384 : Recent Literature. [June, 
in a book like this, in which systematic zodlogy is left out of 
account. The defect is due, we think, to the analytic rather than 
synthetic turn of mind of its author, and not to the want of ade- 
quate knowledge now in the hands of the naturalist. 
Few errors of statement will probably be found in this book. 
We may be allowed to refer to some points to which we should 
take exception: “ Foraminifera,” says our author, “are Monera 
of the Protogenes type.” It is now proved that Foraminifera have 
a nucleus, as stated near the close of this manual, and should be, 
as they always have been, retained among the Radiolaria ; why 
Prof. Huxley should place them among the Monera, which have 
no nucleus, is a ma of surprise. He regards Eozoén as an 
incrusting form of Foaia, not stating the serious objections 
that have been made as to its.animal nature, and then adopts, as 
possible, Wyville Thompson’s suggestion, that “the enormously 
thick azoic slaty and other rocks, which constitute the Laurentian — 
and Cambrian formations, may be to a great extent the metamor- 
phosed products of foraminifera life” !! This really takes our 
breath away. We leave the matter in the hands of the geologists. 
Then it is added anes “And there may be no part of the 
common rocks, which enter into the earth’s crust, which has not 
passed through a living organism at one time or another.” Are 
we not here dealing with a physiology and anatomy not of our 
earth ? 
Shed ane: is stated to be, among sponges, “ the sole fresh-water 
Prof. H. James Clark’s Siphydora echinodes is said by him 
to be common in ponds and streams in the United States (Mind 
in Nature). It is stated that the embryos of Radiolaria are “ pro- 
vided with a single flagellam ;” in Collosphera, however, there are 
two. The young Limulus is said, as “ Dohrn points out” (1871), 
to bear a remarkable resemblance to the trilobite Zrinucleus; 
this was, however, pointed out by Packard, at some length, wit 
_ figures both of young Limulus and T; rinucleus nearly a year pre- 
vious, in this journal for October, 1870. gain, Huxley states, 
speaking of the metamorphosis of Atax bonzi, “The proper vi- 
telline membrane bursts into two halves much as in Le 
and the deutovum Spheres T In Limulus, aa the m 
feeble grasp of the subject. The trilobites are ee with 
the tardigrades and Pentastomida into a division 
ites.” The trilobites by general analogy are obviously to 
associated with the Merostomatd and Limulus, and, since.the pu 
lication of this work, Mr. C. D. Walcott has cpus that they @ 
” and why should 
possessed “four pairs of manducatory jaws; 
_ Trilobita be associated thus with Tardigrada and Peniastonido 
n when both the latter oups are ‘Undoubtedly low ao 
oe ihe j 
