AVES. 
37 
As some of the statements on which the opinions advanced are 
founded seem to have been gathered from authorities having very 
little acquaintance with the facts, we may hold ourselves excused 
from entering further upon the philosophy of this series of 
papers (which is being yet continued) than to say that the 
author is opposed to any theory of Evolution, and especially to 
Mr. Darwin’s. The instances drawn from the Class of birds are 
eight in number (pp. 1352-1355), and one accidentally erroneous 
statement is subsequently corrected (p. 1483). 
Newton, Alfred. Remarks on Prof. Huxley’s proposed Clas- 
sification of Birds. Ibis, 1868, pp. 85-96. 
After giving a brief sketch of Prof. Huxley’s arrangement 
(Zool. Rec. iv. pp. 46-49), the opinion is expressed that a scheme 
of classification composed solely with reference to one character 
will never lead to a true comprehension of the system of Nature. 
The principles laid down by him are shown to consist of two 
kinds of characters,” those which are diagnostic and those 
which arc not; and those drawn from the structure of the palatal 
bones prove, on investigation, to come into the category last 
named, wdiile many of the former are of the other kind. Other 
zoologists, proceeding by other routes, have arrived at some of 
the same conclusions as he has — particularly as to the affinity of 
the Oharadriidcn and Scolopacidae [Limicolcs, Nitzsch] and allied 
groups to the Laridoi, thus forming his suborder ” Schizo- 
gnathcB ; but Bicholophus and Crax seem to form exceptions to 
the very characteristic from which that is named. Similar ex- 
ceptions occur among the Desmognathm and jdigithognathce, and 
also among the further subdivisions, as Grus antigone in the 
Geranomorphee ^mdiProcellaria gigantea in the Cecomorphm. Prof. 
Huxley’s division of the Aetomorpha; [Accipitres) meets with 
more approval. [Q/*. Journ. Anat. & Phys., May 1868, pp. 390, 
391. Vide supra, Huxley, T. H.] 
Owen, Richard. On the Anatomy of Vertebrates. Vol. III. 
London : 1868. 
Though this volume is devoted to a consideration of Mam- 
malia, it is necessary for us to notice it here, on account of the 
systematic views expressed by the author in the Zoological 
Index ” appended to it (pp. 847-849) . These are not quite the 
same as those which were manifested in the preceding volume 
(Zool. Rec. iii. pp. 67, 68). The Class^rc5 is divided into three 
great groups: — (A) Altrices, including the OxdiQY^ Raptores, 
Scansores, Volitores, and Cantores', (B) Praecoces, comprising 
the Orders Rasm'es, Cur sores, Grallatores, and Natatores ; and 
(C) Uroioni [potius UroRoni^, of which Archceopteryx is the sole 
representative. Thus it will be seen that the Cur sores, which 
was before declared (vol. ii. p. 12) not to be a natural Order, is 
again restored ; but it is said (iii. p. 848) to be synonymous 
