236 Recent Literature. 
family to the Marsupialia. No Marsupial presents an analogous 
dentition. Percmeles, it is true, bears a similar relation to Tupaia ; 
but some stress may be laid upon the fact that the Stylodon and 
Chrysochloris are the only known examples of this type of molar. 
As Mr. Lydekker himself indicates by his frequent use of the 
word provisional, we are certainly not in a position to reach final 
conclusions in regard to the classification of the greater number of 
these Mesozoic genera ; and this review of the related portion of this 
valuable catalogue is intended, in large part, to suggest further in- 
quiry, rather than as an expression of final opinion on my own part. 
—Henry F. Osborn. 
SEEBOHM ON THE CHARADRIIÐÆ.!—This is another of the 
handsomely illustrated works of large folio with which the orni- 
thologists of Britain from time to time delight the scientific world, 
and all other lovers of nature as well. While the present publica- 
tion does not pretend to be a complete descriptive monograph, diag- 
nostic characters and figures of species and sub-species are given, 
which are quite sufficient for the determination of the known 
members, at least, of the family. The scope of the work is indi- 
cated by the fact that it embraces as Charadriide the tribe Limi- 
cale of many authors. Especial attention is given, as the title 
indicates, to the geographical distribution of the members of the 
family, with especial reference to their evolution. ; 
The first chapter is occupied with the classification of birds im 
general. The second is devoted to evolution in general. The 
author here distinctly affirms the doctrine that Natural Selection 
never originated anything, and he ranges himself on the side of 
the Neolamarckian school, although he does not say so in precise 
terms. In this matter he shows himself to be much more perspi- 
cacious than those of his countrymen who, like Mr. Romanes, 
regard this view of the subject as “transparently fallacious 
{Romanes in review of Schurman in Nature, Feb., 1888). But we 
take issue with Mr. Seebohm in his expression of evolution 
in taxonomy. Like Schlosser, he believes that “ natural” groups 
must represent phylogenetic series, and he believes these series tO 
be expressed by the totality of the animals’ characters. Thus 
characters of the specific grade generally in his system take pre- 
cedence of those usually regarded as generic and even higher. 
We have objected to this doctrine on various grounds, especially 
in our essay on The Origin of Genera.? First, because generic 
characters probably express more in phylogeny than specific; second, 
iuse specific characters consist of an aggregate of single charac- 
ters, and each has had a history independent of the others, 50 that 
1 The Geographical Distribution of the Charadriide, by Henry See- 
bohm. London: Henry Sothern & Co. 1887. 4to, pp. 524. 
* Origin of the Fittest. D. Appleton & Co. 1887. Art. II. 
