732 



SCIENCE. 



[N. S. Vol. V. No. 123. 



writers find the single word type — ^understood 

 the world over — sufiicient for ordinary needs. 

 But in cases where a species rests on more than 

 one specimen, and the author neglected to in- 

 dicate a type, the term cotype is used to desig- 

 nate each of the several specimens on which the 

 original description was based. Still another 

 term is found convenient and is in common use 

 among mammalogists. It is the word topotype, 

 proposed by Mr. Oldfield Thomas, and used to 

 designate a specimen from the identical locality 

 from which the type specimen of a species came. 

 Among plants and non-migratory terrestrial ani- 

 mals, topotypes are, after the original types, 

 the most valuable study material a museum 

 can possess. 



In paleontology, where it is customary to de- 

 scribe new species from very fragmentary ma- 

 terial — such as the tooth of a mammal or the 

 leaf of a plant — which is afterwards supple- 

 mented by the discovery of additional parts, it 

 becomes convenient, as pointed out by, Mr. 

 Schuchert, to consider the later and more per- 

 fect specimens, from which additional charac- 

 ters are derived, as supplementary types. This, 

 however, hardly seems sufiicient provocation 

 for the introduction of a special set of new 

 terms. Nevertheless, if paleontologists really 

 feel the need of these terms I suppose the rest 

 of us should try to bear them with becoming 

 fortitude ; but would it be too much to ask that 

 they be considered as proprietary material and 

 not let loose on the whole field of systematic 

 biology? 



It is pleasing to note that Mr. Schuchert is a 

 firm believer in the priceless value of type 

 specimens and that he advocates the use of 

 special colored labels to distinguish them from 

 others. Fortunately the use of such labels for 

 this purpose is rapidly becoming general. It 

 might be added that as a rule type specimens 

 should not be placed in the exhibition series 

 in public museums, but should be carefully pre- 

 served in special cases devoted exclusively to 

 such material. The exhibition in glass cases 

 of type specimens of animals injured by light — 

 as birds and mammals — indicates a disinterest- 

 edness amounting almost to criminal neglect. 



While discussing the matter of types I would 

 like to digress sufficiently to express the con- 



viction now shared by a large body of working 

 naturalists that type specimens, being units of 

 comparison, should from the nature of the case 

 be single, not multiple. It is the common ex- 

 perience of naturalists that in a considerable 

 percentage of the cases where several speci- 

 mens have been used as types, subsequent study 

 has shown these specimens to belong to diffierent 

 species, and in some cases to different genera. 

 Is not this fact alone an unanswerable objection 

 to the existence of more than one type specimen 

 of a species ? C. Hart Meeriam. 



SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE. 

 Spencer's Principles of Sociology. New York, D. 



Appleton & Co. 1897. Volume III., pp. x 



+ 645. 



This volume completes not only Mr. Spen- 

 cer's great work on ' The Principles of Soci- 

 ology,' which In itself is an undertaking quite 

 sufficient to establish the permanent reputation 

 of any one man ; but also the system of ' Syn- 

 thetic Philosophy,' which was begun more than 

 thirty-six years ago, and has been carried for- 

 ward under circumstances of extraordinary 

 difficulty. The system as it now stands in its 

 final form includes the volume entitled ' First 

 Principles,' in which the general doctrine of 

 evolution is formulated in abstract terms; two 

 volumes on 'The Principles of Biology,' two 

 on ' The Principles of Psychology,' three on 

 ' The Principles of Sociology ' and two on ' The 

 Principles of Ethics.' 



No other mind in our generation has at- 

 tempted to grapple so seriously with so many 

 great subjects as Mr. Spencer has done; no 

 other one thinker has so impressed himself 

 upon all serious investigators in each of the 

 great branches of scientific knowledge. Very 

 few professional biologists are more frequently 

 quoted than Mr. Spencer in works on biology; 

 few, if any, professional psychologists are so 

 frequently quoted in works on psychology ; 

 few, if any, professional writers on ethics are 

 so frequently quoted in discussions of morals. 

 This one fact is a significant index of Mr. 

 Spencer's range and power. Even if it be true 

 that the expert in each of the sciences men- 

 tioned disagrees with Mr. Spencer's conclusions 

 on vital points, it is an astonishing achieve- 



