EDITOR'S TABLE.

The rules of zoological nomenclature formulated by Strickland and adopted by the British Association for the Advancement of Science, in 1842 have been observed by most zoologists ever since. They are eminently fair, and conducive to the best interests of science, and in broad contrast in certain details to some individual opinions which have been promulgated in recent years.

There is a minor point in which it seems to us that the Stricklandian rule might be amended, and we recommend it to the consideration of the international zoological congress committee on nomenclature. This is the question of the presence or absence of the annectant i in the root of proper names of the second declension—to which most proper names belong. Shall we write Boggsus or Boggsius: Keenus or Keenius; Levius or Leviius, etc.? The British rule provides (Proceeds. Brit. Ass. Adv. Sci., 1842, p. 115) that after a consonant the termination of proper names shall be us gen. i; while after a vowel the i shall be inserted, so that we have ius, gen. ii.

This rule, however, does not exactly conform to the usage of the Romans, which was not regular. Thus they wrote Catullus, Catulli, but Sallustius, Sallustii; Corvus, Corvi; Horatius, Horatii, etc. After vowels the custom also varied, but generally the i was omitted since it is unnecessary on the score of euphony. The Romans were, as well known, guided by euphony in the matter, hence the irregularity. It is evident that we should be guided by the same principle, but that in doing so we should endeavor to formulate a rule which shall have no exceptions. Naturalists cannot be expected to remember exceptions in a subsidiary matter like nomenclature.

The reversal of the Stricklandian rule would apparently accord best with the spirit of Latin word composition. That is, an i should be inserted after the root of all proper names of the second declension which ends in a consonant, and no i should be inserted where the root terminates in a vowel. Names of the first class never sound badly with the i, while most of them,-notably those whose roots end in labials and dentals, do sound badly. A vowel precedes the us euphoniously. Thus Dana, Danaus; Perrine, Perrinius; Secchi, Secchius; Gaudry, Gaudrius. Those ending in o and u are not of the second declension, unless made so by the addition of the consonant v, as Sello, Sellovius; Yarrow, Yarrovius.

OUR much esteemed contemporary, Natural Science, had, in a recent number, three short articles devoted to the denunciation of the describing of species in biology; calling the practice in one of them "a most unprofitable" kind of work. Now comes our equally esteemed colleague, The Revue Scientifique (1896, p. 440), and remarks as follows, anent of the recent work of Messrs. C. H. Merriam and E. S. Miller on North American Mammalia: "But really is there not more interesting work to be done on the fauna of the United States? This work, which consists in enumerating and describing species, which is within reach of the most mediocre intelligence, this fastidious care which should be left to those who are not capable of ideas, is this the only work which tempts American Zoologists? Is there not other occupation for their scientific activity? Cannot Mr. Hart Merriam stimulate work of a biologic character?"

We regard the expressions above quoted as an indication of a mild form of megalomania which is not unfrequently found among the users of mechanical appliances in the biological laboratory. The most intelligent cultivators of these important branches of biologic research are, however, well aware that the exact determination of species is fully equal in importance to their own pursuit, for the following reasons, among others. If we regard biology to consist of two branches, evolution and physiology, we define evolution, with Darwin, as the origin of species. For physiology the question of species is not so important. Species are, however, what the labors of the ages have produced, and it is necessary to know them in order to pursue any branch of evolution (as embryology or paleontology) intelligently. The work of the embryologist and paleontologist who does not know the species whose origin he seeks to explain is greatly lacking in precision. Linnæus states that the tyro knows the higher divisions, but only the expert knows species. We also especially deny that the discrimination and description of species is within reach of the most mediocre intelligence. On the contrary, no kind of work in biology imposes as much on all the mental faculties which are used in scientific work. Those who have not attempted it have little idea what is involved in a diagnosis or an analytical key. Finally, as regards the mammalogic work of Messrs. Merriam and Miller, we consider it of the utmost importance. They are pointing out the results of the evolution of Mammalian life in North America, which it is the business of the embryologist and the paleontologist to explain. And in this field the work of Messrs. Merriam and Miller is the best that has ever been done in any country.

The most important result of the Nansen Arctic exploration which has been so far given to the public is the discovery that the ocean has the great depth of nearly 2000 fathoms north of Franz Joseph's Land. This is the average of the oceanic depths, and the knowledge of its extension to the point nearest the pole yet attained, is a distinct gain. It dispels the idea that the pole can be reached overland from the side of Siberia, and shows that the nearest land approach, as suggested by Peary, is by way of Greenland. While this discovery does not destroy the hypothesis that land exists near the pole, it weakens it. The theory will not become extinct until the northern rendezvous of high arctic migratory birds has been discovered. The remarkable discovery of a territory free from glaciers and covered with vegetation in Grinnell Land, and along the north coast of Greenland, by the Greeley Expedition, opens up interesting possibilities, and must stimulate further search. American citizens have had an honorable share in these in the past, and it is to be hoped that they will continue to attack the problem until it is solved.

RECENT LITERATURE.

The Earth and Its Story by A. Heilprin' fills a want long felt by teachers of elementary geology. It is a well illustrated little volume which presents "briefly, forcibly and possibly in a more popular form than in most books of a similar nature, the general facts of geology." It covers the field that it is intended to cover in a remarkably satisfactory manner. The facts of the science are given in sufficient detail to impress the student with the notion that the generalizations based upon them are built upon a secure foundation. Comparatively slight stress is laid upon these facts, the greater emphasis being placed on the general truths to which they lead. The book is interesting. It is well written; the language is simple and the thoughts are very clearly expressed. Only the most important conclusions of geology are mentioned, and where the views expressed are not accepted by all geologists, the author does not hesitate to mention the fact.

These are

A prominent feature of the book are the illustrations. mainly reproductions of photographs, many of them entirely new. A

1 Angelo Heilprin: The Earth and Its Story, a First Book of Geology. Boston, Silver, Burdett and Co., 1896. Pp. 267 and Plates 64.

few are blurred, but the majority are sufficiently full of detail to be of great aid to the reader. Two might well have been spared without injuring the value of the volume in the least-the map of Mammoth Cave (Plate 22, Fig. 2) on which the lettering is so small as to be read with difficulty, and the plate supposed to show the forms of crystals.

Criticism might well be urged against the table of geological" epochs and formations," since the terms 'primary' and' secondary' are used in conjunction with Paleozoic and Mesozoic, as though they were in as frequent use as the latter, and the term 'tertiary' is used as synony mous with Cainozoic. Azoic' is also used as the time term corresponding to the formation term Archean, in spite of the fact that the pres ence of fossils in the Archean rocks (Huronian and Laurentian) is not positively denied. Finally the term Algonkian has no place in the table. While, of course, it is permitted to the author to decline to accept this term as having a definite significance, it is at the same time unfortunate for his readers that they are not made familiar with it, if only as an aid toward the understanding of the handsome geological maps of the U. S. Geological Survey.

There are 19 chapters in the book. The first three treat of rocks. their formation and decay, the fourth of mountains, the next two of glaciers, the seventh of underground waters, the eighth of the relation between sea and land, the ninth of the interior of the earth, the tenth and eleventh of volcanoes, the twelfth of coral islands, the next three of fossils-their organization and their teachings, the sixteenth of land surfaces, and the last three of metals, minerals, building stones, etc.

No one need hesitate for an instant in recommending this little volume for use in our high schools and academies. It is by far the best thing of its kind that has yet appeared upon the market.-W. S. B.

A Handbook of Rocks, for use without the Microscope by Dr. J. F. Kemp2 is a very welcome visitor to the desk of the teacher of geology. There has long been needed a little treatise on lithology which might be used as an introduction to the study of rocks and as a text-book for the use of those students in geology who have no intention of taking up the subject as a specialty. The volume before us fills this need completely. It is an excellent little book, as full of detail as is desirable for a book of its character and as accurate as is possible in one of its size. Each of the main families of rocks is well characterized

2 J. F. Kemp: A Handbook of Rocks, for use without the Microscope with 1 glossary of names of Rocks and other Lithological Terms. Printed for the author. New York, 1896, pp. vii, 176. Price in lots of ten copies $1.00 each.

in a few discriminating sentences, analyses of many varieties are given and the structures and textures of all are well described. One of the most commendable features of the volume is the use of only the more important rock-names in the body of the text-the less important ones being relegated to a very comprehensive glossary which forms a convenient appendix to the book. In this respect, as in some others, the volume under review is very much more satisfactory to the untechnical reader than the other volumes of similar character that have recently come under our notice.

The work opens with a description of the rock-forming minerals and a discussion of the principles of rock classification. Following this are the descriptions of the rocks. These are divided into Igneous, Aqueous (including Eolian) and Metamorphic rocks. Each class is divided into groups according to chemical composition, and each group is further subdivided according to texture. The classification is an eminently practical one, and at the same time it can give no offense to the micoscopical lithologist.

In the discussion of the rock-types each chapter begins with a list of analyses; this is followed by comments upon them. Then comes a description of varieties, a statement of relationships, a paragraph on geological occurrence, one on alterations and one on distribution. In that portion of the book that deals with the igneous rocks the glasses are first taken up, then the porphyritic varieties and, finally, the granitic ones. The aqueous rocks are grouped as mechanical sediments, limestones, organic remains and precipitates from solution. Of the metamorphic rocks two great classes are recognized, viz., those produced by contact action and those produced by regional metamorphism.

The above outline of the contents of the volume is very brief, but it is sufficiently full to indicate that the author has covered well the field that such a treatise as this one should cover. This book should find a wide sale among engineers as well as among all teachers who introduce into their courses on geology a description of rocks. It is a far more valuable synopsis of the characteristics of rock types to place in the hands of geological students than the synopses contained in the large text books on geology.—W. S. B.