328 
seems to me of the greatest importance is that this stomachic 
cavity is divided in several sponges ( Axinella and others) by 
radial partition walls into compartments (of various or con- 
stant number, especially eight!), and thus the entire body of 
the individual sponge seems to be composed of a fixed 
number of antimera. I had hitherto always considered the 
absence of antimera-formation as one of the most important 
morphological differences between Sponges and Coclenterata. 
By their similar mode of propagation, &c., the near rela- 
tionship of the sponges and Anthozoa becomes still more 
probable. In short, I now consider it most correct to follow 
Leuckart’s example in uniting the Sponges with the Coclen- 
terata systematically, and therefore consider it very probable 
that both groups have had a common origin. The phylum 
of the Coclenterata would henceforth divide into two sub- 
phyla. I. Spongise (Coclenterata without urticating organs) : 
1. Petrospongise ; 2. Autospongise. II. Acalephse 1 (Coelen- 
terata with urticating organs): 1. Anthozoa; 2. Archydree ; 
3. Hydromedusac ; 4. Ctenophora. 
As Herr Miklucho is about to publish his beautiful ob- 
servations on sponges, in which he will demonstrate the 
community of descent of the Sponges and Acalephce, I confine 
myself here to this short notice. 2 I have mentioned them 
here because it seems to me that a great gain has been 
attained in classification by the removal of the Sponges from 
the remaining Protista, and by their union with the true ani- 
mals. In particular, it now becomes possible to define my Pro- 
tista kingdom by a decided and important character, and to 
separate it from the true animals and the true plants : this 
character is the total absence of sexual reproduction. In 
nearly all indubitable plants, as well as in all indubitable 
animals, sexual reproduction (ampliigony) is present. On the 
other hand all true Protista (all the above-mentioned groups 
except the Sponges) multiply exclusively by a noil-sexual 
reproduction (monogony). If we extend this definition to 
the genealogical individuality of the first order, to the cycle of 
1 Aristotle’s original definition Acalephse, or Cuidoe, may be the most 
admissible definition for the true Coelenterata (with the exception of the 
Sponges) because, on the one hand, it already expresses their most essential 
character, the possession of urticating organs ; and on the other, because 
Aristotle already included under this definition the two different types of 
Coelenterata, the fixed Pctracalcphoe (Actinia) and the freely swimming 
Nectacalephoe (Medusae), aia(ca\j)0ai, ai icvidai. 
2 A special light becomes thrown, by this community of descent, upon 
the recently so much talkcd-of Hyalonema. Perhaps in the end the sponge 
and parasitic polyp may be connected, and Hyalonema be a direct de- 
scendant of the common original group of Sponges and Acalephse? 
