350 The Systematic Study of Annelids. [July, 



not long before the great musician's death ; but he still lives in the 

 Blind School at Zurich, and there still remains, as a precious relic, 

 the master's chair in which he sat."* 



With this extract we close Mr. Johns's book ; and we must 

 admit that having opened it with a critic's eye, and with the 

 reviewer's thoughts, as we advanced in its perusal we were more and 

 more sorely tempted to " cut it up," and to transfer the rich and 

 fertile " cuttings " bodily into the pages of this Journal. But that 

 would not have been fair to the author, and we hope that the 

 lengthy extracts which we have been led to insert, along with the 

 excellent illustrations, which we can not give, will do something 

 towards securing for the author that large circle of readers to which 

 his honest, truthful, and poetical descriptions of the works and ways 

 of the blind are justly entitled. 



Y. THE SYSTEMATIC STUDY OT ANNELIDS. 



1. Johnston: Catalogue of Worms (Brit. Mus.), 1865. 



2. Kinberg : Eugenies Besa (Aproditea), 1857. 



3. Schmarda: Neue wirbellose Thiere. 1861. 



4. Ehlers : Die Borstenwilrmer (1st Part), 1864. 



5. Malmgren: NordisJca Hafs-Annulater, 1865. 



6. De Quatrefages : Annelides et Gephyriens, 1865. 



7. Malmgren: Annulata Polychoeta Spetsbergise, Groenlandise, 



Islandite, et Seandinavise, 1867. 



There can be little doubt that human knowledge and science 

 have hitherto presented, and will continue to present, the same order 

 of evolution as other progressive phenomena. We trace it from the 

 simple to the complex, from the general to the special ; but most 

 markedly and distinctly has it progressed from the comprehension 

 of plain and obvious facts and appearances, to that of less plain and 

 less obvious phenomena. Small though the illustration may be, 

 yet it is worth remarking that the various phases through which 

 the study of systematic zoology has passed, furnish a very clear 

 instance of this progress. Omitting the classification of Aristotle — 

 which was far in advance of the philosophy of the contemporaries or 

 disciples of that marvellous man — we must start with Linnaeus, as 

 the father of modern Zoology. Of invertebrate animals, he only dis- 

 tinguished two great groups, his Insecta and his Yermes, the latter 

 being a heterogeneous assemblage of all the creatures whose characters 

 were less obvious than those of the former. Cuvier separated the 

 Molluscs and Binged-worms from this group when he gave to the 

 world his fourfold division of the animal kingdom ; but these same 



* P. 99 to 101. 



