112 
THE MYX0GA8TRES. 
In order to inspire confidence in his determinations the preface 
gives a general announcement of the sources whence the types were 
derived, and especially ‘‘the splendid collection of Myxogastres in 
the Royal Herbarium, Rew, rich in types, and with numerous 
annotations by Rostafinski, who examined the collection in detail, 
and which, indeed, served as the basis for his excellent Monograph, 
also served me in like manner.” 
No one can doubt that Mr. Massee has gone to his task honestly, 
has worked all the material industriously, and has produced a con- 
scientious volume, whether all his conclusions be accepted or not. 
There are 32 pages of “ introduction,” and probably the student 
will wish that it had been very much longer. There is but little 
suggestion of theory, and the absolute animal nature of the 
Mycetozoa is combatted by a few terse paragraphs. The summary 
is found in a lew lines. “ Undoubtedly the Myxogastres must be 
considered as a terminal group, and the very fact of this admission 
implies a certain amount of differentiation, in fact sufficient to give 
individuality to the group. I accept De Bary’s reasoning as to the 
origin of the Myxogastres, and as an evolutionist am ready to ex- 
tend the same reasoning to other groups, as having had a common 
origin from the lowest forms of life, where, owing to absence of 
differentiation, the ideas implied in the terms animal and vegetable 
respectively are not evolved, and I consider that the entire evidence 
as to the animal or plant tendency of any departure from this 
neutral starting-point consists of the aggregate tendency of the 
evolved features, which collectively constitute the characteristics of 
the group under consideration ; and this tendency, as manifested 
by the Myxogastres, I consider to be in the direction of the 
vegetable kingdom, and more especially in the direction of the 
Fungi, for the following reasons, which, keeping in view the fact 
that we are dealing with a terminal group, and consequently can 
draw no comparisons from higher forms of the same type, we find 
it impossible to establish any strict homologies, and we are limited 
to the observation of resemblances in form, structure, and mode of 
life.” 
The nine reasons which follow may be left to be perused and 
reflected upon by those who use the volume. 
Although we do not admire books of this particular size, which 
hardly harmonize with anything else, it certainly is good, clear 
reading, and both printer and publisher have done their duty. 
The coloured plates will be valuable, notwithstanding an amount of 
hardness and harshness in their execution which does not please 
the critical eye. We fear that we do not ourselves come up to the 
orthodox standard of a “ reviewer,” at least as interpreted prac- 
tically in certain journals with which we are acquainted. The first, 
and almost the last, qualification seems to be the search after 
everything which can be magnified into a fault, and failing to 
secure sufficient for the purpose to imagine more, interspersed with 
a flavouring of personality. Our own more humble opinion of our 
