June 22, 1900.] 



SCIENCE. 



983 



will prove of distinct value for reference. 

 Neither Dr. Dall nor Mr. Pilsbry departs so far 

 from accepted ideas that his scheme cannot 

 easily be used by those accustomed to the views 

 of other teachers. In this connection, how- 

 ever, one point may puzzle the inquirer, and 

 that is the attachment of the names of the pres- 

 ent writers to family names that were well 

 known almost before those gentlemen were 

 born. What for instance is the meaning of 

 ' Chiton idse, Pilsbry'; ' Arcidffi, Dall,' or 

 'Anatinidse, Dall ' ? It must be recognized by 

 this time that scarcely any family is regarded by 

 each fresh systematist in the precise sense of the 

 first founder ; and if Lamarck, Gray and the 

 rest are quoted in some cases, why not in others ? 

 No attempt to attribute authority tq family 

 names can attain absolute justice, and the sim- 

 plest solution is to omit the names of authorities 

 altogether. But if Mr. Pilsbry, for example, 

 claims to have modified the conception of 

 Chitonidse, it would be well to give the date 

 of the publication in which it was done, so that 

 we may know precisely what value to attach 

 to the collocation ' Chitonidse, Pilsbry.' For- 

 tunately there do not appear to be any new 

 generic names in these chapters : Prolucina, 

 Dall, is unfamiliar certainly, but had it really 

 been new, so careful a worker as Dr. Dall 

 would have indicated the fact. 



It is deeply to be regretted that the above 

 commendatory remarks cannot be extended to 

 the section on Tetrabranchiate Cephalopoda. 

 Professor Hyatt has devoted his high abilities 

 to the study of those animals with such en- 

 thusiasm and success, that his account was 

 eagerly expected. It is a disappointment. 

 What we are given is little better than a pre- 

 liminary notice of ' an exhaustive monograph,' 

 which will doubtless have great value when it 

 appears ; but the present abstract is of slight 

 use to the beginner and incomprehensible even 

 to the specialist. One can sympathize with a 

 man of peculiar knowledge and original ideas, 

 called upon suddenly to edit an account with 

 which he is in total disagreement ; but Profes- 

 sor Hyatt has attempted too much for the al- 

 lotted space. Dr. Eastman, as editor, should 

 have refused these crowds of new and unde- 

 fined genera, thus making room for clearer 



elucidation of the principles on which the new 

 classification was erected. He should also have 

 eliminated the numerous inconsistencies that 

 disfigure the work. They are of many kinds : 

 family names sometimes have an author's 

 name added, sometimes not ; a species is often 

 ascribed to two different authors, there are 

 three instances on pp. 588-9 ; the legends to 

 figures do not always agree with the text ; the 

 genders of adjectives do not always agree with 

 their substantives ; there is also a confusionj 

 which might easily have been avoided, between 

 the ' siphon (funnel) ' and ' siphuncle ' of Pro- 

 fessor Verrill, and the ' siphonal funnels,' ' si- 

 phuncle ' and ' siphon ' of Professor Hyatt. The 

 retention of Tetrabranchiata as a subclass to in- 

 clude both Nautiloidea and Ammonoidea is 

 perhaps not due to Professor Hyatt ; it involves 

 certain statements concerning extinct forms, 

 and especially concerning Ammonoidea, that 

 are absolutely unwarranted by evidence. 



It is not clear who is responsible for the 

 changes in the account of the Dibranchiate Ceph- 

 alopods. But it is clear that the homologies 

 of the cuttle-bone are not yet appreciated. 

 When they are, we shall no longer see Belem- 

 nosis, Seloptera and Spirula, in one suborder, 

 and Belosepia and Sepia in another. 



The recasting of the section on Trilobites by 

 Professor Beecher, and that on Merostomata by 

 Dr. J. M. Clarke, the latter incorporating the 

 results of Holm, Laurie and others, will prove 

 most useful. There are also other changes of 

 value under the head Crustacea, due to Profes- 

 sor J. S. Kingsley, Dr. J. M. Clarke and Mr. 

 E. O. Ulrich. But while we would gladly 

 leave the precise classificatory relationships of 

 Trilobita and Merostomata still unsettled, we 

 should like to see the discovery of Pollicipes 

 and Scalpellum in the Silurian of Gotland 

 recognized by some text-book before another 

 eight years have passed. 



The defects in form and arrangement shown 

 by this volume must be a source of regret to all 

 who believe that a good book covering the 

 whole field of systematic zoology cannot now- 

 adays be written without the co-operation of 

 specialists. To attain success, an editor is re- 

 quired honey-tongued enough to get all he 

 wants out of his helpers, strong enough to sub- 



