208 qN THE ANIMAL KINGDOM. 



The Folypi and Infusoria are upon the whole a Uttle 

 better understood, and accordingly form the greatest part 

 of that group which from the difficulties it throws in the 

 way of the observer I have here named Acrita. To some 

 indeed of the animals comprised under this denomination 

 M.DeBlainville has applied the name of Agastria ; but 

 it does not seem expedient to adopt a word which is with 

 accuracy applicable to so very small a part of the group. 



In general I. could wish to state a novel opinion with 

 the arguments on which it may have been founded briefly, 

 since it is an ungracious as well as a disagreeable task 

 to have to clear the way for its reception by refuting 

 prevalent notions. But in investigations of this sort some 

 names possess an authority which to dispute is of itself 

 presuiiiptuous, but which to slight would be absolute folly. 

 One of the first naturalists of the age, who has instituted 

 several primary divisions which are popular on the Conti- 

 nent, will therefore in the following remarks consider 

 that they have proceeded solely from a love of truth and 

 an ardour for the promotion of natural science, and that 

 were not the doctrines criticised likely from their inge- 

 nuity to mislead, they would never have been impugned. 

 Animals have by this author been divided into Vertehrated 

 and Unvertehrated. Now this division, as M. Cuvier per- 

 ceived, errs more in its nature, of which we have already 

 exposed the defects, than in its particular relation to 

 Zoology. The objection to it is not that it is contrary to 

 truth, but that it does not state enough, and that the young 

 naturalist, placing full reliance on it, may be led to conceive 

 that animals have been formed on only two distinct plans. 

 Had the animal kingdom however been divided into ra- 

 diated and not radiated, or into annulose and not annulose. 



