334 JOURNAL OF ‘SCIENCE. 
of Crustacea referred to. by Prof. Hutton at p. 264, I think all 
the species which he desires to eliminate should certainly be 
struck off our catalogue. Of the doubtful species I have several 
specimens of Vzrdius bifidirostris, which were got by the dredge 
in Paterson Inlet and Port Pegasus. These agree closely with 
Miers’ description, except in having 5 teeth instead of 7 on the 
lower margin of the rostrum. 
There appears to be considerable confusion as to the Species 
of Expagurus. Ihave numerous specimens,—all young, however, 
—which are provisionally labelled £. cristatus ; they certainly 
are as near that species as they are to &. spinulimanus or E. 
nove-scelandice, but they do not agree well with any of the 
three. They were obtained from the same localities as Vzrdzzs. 
AE aga gs 
NESTS OF THE YELLOW-BREASTED T1IT.—Mr. W. E. Barker’ 
of Waikonini, Rangitata, records the occurrence of two nests of 
this little bird (Petveca (Myiomoiva) macrocephala) in a remarkable 
locality. They were placed in the holes of a black-pine post, 
which had formerly been used as a slip-panel. The upper one 
was either deserted or not quite finished ; that in the lower hole 
had two young ones in it. Both nests were neatly made just to 
fit close to the sides of the slot-holes in the post, and well back. 
Outwardly they were made of small chips of wood, short grass, 
roots and moss, while the inside was lined with moss and a mass 
of feathers of the common fowl, together with a few parakeet 
feathers. The young birds had not their eyes open, and the 
mother fed them fearlessly even in the presence of persons 
standing a few yards off. 
PROF. HAECKEL ON EDUCATION.—At the close of a remark- 
able lecture recently delivered at the meeting of German 
naturalists and physicians at Eisenach, Professor Haeckel said : 
— In face of the surprising velocity with which in these last 
years the development theory has paved an entrance into the 
most diverse departments of inquiry, we may here express the 
hope that its high pedagogic value also will be even more 
recognised, and that it will quite perfect the education of the 
coming generations. When five years ago, at the fiftieth 
meeting of naturalists,in Munich, I laid stress on the high 
significance of the development theory in relation to education ; 
my remarks were so misunderstood that a few words of 
explanation may here be allowed me. It stands to reason that 
with these words I could not mean to claim that Darwinism 
should be taught in elementary schools. That is simply 
impossible. For just like the higher mathematics and physics, 
or the history of philosophy, Darwinism demands a mass of 
previous knowledge which can be acquired only in the higher 
stages of learning, Assuredly, however, we may demand that 
