1895.] Editor’s Table. 345 
EDITOR’S TABLE. 
—TueE evolutionary doctrine leads us to expect that definitions of 
natural divisions as genera, families, orders, etc., will be ultimately 
rendered inapplicable through the discovery of intermediate forms. 
This result has, to some extent, followed paleontologic discovery. The 
abolition of definitions, however, can never be complete, and many 
will remain in accordance with the doctrine of “expression points.” 
Evolution of characters, while gradual at bottom, ceases to be so in 
expression, when two or more stimuli coincide to produce something 
‘more than the arithmetical sum of the two might lead one to expect. 
Moreover, there are many “ expressions” which only become apparent 
at a definite stage of development. The eruption of a tooth, for in- 
stance, is only accomplished when the line of the alveolar border is 
passed by the base of the crown as it rises. Yet the growth was, per- 
haps, uniform throughout. Especially has the “law of release ” of en- 
ergy probably often operated to render the immediate appearance of 
a structure possible, although the approach to the point of release may 
have been uniform and gradual. These facts are opposed to the view 
that systematic divisions are phylogenetic lines. The former run 
transverse to the latter, and are generally polyphyletic. ; 
These remarks are apropos to the frequent carelessness exhibited by 
some modern writers in tħe use of systematic terms, family sub- 
family, ordinal names, etc., who use without reference to their relation 
to the divisions which have long borne, and must necessarily bear, those 
names. New names are used for divisions already named, or so nearly 
covered by old names that the creation of new ones is inexcusable. In 
the hands of some authors, almost every conspicuous genus becomes the 
type of a new family. Such authors are frequently at no pains to 
define the divisions thus proposed. The chief sinners in this direction 
appear to be the paleontologists and embryologists, who are sometimes 
unfamiliar with systematic biology. In the midst of this carelessness, 
it is pleasant to refer to the Catalogues of the British Museum issued 
of recent years. So far as regards the Vertebrata, while we cannot 
praise their treatment of the North American species, in their syste- 
matic work there is conservatism and conscientiousness, which is worthy 
of imitation everywhere.—C. 
—Tuerk is still a lack of appreciation on the part of the benefac- 
tors of their fellow citizens of the importance of original research. 
