sors of much younger eyes and hands. Many of our "collectors" 

 have a very considerable knowledge of the various species of 

 diatoms. Among these latter I can only name a few, and will 

 quote Mr. Rae of Stirling, Mr. Doeg ol Evesham, Mr. Macrae of 

 London, Mr. Morland of Hounslow, Mr. Griffin, etc. Diato- 

 mology, as a science possessing science-writers ', has emigrated 

 principally to France, Germany, and the United States, with 

 solitary votaries elsewhere — one in Hungary, M. Pantocsek ; 

 one in Belgium, M. Van Heurck ; two in Italy, M. Castra- 

 cane and M. Mateo Lanzi; one in Sweden, M. Cleve ; and one 

 in Switzerland, M. Brun. 



Since Messrs. Grove and Sturt published their memorable 

 papers on the Oamaru (New Zealand) fossil deposits in the 

 Journal of the Quekett Club in 1886 — 87, I hear that M. Sturt 

 has entirely given up the study of Diatoms. Mr. J. Rattray, 

 after his arduous labours among the Coscbiodisci, the Aulacodisci, 

 the Adinocydi, and their allies, has retired from the field of 

 active workers. The same may be said of the sympathetic 

 veteran, Fred. Kitton. The cause of these defections is attri- 

 butable in'a great measure to the stern fact that the study of the 

 Diatoms is not conducive to the obtention of the .much-needed 

 "daily bread," but leads, alas ! rather to the opposite result and 

 also to the difficulty of finding publishers among the learned 

 societies, whose members are not generally diatomists, and who 

 object to the expense of the printing of the plates explanatory 

 of the text. Most persons, however, and whatever their occupa- 

 tions or pursuits, have occasionally a few leisure hours, and to 

 these we must look forward hopefully for the developments of 

 the future. 



1 am fully aware that the "professors" of Botany in this 

 country— few of whom know more about diatoms beyond their 

 use as test objects for the high powers of the microscope —have 

 relegated our favourites (very erroneously, in my humble 

 opinion) among the lowest forms of life, and classed them with 

 the heterogenous mixture of so-called " Schizophytous Proto- 

 phytes," hardly higher in organisation than the problematical 



