268 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY. 



r W 



embryo may be seen revolving within its cyst, previous to rupturing it 

 and moving away as a free-swimming organism " (p. 239). 



As before, it may be again asked what determines the ciliate to arise 

 at any one particular point in the pellicle; unless there was a living, in- 

 visible " pre-ciliate " to start it? Why should not this theory or imagi- 

 nation be as feasible as archebiosis ? Dr. Bastian himself says, " All I 

 mean to convey is, that the ciliates take origin from the very minute 

 corpuscles which are, at one stage of their existence, almost indistinguish- 

 able from the discrete corpuscles that develop into monads or amoeba? " 

 (p. 341). 



Instead of one and the same matter having the power to develop into 

 three or more different kinds of being, what proof is there that these 

 practically indistinguishable objects may not be the quite independent 

 origin of all the different organisms ? That no such minute germs 

 have hitherto been known to belong to ciliates is no proof that they do 

 not exist. Indeed, we are disposed to say that Dr. Bastian has discovered 

 them. 



Several more wonderful transformations are described, as eggs of 

 tardigrades and of a gnat-like fly, developing into ciliated infusoria. Were 

 they not parasites ? 



Notwithstanding the long period which Dr. Bastian has devoted to his 

 researches, a careful study of the book does not dissipate the doubts one 

 felt at starting. Though many fungi thought to belong to different 

 genera, as Puccinia and JEcidium, are now known to be dimorphic, and 

 some of the organisms he has observed may prove to be of a similar 

 nature, yet such startling transformations as chlorophyll into other and 

 independent living organisms still require far more proofs than have been 

 given. 



'•The Origin of Life: its Physical Basis and Definition." By J. B. 

 Burke. 8vo., 351 pp. (Chapman & Hall, London.) 16s. 



The author begins by accepting, in a sense, Aristotle's belief that 

 " motion constitutes life," by saying — "Life is, so to speak, a specialised 

 motion." He regards metabolism as the indication of life, and adds that 

 it is found in other phenomena outside of physiology, giving as instances 

 luminosity of flames, phosphorescent and fluorescent bodies: "they 

 are of this nature, being due to the building up and breaking down of 

 molecular agglomerations." 



Now, one readily admits that the phosphorescence of the glow-worm 

 and Xoctiluccs is a result of chemical actions associated with life; but 

 fTuor spar is not alive ; nor is the flame of a candle, though respiration is 

 chemically identical with combustion. 



It seems to us that Mr. Burke here strikes a false note in starting. 

 He appears to consider chemical processes similar to those seen in 

 organisms, as necessarily indicating life ; and when they are observed in 

 other bodies, to be therefore a witness to the latter being alive also. But 

 life does not appear to be of the nature of force at all ; rather it is a 

 director of forces. Why should silica find its way to the nails, and lime 

 to the bones, and phosphorus to the brain? 



If h kitten and a young hawk be fed on the same animal food, what 



