250 The Lesson of the Unnucleated Cell. [May, 
as we can see, be repeated in the same manner for ever. 
Accidents excepted, they are immortal.” That these frail 
tiny beings were living not potentially in their ancestors, but 
really in their own persons, perhaps, in the Laurentian 
^InVhe February number of this Journal (pp. 68 and 72) 
appear two articles which are parcel of the same subject. 
The first, “ Is Death Universal ?” “ In monocellular ani- 
mals, which propagate by division, the entire bodily substance 
of the older individuals continues to live in the young indi- 
viduals into which the former have resolved themselves by 
the aft of fission,” “ thence Weisman ascribes to the Proto- 
zoa immortality.” And he argues thus We have an 
endless series of individuals, each of which is as old as the 
species itself.” “ The Metazoa have lost this faculty ot 
endless life. In them the monocellular organisms is restricted 
to the reproduction cells alone.” Mobius differs from this 
conclusion, and the writer reasserts the position assumed 
The second article, “Death and Individuality. _ G. b. 
Minot says “ the current conceptions of death as a biological 
phenomenon are very confused and unscientific, and that 
“ the recent publications of Weisman and Goette upon this 
general topic have increased rather than lessened the existing 
confusion. In faft these authors fail to make the necessary 
distinctions between the different kinds of death, the different 
orders of individuality, and the different forms of reproduc- 
tion. When speaking of individuality the author says the 
error of Weisman and Goette is that “ they both assume 
that the death of a single protozoon is equivalent to the 
death of one of the higher animals.” It is to be noted, the 
latter says, “ The death of a unicellular is entirely different 
from the death of a multicellular individual.” Minot further 
savs “ To Huxley we owe the first scientific determination 
of individuality. . . . Life occurs in cycles of cells : each 
cycle comprises all the cells springing from a single impregnated 
ovum.” “ All cells are homologous , all cycles are homologous, 
hut individuals are not always homologous, since an individual 
may be the whole or any fractional part of a cycle. 1 bus 
“ the whole of every cycle is homologous with every other 
whole cycle, no matter whether every cell is a so-called 
individual, or whether they constitute several individuals 
( e .g ., polyps) or a single one (vertebrates).” 
In substance Mr. Minot’s arguments are as lollows 
That all organisms develope in cycles, and that all species 
begin their life-history with an impregnated cell, or ovum, 
