Marks , employed for classifying the Schizomycetes. 105 
proposed system than is always admitted. Cohn’s great 
merit, in fact, was in pointing out that there is a relative 
consistency in the recurring forms met with, sufficient to 
enable us to describe them more or less definitely : he did 
not insist on the absolute persistence of these forms to the 
extent he has been supposed to have done. 
Two double sets of dissentients to the Cohn-Ehrenberg 
school, of the decade prior to 1881, seem to have arisen 
about this period, and I shall briefly sketch the peculiarities 
(as I understand them) of each of these camps, or schools, or 
whatever we choose to term them, merely reminding the 
reader that each touches the period just referred to in very 
different ways and at different points. 
First, there was a double set of botanists. One of these 
sets may be best referred to as the systematists, who seem 
to have directed their attentions almost entirely to the getting 
hold of every new form of Schizomycete, as soon as it was 
published, and no matter by whom, and giving it a name, 
implying that the form recorded is a species. This set of 
workers, of very unequal merit, has culminated in the un- 
questionably brilliant leaders, Winter, the deplored compiler 
of the celebrated Pilz-Flora of Winter and Rabenhorst, 
and Trevisan and De-Toni, the splendidly talented and 
industrious compilers of the volume on Schizomycetes of 
Saccardo’s monumental Sylloge Fungorum, and now the 
authority on European systematic mycology. 
The second of this set may be termed the morphologists, 
and their distinguishing feature — the one which binds them 
together as a band of workers — has been the investigation 
of the development as well as the forms of the Schizomycetes. 
Influenced throughout more or less by the two masters of 
microscopic methods, De Bary and Brefeld, and also, it 
should be mentioned, by Cohn himself, who was an exceed- 
ingly able investigator, quite alive to the morphology of the 
subject he tried to set in order, this assiduous band of 
observers, comprising Cienkowski, Prazmowsky, Billroth, 
Lankester, Ballinger, Eidam, Hueppe, Klebs, Klein, Kurth, 
1 
