122 Recent Literature. [ February, 
was in passable condition, but we are informed [p. 84] that “it is 
not possible at this stage of the study to attempt a systematic ar- 
On page 85 it is stated that the Rhizocephala and 
and Cirripedia “ are enclosed in a hard shell-like test,” which is 
true of no adult; Rhizocephala and some barnacles are exceptions. 
On the same page we are told that the sucker-like organ on the 
head of Sida corresponds to the pedicle [peduncle] of the barna- 
cles, a statement showing very elastic ideas of homology. Our 
author, also contrary to the ideas of the best morphologists, rec- 
ognizes an ocular segment, and excludes the telson from a posi- 
tion among the somites of the body. The NATURALIST is not 
the place, nor have we time to rectify the synonymy of the forms 
described, and to assign them to their proper position, but several 
forms, if the drawings are accurate, are placed at least in wrong 
genera. The typographical errors are numerous; Desmarest’s 
name appears with three different orthographies, the abbreviation 
“Enc. méth” under three distinct forms. Lovén as “ Loren,” 
somite as “somnite” on p. 90, occurs the word “ setigiferous,” 
but the worst of all is “qualities” for gnathites (p. 86). 
The illustrative figures are clearly printed, but of their accuracy 
we are not certain, and many points which are important from a 
systematic standpoint are slighted or ignored, thus rendering it 
difficult for the future reviser of the American species to classify 
the forms here described, and a quotation from p. 86, seems to 
exactly describe the condition of affairs brought about by this 
work. e curious misapprehensions and inaccuracies into 
which authors have fallen still further complicates the matter.— 
F. S. Kingsley. 
Tue MISSES JONES AND SHULZE’s NESTS AND EGGS OF THE BIRDS 
or On1o'—The just appreciation and cordial encouragement ac- 
corded by scientific critics to Part 1, of this beautiful work must ' 
have prepared a welcome on the part of the public for the further 
installment issued in October last. Not only does its unique 2%- 
semble render it attractive, but it presents a combination of the 
useful and the agreeable of science and of art, to a very rare 
degree. In these days, when the great majority of periodical 
“Illustrations” have wrought, will be justly ranked high in 
general estimation. The originality of method of this work, 
which copies some of the prettiest and most varied objects in na- 
ture, the pleasing combinations in the drawings, the faithfully 
imitative style of coloring, and the tasteful finish of the text, 
` 1 Illustrati f the Nests and Eggs of the Birds of Ohio. With text. By Gene- — 
vieve E. Jones and Eliza J. Shulze, Folio. Published by the Authors. Circleville, 
Ohio. (Part 11.) : ; 3 zn O 
