Apkil 24, 1914] 



SCIENCE 



609 



Onee, when I asked the captain of a Cape 

 Ann fishing schooner what names they gave 

 to certain actinians, holothurians, ascidians, 

 etc., he said, " We should not dare to tell our 

 ■wives and daughters," and I agreed with him. 

 Such are the names that McMurrich and some 

 others would like to revive! 



It is rather embarrassing, when asked by an 

 educated lady the name of a beautiful sea- 

 anemone, to have to say that its name is 

 " Priapus senilis" or even Metridium senilis; 

 or " Priapus humanus " Linne, for another 

 creature ; or to give other equally unjustifiable 

 names. 



That Linne used these and other names in 

 an obscene sense is evident, not only because 

 often derived from fishermen's dirty names, 

 but because he described his species in the 

 terms of human anatomy of sexual organs, in 

 many cases, too absurd to mention. 



It is, therefore, unfortunate that a zoologist 

 of such excellent ability as Professor Mc- 

 Murrich,, should waste his time trying to re- 

 vive these old, dirty, indeterminable names, 

 which he himself admits can not be definitely 

 applied to any species by means of the descrip- 

 tions themselves, while his indirect evidence 

 is equally uncertain. The names that he thus 

 adopts are Metridium senilis for M. dianthus; 

 Urticina felina for TJ. crassicornisj Priapus 

 equinus for Actinia mesemhryanthemum. 



In the tenth edition of the " Syst. Nat.," 

 1Y58, p. 656, the two species of " Priapus " are 

 P. equinus and P. humanus. The latter is a 

 sipunculoid worm. I do not know that any 

 one has recently tried to revive this name. It 

 has better claims than some of the others. 



For P. equinus the only description 

 (1Y58) is " semiovalis Iseviusculus." Surely 

 not very edifying! In Fauna Suecica, p. 

 510, he has three more species: P. senilis; P. 

 judaicus; P. felinus. The first has, as a diag- 

 nosis, only this : " subcylindricus rugosus," 

 with a three-line descriptive note, to the effect 

 that it is the size of the last joint of a finger; 

 that it is fuscous, sordid, rough, with a sub- 

 coriaceus tunic, with the upper part soft, thin 

 and sanguineous. These characters surely do 



not apply to M. dianthus, which is large, soft 

 and smooth throughout, and especially deli- 

 cate and translucent, when as small as the one 

 mentioned by Linne. It does not have the 

 upper part sanguineous, however much it may 

 vary in color. There are other species on the 

 Norwegian coast that agree with the brief 

 description far better. This identification by 

 McMurrich is then in itself untenable, as 

 well as undesirable. 



As for "Priapus felinus," 1Y61, the case ia 

 no better. The diagnosis is " cylindricus 

 laevis glande muricata." The descriptive note 

 is " simillarius priori," " sed glande muricata." 

 No reference to earlier works. What he 

 means by a " muricate glans " is hard to 

 understand, if he had a soft actinian before 

 him, like Actinia m,esemhryanthemum. Per- 

 haps he refers here to another sipunculoid 

 worm. 



As for the generic name Priapus, 1758, if 

 it is to be used at all, it must be applied to 

 the second species, humanus, as the type, for 

 the first species was very early (1767) placed 

 in Actinia. Whether helminthologists will 

 adopt the name remains to be seen. 



A. E. Verrill 



THE EDUCATIONAL VALUE OF MATHEMATICS 



To THE Editor op Science: In a speech be- 

 fore the Cincinnati Schoolmaster's Club on 

 February 21, 1914, Professor E. L. Thorndike, 

 of Columbia University, made certain state- 

 ments with regard to the educational value of 

 mathematics and the classical languages, 

 which were quoted in the issue of the Cin- 

 cinnati Enquirer for February 22. One of 

 the statements as quoted was that 

 the old notion that Latin or matliematics made the 

 mind more effective in all the work of business, 

 law or other professions was largely superstition. 



The phraseology of this statement is cer- 

 tainly misleading. By the use of the expres- 

 sion " old notion " Professor Thorndike tends 

 to convey the impression that no up-to-date, 

 intelligent person has such a notion. That 

 this is the very reverse of the truth may be 

 seen by quoting from an article by Professor 

 C. J. Keyser in the issue of Science for 



