creative acts, few or many in number, could only be ade- © 
quately realised by the naturalist whose powers of allocation — 
and grouping enabled him to grasp the magnitude and infinite — 
import of those relations. Dr, Cobbold said he had insisted q 
upon equivalency for years past. He then proceeded to deal — 
with the facts of succession, and said the earliest organism as — 
regarded time which geology had revealed was the fossil called — 
Eozoon, which belonged to the lowermost division of the animal — 
series. Dr. Cobbold then described the succession of the various 
known groups, and, glancing at the times of origim and sue- 
d 
d 
? 
