48 
ZOOLOGICAL LITERATURE. 
Alcedinida, Buceroiidas, UpupidcBy MeropidcSj MomotidcBj Cora-- 
ciidcBj and (d) Trogonida. Next in order come the CeleomorpJue 
Picidci) group respecting the exact position of which Prof. 
Huxley is uncertain^ though he is inclined to suppose its affini- 
ties are with the jEgithognathcBy the fourth and last of his sub- 
orders/^ characterized by a palatal structure in some respects 
intermediate in structure between the preceding ones. The 
vomer is broad, abruptly truncated in front, and deeply cleft 
behind, so as to embrace the rostrum of the sphenoid ; the pa- 
latals have produced postero-external angles, the maxillo-palatals 
are slender at their origin, and extend obliquely inwards and 
forwards over the palatals, ending beneath the vomer in expanded 
extremities, not united either with one another or with the vo- 
mer. The anterior part of the nasal septum is frequently ossi- 
fied, but this ossification is not united with the vomer. The 
u^githognath(B are divisible into two groups : (1) CypselomorphcBj 
including Trochilidce, CypselidcSy and CaprimulgidcBy and (2) Co- 
racomorphcBy which last are separable into two groups (neither 
of which receives a name) , one {a) formed of the genus Menura, 
which seems to stand alone, and the other [b) made up of (a) 
Polymyoday (/8) TracheophoiKBy and (7) OligomyodcBy sections 
founded on the laryngeal structure, but declared to be not natu- 
ral. The Coracomorph(By therefore, corresponds with the Pas- 
seres of this ^ Record,^ and contains by far the largest number of 
species. 
Such, then, is a very brief abstract of this remarkable paper, 
which is admirably illustrated by woodcuts showing the various 
modifications of palatal structure described by the author. The 
only group with respect to which he enters into further details 
is that of the AetomorphcBy which he divides into four primary 
groups (see special part under ^^Accipitres . That the princi- 
ples of ornithological classification here laid down are not entirely 
new is no objection to them ; for Prof. Huxley has gone much 
more thoroughly into the subject than did Dr. Cornay (LHn- 
stitut, xii. p. 21 ; Comptes Rendus, xviii. pp. 94, 95 ; Rev. Zool. 
1847, pp. 360-369), whose labours have not generally been re- 
garded with favour ; but it does seem a question very much de- 
serving of attention how far any approach to a natural system 
can be based on the modifications of one part of an animaPs 
structure without any reference whatever to other portions of it. 
The present proposal, therefore, must be regarded as on its trial; 
but though it appears to us on the whole to result in a purely 
artificial system, it is undoubtedly of a very diflPerent kind from 
almost any that has before been suggested. There is in it no 
room for fancy, the statements are indisputable, and all that re- 
mains for consideration is whether they really possess the im- 
portance which their author assigns to them. But we value 
Prof. Huxley^s investigations very much as tending to lead to a 
