THURSDAY, AUGUST 4, 1881

FOSSIL CRINOIDS Mémoires de la Société Paléontologique Suisse. Monographie des Crinoides Fossiles de la Suisse. Par P. de Loriol. (Genève Imprimerie Charles Schuchardt, 1877-1879.)

Iconographia Crinoideorum in Stratis Suecia Siluricis Fossilium. Auctore N. P. Angelin, Opus postumum edendum curavit Regia Academia Scientiarum Suecica. Cum Tabulis XXIX. (Holmiæ: Samson et Wallin, 1878.)

PROF. P. DE LORIOL of Geneva, who is so well

known for his researches on the fossil sea-urchins, has been occupying himself for some time past with the study of the fossil Crinoids. A handsome volume, consisting of 300 pages of text and twenty-one somewhat crowded quarto plates, contains the results of his work on those discovered in the stratified rocks of Switzerland. It originally appeared in three parts, which formed portions of the volumes issued by the Paleontological Society of Switzerland for the years 1877-79.

The total number of species described by Prof. de Loriol amounts to 125, of which thirty-nine are new to science. The series commences with the well-known "Lily-Encrinite" from the Muschelkalk, and ends with a species of D'Orbigny's doubtful genus "Conocrinus" from the Nummulitic Eocene of Wesen. Paleozoic Crinoids are, of course, conspicuous by their absence; so that Prof. de Loriol was not hampered by having to deal with any obsolete system of classification. For the primary divisions of the class he adopts Dujardin's modification of Pictet's system. This throws such very diverse forms as Encrinus, Apiocrinus, and Pentacrinus into one family, the Pycnocrinides, which is especially characterised by the thickness of the plates of the calyx.

Each of these genera, however, is best regarded as the type of a separate family. In fact, Pictet's "family" of Pycnocrinides includes nearly all the non-paleozoic Crinoids or Neocrinoidea except the Comatula, and is far more comprehensive than an ordinary zoological "family."

Encrinus and Apiocrinus are fairly well represented in the Jurassic rocks of Switzerland. Two species of the former genus are described by Prof. de Loriol, one of which is new; and there are four species of Apiocrinus, one of which is new, though founded only on the characters of the stem. Millericrinus and Pentacrinus, however, are considerably more abundant. Thirty-three species of the former are described, two being Liassic and three Cretaceous; while there are no less than fortythree Pentacrinus species, six of which are Cretaceous, and one from the Infra-Lias (Rhætic).

Most of the species are necessarily founded only on the characters of isolated joints and fragments of stems, and are therefore only of provisional value; for two or more joints, the markings on which differ considerably, may really belong to different parts of the same stem. Nevertheless, after making allowance for these possibilities, Prof. de Loriol finds a considerable number of different types of stem which are confined to particular horizons. VOL. XXIV.-No. 614

They thus acquire some stratigraphical value, and it is convenient to name them, but the names can only acquire a permanent value (or otherwise) when we are acquainted with the calices associated with the stem-joints in question. This is, unfortunately, but far too rarely possible. The genus "Pentacrinus" is a large one, and it is almost necessary to separate off some of the best marked varieties as distinct generic types, just as has been done with Apiocrinus. Prof. de Loriol has attempted this subdivision in two cases, in one of which he seems to us to be fully justified, though we cannot say the same for the other. He attempts to re-establish the genus Cainocrinus of Edward Forbes, to include those species of Pentacrinus in which the basals form a complete ring and cut off the

radials entirely from the top stem-joint. The characters

of the stem and of the faces of its component joints are identical with those of the ordinary Pentacrinus type; and there is so much variation in the development of the basals among the different Pentacrinus species, both recent and fossil, that it is hardly worth while to separate off one of the extreme terms of the series as a distinct genus. Besides the fossil species mentioned by Prof. de Loriol Cainocrinus would include the recent Pentacrinus Mülleri, Oersted, from the Caribbean Sea, P. WyvilleThomsoni from the North Atlantic, and P. Maclearanus of the Challenger dredgings.

The genus Balanocrinus was established by the late Prof. Louis Agassiz for a crinoidal fragment that he believed to be a calyx with an attached stem-joint; and he described the terminal face of the latter as resembling those of the stem-joints of Pentacrinus subteres. Prof. de Loriol, however, finds this fragment to be merely an abnormally swollen piece of stem, with the borings of some parasitic mollusc. But the stem-joints of P. subteres have rather different terminal faces from those of the ordinary Pentacrinus species; and Prof. de Loriol therefore proposes to retain the name Balanocrinus for this and similar forms, in which only the rim of each joint-face is crenulated, and not the central ends of its petaloid divisions as in the ordinary Pentacrinida. No calyx has ever been found associated with stem-joints of this nature except perhaps that of P. Fisheri. This name was given by Edward Forbes to a specimen from the Oxford clay of Weymouth that was described by Baily, who did not, however, say much about the stem-joints. Prof. de Loriol directs the attention of English paleontologists to this subject, in the hope of finding out whether Baily's species is a Balanocrinus. If it be so, the original specimen would acquire additional value from its being the only one with the calyx preserved.

The well-known genus Eugeniacrinus, which is made the type of a new family by Prof. de Loriol, is represented in the Swiss rocks by nine species, ranging from the "Oxfordien" to the "Néocomien." The curious form Phyllocrinus with its deeply incised radials was described by d'Orbigny as a Neocomian Blastoid allied to Pentremites; but it has become less interesting since Prof. Zittel showed it to be a near ally of Eugeniacrinus. It is represented in Switzerland by nine well-marked species, which range from the Lower Oolites to the Neocomian deposits.

Comatulæ are also abundant in the Swiss rocks, twelve species being described by Prof. de Loriol, eleven of

P

which are new. These are equally distributed through the Jurassic and Cretaceous series; but there are none as old as our own Actinometra Cheltonensis from the Inferior Oolite of Gloucestershire, nor as young as various species from the Margate chalk. One of the Neocomian species belongs to the sub-genus Ophiocrinus of Semper, which is characterised by the presence of five undivided rays. There are only three recent species referable to this type, all of them inhabiting different portions of the Pacific Ocean. With the Comatule must be included two species of the curious genus Thiolliericrinus, recently mentioned in these columns (vol. xxiii. p. 377) as being a permanent larval form.

Prof. de Loriol's Monograph with its abundant illustrations forms an excellent supplement to the fourth volume of Quenstedt's wonderful "Petrefactenkunde Deutschlands," which deals with the Encriniden. Taken together, the two works give us a very complete account of the Mezozoic Crinoids of Central Europe. We understand that Prof. de Loriol is now working out the French Crinoids in the same way as he has treated the Swiss ones, and we hope that he will be enabled to complete this somewhat extensive task with an equally satisfactory result. This will render a similar work on the British Crinoids more than ever necessary, and we trust that it may be accomplished within a reasonable time.

a

The second book mentioned at the head of this article is the late Prof. Angelin's "Iconographia of the Silurian Crinoids of Sweden." It has been published as posthumous work by the Swedish Academy, and is unquestionably the finest work on Crinoids that has ever appeared. It consists of twenty-nine beautifully-printed folio plates, which illustrate the marvellous wealth of Crinoids and Cystids in the Silurian rocks of Sweden. Some of the figures, such as those of Crotalocrinus, are excessively intricate, and they are all admirably clear and well-arranged. The lamented death of the eminent Swedish paleontologist has unfortunately prevented these figures from being as useful to his successors as they would have been, had he lived to describe them. They have been edited by two of his colleagues, Professors Lovén and Lindström, who have classified the genera and species according to the system which they found sketched out in Prof. Angelin's notes and manuscripts. Unfortunately, however, the classification is an entirely unnatural one, depending upon the number of basal plates in the calyx. Wachsmuth, the chief authority in America on the Palæocrinoids, has already pointed out that while it brings together very distinct types such as Rhodocrinus and Poteriocrinus, genera which are very intimately related, such as Platycrinus and Dichocrinus, are widely separated. Among the true Crinoids forty genera are figured, comprising 176 species, many of which are new. They are arranged into twenty-three families, but as these are not defined we are unable to learn the principles upon which they were established.

There are also figures of twenty-three Cystidean species, arranged into nine genera, including one new one, which fall into three sections, the Apora, Gemellipora, and Rhombifera. So far as can be judged from the species referred to each section, Angelin's classification is something more than an introduction of new names for the three divisions of the group which were sketched out by Müller. Neither

of the three genera included in the Apora, Angelin, are ordinarily referred to the Aporitida; but Echinosphærites aurantium and Caryocystites, von Buch, were placed by Müller among the Rhombiferi or Cystideen mit Porenrauten"; while the third genus, Megacystites, Hall, is ordinarily referred to the Diploporitida, which is a parallel group to the Gemellipora, Angelin.

As in the case of the true Crinoids, we are unable to learn the principle of Angelin's classification of the Cystidea. It is not likely therefore to be adopted, at any rate for the present. Possibly, however, it may stand the test of future discoveries better than the Müllerian system, though we do not think this contingency a very probable one.

In spite of the inconsistencies which we have mentioned, the "Iconographia" must be indispensable to every student of the Palæocrinoidea. A glance through its pages makes one long to see some really good illustrations of our British species. There are many specimens of the utmost beauty and novelty, both in our public museums and in private collections, which we hope will some day be properly described in a "Monograph of the Fossil Crinoids of the British Isles."

OUR BOOK SHELF

The Countries of the World. By Robert Brown. Vol. vi. (London: Cassell and Co.)

WE are surprised that, after so many volumes of this work have been devoted to the description of America and Asia, the whole of Europe and of Africa are disposed of in a single volume, a considerable part of it being devoted, moreover, to the Turkish Empire. This last is allotted 58 pages, whilst the whole of Europe is dealt with in 104 pages, and the whole of Africa in other 104 pages. Moreover, why should Turkey have the favour of receiving thrice as much space as Russia, which is actually dismissed in only eight pages, whilst France, Germany, Italy, and Spain have only four pages each. Does the Russian Empire, or Spain, with their variety of climate, of soil, and of population, afford less interest for the general reader than Asiatic Turkey, and Italy less than Senegambia or Liberia ?

It is obvious that such a distribution of space must affect the entire value of the work. Certainly when reading Mr. Brown's book we have admired in many instances the talent with which he succeeds in condensing in to very few pages a good description of a country; but the book being intended to afford more interest to the general reader than a simple text-book of geography, the author has been compelled to enter into generalisations which cannot but give a false idea of the subject. Is it possible that the reader can have a true conception of the climate of France when he learns from Mr. R. Brown's book that "the climate is one of the finest in Europe-mild, equable, and healthy, in spite of the hot winds from Africa, which sometimes impinge on the southern districts, and the chilly 'mistral' which sweeps down from the Alps in the north"? Or, what an idea will be impressed upon his mind of Paris, when he learns only that "in Paris centres the most polished society of the world. From Paris are sent forth the books, the bonnets, the pictures, and possibly even the vices which are so largely aped by the rest of the civilised world. It is the city of pleasure. But, contrary to the general impression, the morals of Paris, if not high, are not superlatively low; for though these are depraved enough, they are infinitely superior in many respects to those of Vienna, Naples, Bucharest, and even Berlin, which is more cir

cumspect and prudish." All this is quite right, but is it a description worthy of the great capital of the Continent? The same might be said of all the other countries touched by Mr. R. Brown in this volume. All that he says is quite correct, and we do not find such blunders as are too often found in geographical works. But the necessity of giving the reader a generalisation for the purpose of rendering the book more interesting often leads the author to make such generalisations as give to the reader a most untrue conception of the subject. We must regret that Mr. Brown has been compelled to condense his work in this way, and thus seriously diminish the value of what promised to be a useful and trustworthy compilation. Phonetik. Zur vergleichenden Physiologie der Stimme und Sprache. By Dr. F. Techmer. (Leipzig: Engelmann, 1880.)

THE excellent work on the Physiology of Language published by Dr. Techmer under the above title forms the first volume of an Introduction to the Science of Language, the rest of which is hereafter to appear. We have little hesitation in saying that it is the best résumé that exists at present of what is known about the nature and formation of the sounds we utter.

Dr. Techmer has been well prepared for the task he has undertaken. In the first instance a student of natural science, he next devoted himself to the acquisition of modern European languages, then of languages so remote from ours as Chinese and Sanskrit, and finally to the study of comparative philology. Naturally, however, his earlier studies had inclined him rather to the investigation of the material of speech than to the antiquarian researches of the Indo-Germanists or the psychological inquiries of the school of Steinthal. He brought to the investigation a well-trained mind, an intimate acquaintance with physics, acoustics, and physiology, a wide range of reading, and keen observation. What he has to say, therefore, is well worthy of attention.

The ground he covers is so extensive that in order to bring his work within manageable compass he can do little more than indicate the chief facts, methods of investigation and results which have been arrived at by previous phoneticians, along with copious references and notes. These will enable the reader to follow each particular point into special detail, if he so wish. At the same time Dr. Techmer has not been content with being merely a passive reproducer of the opinions of others. He has carefully tested them wherever it has been possible, and made independent experiments of his own, the results of which be lays before us. Hence his judgments and criticisms are always of value, while the numerous and carefully-drawn illustrations and diagrams which accompany his work leave little to be desired.

He has done well in not forgetting the comparative method in his treatment of phonetics. Properly to understand the physiology of human speech it is necessary to compare our vocal organs with those of reptiles, mammals, and more especially birds. Jäger has already been struck by the curious relationship that seems to exist between the power of speech and walking on two feet, and has endeavoured to explain it, though not very successfully.

Perhaps the fact that is most brought home to our minds by a study of Dr. Techmer's book is the uncertainty and obscurity that still hang over a large part of phonetics. Experts still differ radically on soine of the most fundamental details of the science. This is more especially the case with that side of the science which has to do with acoustics; on the physiological side it lends itself more readily to observation and experiment, and the physiological conditions requisite for the production of particular sounds are consequently much better known. Hence it is that the nature of the consonants is far more accurately determined than that of the vowels, and that it will be long before all the difficulties connected with the

formation of the latter are satisfactorily removed. The best means of overcoming them will be a succession of works like this of Dr. Techmer's, at once clear, precise, and thorough.

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

[The Editor does not hold himself responsible for opinions expressed by his correspondents. Neither can he undertake to return, or to correspond with the writers of, rejected manuscripts. No notice is taken of anonymous communications. [The Editor urgently requests correspondents to keep their letters as short as possible. The pressure on his space is so great that it is impossible otherwise to ensure the appearance even of communications containing interesting and novel facts.]

Medusæ

IN Mr. H. N. Moseley's "Notes by a Naturalist," on the Challenger, p. 404, a curious habit of Medusa in the Island of Santa Cruz Major, is mentioned, viz. their lying on the tops of their umbrellas, its tentacles directed upwards. I think your readers may be interested to learn that I have frequently noticed Medusæ in a similar position in the West Indies. A few years ago I was quartered for some time at Port Royal, Jamaica, and in the channels between the mangroves I observed what I at first thought were Actineæ of large size on the muddy bottom, in about eight feet of water. They were very numerous. I stirred one up with the boat-hook, and was surprised to find it was a Medusa turned upside down. On being disturbed, it lazily con. tracted its umbrella in the usual manner and settled down again in the mud as before. The species was about a foot in diameter of umbrella, and dirty white in colour. I never saw them swimming in the mangrove creeks, though I was frequently out in a boat, and they were at all times con mon on the bottom, lying as described. Some time afterwards I saw what seemed to be the same species at St. George's Bay, a small island about ten miles the mud amongst the mangroves, in about four feet of water. from Belize, Honduras. It was lying in the same position on I poked several up with a stick, and they slowly swam for a short distance, and again settled down on their umbrellas. I believe it to be really the habit of the species to lie on its back, as it were, and it is interesting to find another kind in the east acting similarly. Mangrove swamps are extensive in the vicinity of Singapore, but I have not noticed any Medusæ here in that position, possibly because there is a considerable tide which leaves the mud bare at low water.

I think I have seen the habit noticed in some book, but cannot recollect where. H. ARCHER

Fort Canning, Singapore, June 28

Two Kinds of Stamens with Different Functions in the same Flower

THE following extract from a letter lately received from my brother Fritz Müller (of Blumenau, Prov. St. Catharina, Brazil) contains so new and curious an observation that it will probably interest the botanical readers of this journal.

"A species of Heeria (Melastomacea), which is not indigenous here, begins in my garden now to open its beautiful red flowers,

Flower of Heeria spec., longitudinally dissected. s, sepals;, petals; a1, one of the conspicuous yellow anthers which attract the insects; a one of the inconspicuous red anthers, which powder the insects with pollen; c, connective of this anther; f, fork of this connective; st, stigma, remarkable for having two kinds of differently coloured anthers. The four petals spread in a perpendicular plane; the yellow anthers (a) of the four shorter filaments, closely pressed together, project from the middle of the flower; their bright yellow strikingly contrasts with the violet-shining light red of the corolla; the longer anthers (a2) are red, like the filaments, and the very long connective (c), which is lengthened beyond the point of insertion

into a fork (f), with two yellowish points; these points stand close beneath the yellow anthers, whilst the apical apertures of the red anthers (a2) are placed far below them near the stigma; also the style and the stigma (st) are coloured so very like the corolla, that from some distance neither they nor the longer stamens can be seen at all. Any large bee (like Xylocopa, Centris, or Bombus), when working on the smaller anthers in order to collect pollen, would, by moving the connective fork of the larger ones, press the apertures of the latter against the ventral side of its abdomen and powder it with pollen. Until now I have only seen a little fly (Syrphidae) and Trigona ruficrus visiting this flower, both too small to fertilise it. The fly takes only notice of the yellow anthers; the Trigonas, too, always sit down first on these; but most of them (the more experienced specimens ?) turn then round, and go to the larger anthers, which offer a more copious pollen-store, and work on them with their mandibles or eat them up entirely. Even if larger bees acted in the same manner as Trigona ruficrus, they would have powdered the ventral side of their abdomen before going to plunder the latter. The pollen of both kinds of anthers is white." HERMANN MÜLLER

Paleolithic Implements in the Thames Valley at and near London. Their Comparative Numbers

IN my former letters, NATURE, vol. xxiii. p. 604, vol. xxiv. p. 29, I cited instances of the occurrence of these objects at great heights, indicating great antiquity, at the north and south of London. After the positions of the implements on the different old river terraces are considered, their numbers, as compared with the amount of material excavated, is a subject of considerable interest, as these numbers indicate in a broad way the amount of human population.

Before I give the results of my own experience I may say here that I have had these implements in view for about twenty years. I have not searched for them myself during all this time, although at first I commonly looked over pits and roads for implements and flakes with little or no result.

of

I had four reasons for beginning a thorough examination the London gravels:-I. I had long taken a great interest in the subject. 2. I had particularly noticed the implement found in Gray's Inn Lane now in the British Museum, I had looked over Col. A. Lane Fox's collection from Acton and Ealing, and I knew of two implements from the gravels excavated near my own house. 3. I felt disappointed at not meeting with Thames valley implements myself. 4. I had been unwell through overwork, and my doctor told me I should not be well again till I regularly took a four-miles daily walk.

In the early spring of 1878 I determined to walk over the London gravels and note the constituent stones-not walk over the roads and pits once or twice, but ten, twenty, or if need be fifty times, so as to thoroughly acquaint myself with the stratification and materials.

I began in May, 1878, to examine the excavated gravel at Clapton, N.E. London, in the valley of the Lea. Here, after considerable searching, I found an implement and several flakes. I then mapped out the gravels for twenty-seven miles in a line east and west of North London, and wherever the gravel has been exposed in these twenty-seven miles I have been over it a great number of times. In three years-from May, 1878, to May, 1881, I found exactly one hundred implements, mostly lingulate examples (a few ovate), and thirteen trimmed flakes, i.e. genuine implements, but worked on one face only. This is equal to one hundred and thirteen perfect specimens. I also found twenty

one butt-ends and six points, some broken in Paleolithic times, others showing modern fractures; side-scrapers, six; flakes about one thousand four hundred; broken fossil bones, teeth, and tusks, chiefly mammoth and horse, not uncommon. Hammerstones of quartzite, with abraded ends, none. An unabraded quartzite pebble, such as the pebble mentioned by Mr. Perceval, teaches nothing. Even if one end is abraded off, it might have been rubbed off by other pebbles passing over it whilst naturally fixed in the bed of a stream. When both ends of a quartzite pebble are abraded quite away, and the abraded parts are of a distinctly different colour from the rest of the pebble, such a stone

One seldom sees a first-class implement resting flat and clean in the middle of a road or pit, inviting the passer-by to pick it up. They are usually half-buried, with only part of the point, edge, or butt visible, and that part frequently covered with clay or dirt, so that it requires a sharp and trained eye to distinguish the implements and flakes from the ballast with which they are incorporated.

My first attempts were to find how many implements occurred in a hundred tons of London gravel, but I found it impossible to determine this with certainty; I however could accurately find how many miles of the actual drift I had walked over, and my experience is that I walked in three years over four thousand five hundred miles of gravel to find one hundred and thirteen implements, equal to a walk of about forty miles for one implement.

Of course the implements may be more frequent in some places, as at Milford Hill, Salisbury, and Warren Hill, Mildenhall, and much less frequent in others, but the above statement is my personal experience in the twenty-seven miles of river. gravel to the north of the Thames at London. The men work. ing in the roads and pits often questioned me, and I set all the men to look for the implements during my absence: the whole of the men together in three years produced twenty-two extra implements, ovate or lingulate, and worked on both sides.

The mere accumulation of implements was by no means my object. I felt from the first that to entirely depend upon workmen was a great mistake, as all ill-defined instruments must be lost. I therefore personally looked out for genuine new things, and especially wished to ascertain, if possible, what the implements themselves had to teach of the men who made them, how the implements were deposited, and if possible to calculate their age in years. With these objects in view I have kept a manuscript book, giving the exact circumstances of finding of every implement in my collection, not only in reference to the imple ments belonging to the Thames Valley, but to nearly all the implementiferous river valleys of this country. With equal care I have kept a list of non-implementiferous positions, and my experience is, the lower gravels of the Thames as at Hammersmith and Battersea are barren. As soon however as a seventy or eighty feet terrace is reached, the implements and flakes crop up. Two implements have been found in the Thames at Ham mersmith and Battersea, as recorded by Mr. Evans ("Stone Implements," p. 528), but these, of course, were washed out of a higher bed. I have found several flakes and an implement at Clapham Common and Battersea Rise, but here the heights are seventy to ninety feet. The most persistent searching at Lower Battersea and Hammersmith has produced with me absolutely nothing. With your permission I will give further results in a WORTHINGTON G. SMITH

future letter.

125, Grosvenor Road, Highbury, N.

WE

THE COMET

WE have received the following further communications on the lately-visible comet :

THE appearance of a large comet has afforded an opportunity of adding to our knowledge of these bodies by applying to it a new means of research. Owing to the recent progress in photography it was to be hoped that photographs of the comet and even of its spectrum might be obtained and peculiarities invisible to the eye detected. For such experiments my observatory was prepared, because for many years its resources have been directed to the more delicate branches of celestial photography and spectroscopy, such as photography of stellar spectra and of the nebulæ. More than a hundred photographs of spectra of stars have been taken, and in the nebula of Orion details equal in faintness to stars of the 147 magnitude have been photographed.

It was obvious that if the comet could be photographed by less than an hour's exposure there would be a chance of obtaining a photograph of the spectrum of the coma,

of these of Paleolithic age, but not from the Thames valley.

On reading these notes some persons may be inclined to exclaim, What a large number of implements! How common these objects must be! My reply is they are by no means common, but as a rule extremely rare and most difficult to find.

consisted of but few lines. In examining my photographs of the spectrum of the voltaic arc, a strong band or group of lines was found above H, and on the hypothesis that the incandescent vapour of a carbon compound exists in

comets, this band might be photographed in their spectrum.

Accordingly at the first attempt a photograph of the nucleus and part of the envelopes was obtained in seventeen minutes, on the night of June 24, through breaks in the clouds. On succeeding occasions, when an exposure of 162 minutes was given, the tail impressed itself to an extent of nearly ten degrees in length.

I next tried by interposing a direct-vision prism between the sensitive plate and the object-glass to secure a photograph which would show the continuous spectrum of the nucleus and the banded spectrum of the coma. After an exposure of eighty-three minutes a strong picture of the spectrum of the nucleus, coma, and part of the tail was obtained, but the banded spectrum was overpowered by the continuous spectrum.

I then applied the two-prism spectroscope used for stellar spectrum photography, anticipating that, although the diminution of light would be serious after passing through the slit, two prisms, and two object-glasses, yet the advantage of being able to have a juxtaposed comparison-spectrum would make the attempt desirable, and, moreover, the continuous spectrum being more weakened than the banded by the increased dispersion, the latter would become more distinct.

Three photographs of the comet's spectrum have been taken with this arrangement with exposures of 180 minutes, 196 minutes, and 228 minutes, and with a comparison spectrum on each. The continuous spectrum of the nucleus was plainly seen while the photography was in progress. It will take some time to reduce and discuss these photographs and prepare the auxiliary photographs which will be necessary for their interpretation. For the present it suffices to say that the most striking feature is a heavy band above H which is divisible into lines, and in addition two faint bands, one between G and h, and another between h and H. I was very careful to stop the exposures before dawn, fearing that the spectrum of daylight might become superposed on the cometary spectrum.

It would seem that these photographs strengthen the hypothesis of the presence of carbon in comets, but a series of comparisons will be necessary, and it is not improbable that a part of the spectrum may be due to other elements. HENRY DRAPER

271, Madison Avenue, New York

My first view of the comet was on June 25, when it appeared through a momentary opening in the clouds, with a nucleus that, in size and brightness, seemed to equal Venus at her best. The tail, immediately at its commencement, was exceedingly bright also, but I could see no more of it then, nor at a second view, also momentary, when little more than the head was visible. Notwithstanding the immense development of tail shown by the great comet of 1861 it could not compare for an instant in brightness with the nucleus of the present one as I saw it on June 25.

On June 27 I again observed it wonderfully waned in light, with a tail plainly traceable for ten degrees, and pointing directly to the Pole. The tail was slightly curved to the right; that is, it was convex to the apparent east, or on the preceding side, and was brightest and best developed on that side. There was no time for observation with the telescope when the clouds shut up the skies for the remainder of the night.

On the next night, the 28th, I got a view with the telescope, and by an observation, which was much interfered with by clouds, I made out the position to be, in Right Ascension, 5h. 58m. 44s., and in Declination 63° 12′ 53′′, at 12h. 15m. Greenwich mean time. The comet was progressively waning, but the tail seemed still about 10° long, and pointed to the Polar star. The nucleus, though growing smaller, was still exceedingly brilliant, and as

-f

large as a star of the first magnitude. The direction o the tail did not differ very much from the comet's appa rent course, and seemed concave to it, contrary to what is usually observed with other comets. With a power of 126 on a 44-inch achromatic I saw a curve of light extending like wings on each side of the head, and outside, with a dark space between them, appeared a large enveloping curve of inferior brightness. I fancied at times that I could discern a very faint third envelope outside all. These curves extended farther in the direction of the tail on the following side than on the other, though it was on the latter or preceding side that the tail showed the best definition.

On July 8 the comet seemed much diminished in light and magnitude, though the nucleus was still brightly stellar. I could now see only the inner light-curve extending on both sides of the comet's head, and through it on the following side I distinctly observed a small star shining, as it would appear, with undiminished brightness. The preceding side of the tail was still brighter and better defined than the following. I made the comet's position at 14h. G.M.T. Right Ascension 7h. 49m. 38s, and Declination 79° 27′ 21′′.

On July 11 it was still further diminished, and in the bright moonlight there was no longer any light-curve traceable in my telescope. The nucleus however continued remarkably bright and star-like, and there was an extensive nebulosity round it. The tail might be traced by the naked eye three or four degrees. I had on this night a very satisfactory micrometrical observation, but I have not as yet been able to perfectly identify the star of comparison. comparison. The calculated light of the comet was scarce more than a tenth of what it was on June 22. It is now fast receding out of naked-eye view, and of little interest except for marking its position. This on July 20, at 12h. 20m. G.M.T., I made to be 11h. 17m. 47s. in R.A., and 82° 9' 2" in Declination.

Schæberle's comet is now well in view, and would be visible to the naked eye only for the brightness of the sky where it is moving. The weakest binocular is sufficient to show it, and it is rapidly gaining in brightness. On the 27th inst. it appeared to me with a stellar nucleus and a tail visible for about half a degree. I made its position at 14h. 15m. G.M.T. 6h. 14m. 41s. R. Ascension, and 43° 59' 10" in Declination. The observation was difficult owing to the brightness of the sky and to clouds. J. BIRMINGHAM

Millbrook, Tuam, July 28

=

A POPULAR ACCOUNT OF CHAMELEONS1 THE 'HE animal to which I propose especially to direct your attention to-day is one which has been the subject of many observations, and has inspired great interest from the most ancient times.

Its name "chamæleon" is derived from two Greek words signifying "Ground-lion," a name singularly inappropriate, since it is one of those creatures which are specially fitted by their organisation to live on trees, and which are comparatively ill at ease when on the surface of the earth.

It is by no means surprising however that this creature should have attracted the attention it has attracted, such is the singularity of its appearance and the peculiarities of its habits and properties. Neither is it surprising that it should have occasioned many errors and superstitions when we consider the erroneous beliefs current amongst ourselves with respect to our own toads and slow-worms, efts, &c.

Aristotle was acquainted (as was to be expected of him) with the singular motions of its eyes, but even he fell into some curious mistakes respecting it, and he tells us that

1 Lecture delivered at the Zol gical Gardens on July 28, 1881, by St. George Mivart, F.R.S.