REVIEWS. 
489 
responds to the matrix or intercellular substance of other Avriters, and is the 
formative agent in the production of tissues ; the endoplast (nucleus) is 
simply passive. Dr. Carpenter, on the other hand, employs the expression 
“ proto-plasmic substance,” but we very strongly incline to the supposition 
that this proto-plasmic substance is nothing more than the periplast of Huxley ; 
and if so. Dr. Carpenter can hardly be justified in writing as though the 
idea of development which he conveys to his readers was really his own. 
In regard to the imj)rovements over other editions which the present one 
exhibits, we may mention that in most instances the text is in keeping with 
the recent advance in our knowledge of microscopic anatomy. A number of 
Avoodcuts from other treatises has been introduced, and the letter-press has 
been augmented by about a hundred pages. Still the old cell-idea pervades 
the entire book, and though unquestionably Dr. Carpenter has done his 
utmost to modify his former writing in adaptation to modern theories, the 
result is unsatisfactory ; his volume presents a deal of ugly patching, which, 
under the circumstances, was unavoidable, but Avhich Avill, we fear, prove 
exceedingly irksome to the student. 
MEMOIKS OF THE ANTHROPOLOGICAL SOCIETY.* 
OO much has been said about the Anthropological Society and the gap in 
^ science which its efibrts were to fill, that the publication of its first volume 
of memoirs is a matter of interest to the general public. Some allege that this 
association owes its origin to pique, that a number of members of the 
Ethnological — a society of standing and respectability — who could not agree 
Avith the general body, determined to form an association for themselves ; 
others contend that the Anthropologicals are atheists, whose whole aim is to 
crush Christianity, and substitute a wide spirit of rationalism. Whichever 
of these ideas be correct — and we do not vouch for the accuracy of either — the 
issue of the first volume of papers communicated to the society’s meetings is. 
of importance, inasmuch as it shows what work has really been accomplished,., 
and enables us to judge as to how far the new body has fulfilled its extensive^ 
promises. Malicious “ felloAvs ” of the “ Ethnological,” with Avhom, of course, , 
Ave have no sympathy, declare that an association which is presided over by 
Dr. James Hunt, and Avhich delights in the Avorship of heroes of the Captain 
Burton stamp, could not produce, under the combined efforts of all its 
members, anything worth setting in tjq^e. Hitherto we have continuously 
abstained from offering an opinion upon the question, but now that the 
materials are in our possession, we do not hesitate to speak our mind, and 
Ave regret that we haA”e not much to say in praise of the Anthropological 
movement. With regard to the propriety of forming an association for the 
* “ Memoirs read before the Anthropological Society of London, 1863-4.” 
Vol. i. London : Published for the Society by Triibner & Co. 1865. 
