Notices of Books. 
4 r 7 
1878.] 
“ Popular Errors about Poisons.” It may, however, be ques- 
tioned whether he does not go too far in denying the existence of 
slow poisons whose effects are not perceived until a considerable 
time after their administration. That death does not necessarily 
follow immediately after the introduction of a lethal substance 
into the system is often shown in cases of hydrophobia. Whilst, 
therefore, we fully join Mr. Davies in repudiating the notion that 
a poisoner can so regulate the dose given as to ensure the death 
of his victim at some specific and remote time, we do not think 
it impossible that a man after having taken a poison may remain 
perhaps for months in apparent health. Of this we have heard 
of three painful cases, on what seems to be unimpeachable 
authority. 
Mr. A. J. Mott points out some of the shortcomings of Haeckel’s 
“ History of Creation,” and contends — erroneously in our opinion 
— that the disciples of Haeckel are the only logically-consistent 
Evolutionists. The paper shows extensive reading and acute 
thought, but to our mind it conveys the impression that Mr, Mott 
is not a working biologist. 
Conferences held in Connection with the Special Loan Collection 
of Scientific Apparatus , 1876. Chemistry, Biology, Physical 
Geography, Geology, Mineralogy, and Meteorology. Pub- 
lished for the Lords of the Committee of Council on Educa- 
tion. London : Chapman and Hall, 193, Piccadilly. 
This work has been tardy in making its appearance. So much 
has happened to call public attention in other directions that the 
Exhibition of Scientific Apparatus of 1876 is now almost forgotten. 
This book consists of a series of papers or addresses read or deli- 
vered by certain eminent men, and followed by some slight 
discussion, the whole being supposed to be connected with or 
inspired by the articles then and there exhibited. Though sadly 
in need of a good index, it contains, as might be expeCted, no 
small store of interesting faCts and of weighty opinions. Thus 
Prof. Frankland points out, as an important deficiency in our 
national appliances for the furtherance of scientific culture, the 
absence of a museum of chemical products. Every chemist 
must admit that a collection of this nature, kept well up to the 
level of the day, would be “ of the highest interest both to the 
student and the investigator.” The expense of forming and 
enlarging such a collection would be smaller than might at first 
sight be imagined, since there are few discoverers of new com- 
pounds who would not think it a privilege rather than a tax to 
deposit a specimen of their products in a great national collection. 
Why, then, is Prof. Frankland’s suggestion still not aCted upon ? 
VOL. VIII. (N.S.) 2 E 
