I was glad to read in a recent number of "The Asclepiad," an article by Dr. B. W. Richardson, on "Alcohol at the Bedside," and to find there from the pen of one of the most staunch and determined of abstainers a decided recognition of the great medicinal value of alcohol, which some fanatical teetotalers have lately denied, who would prohibit its use in hospitals, and banish it from the pharmacopoeia. But Dr. Richardson protests against prescribing it in the form of wine or other commercial beverage. He insists upon the use of pure ethylic alcohol, dispensed like other drugs, and mixed by the dispenser only with the other items of the prescription. The modern manufacture of choice wines renders it absolutely impossible for the physician to know what he is prescribing when he recommends the use of any of them. His grandfather may possibly have formed some idea of the composition of the wine of his period.

RUDIMENTS AND VESTIGES.

N the controversy on this subject in the pages of SCIENCE-GOSSIP during the last year, there have been, besides various side issues, two distinct questions under discussion, both of which Miss Layard started in her original article in SCIENCEGOSSIP for October, 1887, and which, it seems to me, should be studiously kept separate.

The first of these is, whether Mr. Darwin's use of the word rudimentary in the "Descent of Man," etc., is in accordance with its etymological and generally accepted sense.

I think that, as Miss Layard says in her last contribution to the discussion, there has been a general consensus of opinion "that a better word might be substituted;" but, at the same time, as she rather implies by using the words "reluctant recognition," there has been a general feeling that the matter was not of the first importance when compared with Miss Layard's other contention.

For although Miss Layard is absolutely right in saying that "if Mr. Darwin, by his persistent accuracy, has taught his readers to submit terms as well as facts to a strict investigation, he would have been the last to complain of the jealous regard for truth which cannot sanction the misuse of a single word;" still this possible misuse sinks into absolute insignificance beside the other question which Miss Layard has raised. As a matter of fact, not only by Darwin, but by many others among the first authorities, is the word used in this sense, as a consultation of the pages of "Nature" will show at once. Still it is an undoubted fact, that this use is not in accordance with the derivation of the word, nor its general use.

Miss Layard has, however, from the first, associated with this a question of vastly more importance than

66

re

the possible misuse of a word could be, inasmuch as it affects the whole conception of organic evolution. This is whether one or more of man's organs may or may not be said to be in a lower state of development than any corresponding ones throughout organic nature. At the base of Miss Layard's argument on this subject, there appears to me to lie a fundamental misconception of the nature of organic evolution, and it is connected with the use of such words as "typical standard," "progression," trogression," etc. For while Miss Layard says in her last notes on the subject that "it does not necessarily follow" from "the unmistakable family likeness running throughout creation" "that we are justified in making invidious comparisons between organs specially adapted to differing purposes," she herself makes these "individious comparisons" in her first article by saying: "Allowing, as we must, man's to be the ideal form, might it not be more correct to speak of the lower forms which preceded it as made up of excrescences and deficiencies?" And again: "The tail should... be regarded as an excrescence, the ape being the rough sketch of the ideal form, before the artist had pared off the superfluous clay. To a casual observer, the huge shoulder bones, and the formidable jaw and teeth of the ape, might argue a superiority over the same organs in man.... but when we consider the deficient brain of the anthropoid ape, and his small skull, we see at once that to keep the balance true, excrescences in one organ were bound to make up for deficiencies in another."

66

It is precisely this arbitrary setting up of a "typical standard," or an "ideal form," for the whole organism, rather than judging organisms by their relation to environment, which Mr. Fenn wrote to combat in the November SCIENCE-Gossip, and which Miss Layard herself now deprecates. The only justifiable use of such a phrase is when it is applied to the most highly-developed known form of an organ or set of organs. Thus Sachs, in his 'Physiology of Plants" (p. 6), says: "I name organic forms which present the essential peculiarities in great perfection, and from which, therefore, a clear scientific consideration best proceeds, typical forms." In this sense the tail of the lower animals must be regarded as the typical form, not as an "excrescence," while our os coccyx is, on the other hand, not a 66 'more perfect shortened formation," but in a lower state of development and therefore "rudimentary," or, if Miss Layard will, "reduced." This then is the only sense in which I used the word, and it is difficult to see in what other sense it could be used by any one accepting the theory of organic evolution as generally understood. For the setting up of an arbitrary standard of perfection; would imply the operation of an intelligent agency, and would be entirely inconsistent with the operation of a factor like natural selection, or the inheritance of

functionally-produced modifications, which, of course, ultimately consist in the action of certain purely mechanical environing agencies on the organism. And it must be remembered that this conception of organic evolution is not the idea of any school of ultra-Darwinians, but the opinion of nearly all the prominent men of science of the day. I allude to men like Professor Huxley, Mr. Herbert Spencer, and Dr. Romanes. Every organism then being what it is in virtue of its varied and changing environment, it would be manifestly absurd to set up an arbitrary standard of 'perfection. Yet this is what Miss Layard did in her earlier articles. "That standard," she said, in effect, "is man."

Thus it will be seen that while Miss Layard attributes to me the use of the phrase "typical standard," etc., in a sense that requires an assumption which, as I have endeavoured to show, an evolutionist (in the usually understood sense) could not have made, she herself makes this very assumption in her earlier articles.

Again, in Miss Layard's most recent contribution, she makes some assumptions for which I can find no warrant in the correspondence on the subject. For instance, she says: "An evolution of retrogression is cheerfully accepted as the gradual means by which man has arrived at his present physical condition, and on this poor. . . instrument, his brain, which apparently alone has progressed, is to act, with this astonishing result, that he is the most perfect animal known.'" Now, who ever asserted or implied that "the brain alone has progressed"? Again, I fail to see "the inconsistency of a brain that has progressed being prepared to work an organism that has retrograded," taking retrogression, as I imagine all evolutionists must, to mean that certain altered conditions have necessitated a corresponding modification of function, and this again has reacted on the body, and produced certain modifica. tions of structure, the process being in some cases combined with the action of natural selection.

Again, the analogy with "Mozart attempting to play on a worn-out lodging-house piano," appears to me to be singularly unhappy; and for this reason— a mechanical instrument which the contrivers know can perform certain things, and must absolutely be worn out sooner or later, cannot possibly be compared with an organism, which has infinite powers of adapting itself to changed conditions.

Further, with regard to the quotation from Dr. Foster, which is summed up in the italicised words: “Its (the will's) operations are limited by the machinery at its command." Nobody asserted that the machinery at the command of the will was not adequate to perform the things man does perform. All that any of your correspondents contend, is that certain parts of this machinery are in a lower state of development than the corresponding parts of some of the lower animals.

Lastly, with regard to the two striking instances which I mentioned in SCIENCE-GOSSIP for June in support of this fact, I would point out that while I spoke of the muscles themselves of an ordinary civilised human being of the present day, Mr. Darwin speaks of the "correlated action of the muscles of the hand, arm, and shoulder" of a Fuegian, which is a somewhat different thing. My other instance Miss Layard has not attempted to

answer.

In conclusion, I would repeat that organs, per se, can only be considered more or less perfect in proportion as they are more or less able to perform the functions for which they were developed; and that, therefore, no organism can be said to be "ideal" unless every one of its organs performs its functions more completely than any corresponding ones throughout organic nature. As no organism, from the changing nature of the environing conditions can possibly conform to this standard, to call man or any other organism "the ideal form," is entirely inconsistent with the fundamental principles of organic evolution. A. G. TANSLEY.

LATHYRUS TUBEROSUS IN SUSSEX.

A

MOST interesting floral "find" in Sussex during the present summer has been that of the pease earth-nut (Lathyrus tuberosus), by R. D. Postans, Esq., who observed it on the shingle beach at Eastbourne in full bloom in the first week in August. He then sent me a specimen with its lovely crimson flowers, but with only a portion of its creeping rootstock. Afterwards, however, using a trowel, the rootlets, with its remarkable tubers, were also found. These were forwarded on the 16th, and are here represented of the natural size; one of them weighed a quarter of an ounce. As this curious species, so far as I know, has only occurred previously at Fyfield, near Chipping Ongar, in Essex, Gibson's account of it may be quoted "This beautiful plant was first noticed here by Octavius Corder in 1859, and distinguished in the following year. It grows about Fyfield, extending over a district three miles in extent. A plant so conspicuous might naturally be supposed to be a recent introduction, but a resident farmer has noticed it growing abundantly in the same fields for the last sixty years." He also observes: "The Rev. W. W. Newbould finds specimens of L. tuberosus in the British Museum, in the collections of Buddle and Petiver, Buddle stating: 'I had it from the Rev. Mr. John Sedgwick, who gathered it not far from Lincoln in the north field of Blankney, near the road to Lincoln.'" The locality in which the Sussex plant occurs, i.e. the shingle beach at Eastbourne, differs greatly from that mentioned by Gibson, viz.

as an esculent. We have now records of its occurrence in Essex and Sussex, but how it got to either of these localities, so far distant from each other, has not as yet been accounted for.

F. H. ARNOLD.

A WINTER IN MASSAUA.

URING last winter the steamer I commanded

DU

was taken up by the Italian Government for condensing purposes, and in spare time I amused myself by making a few notes on the Natural History of the place I was sent to, Massaua, and its immediate neighbourhood, the results of which notes I here generalise, hoping they may prove of some interest. Many men situated as I am visit places from whence no notes or collections have ever been made, and it is the hope that something may be done in that way, that encourages me to place these few lines before you; and I shall arrange them under different heads.

1. General Description.-Massaua is situated on a small island on the western side of the Red Sea, and has a population of about 8000 inhabitants, comprising a most heterogeneous collection of Abyssinians, Gallas, Somalis, Arabs, Egyptians, Soudanese and Hindoos. There are a few good houses, built of coral rock, with thick walls, and, as is customary in Eastern places, flat roofs, very effectual in keeping out the heat; but the majority of natives live in ramshackle huts made of a few poles and rough mats, which, during the heavy winter rains afford little protection against the elements. There is very little sickness; rheumatic fever however amongst the natives is the most prevalent ailment, and from it the Italian troops suffered a good deal. There is far less sickness during the hot dry summer than in the winter. At Massaua is established a French Catholic Mission and at Makullo (a village about 3 miles W.N.W. of Massaua) a Swedish Protestant Mission, both doing good work. At the latter I met with great hospitality and kindness, and was able to get a good deal of information. There are no wells in Massaua, all the water is brought by pipes from Makullo, at which place there is a good and constant supply, though the water is slightly brackish.

With Suakim (which is situated 242 miles to the N.W. by N.) it has always formed one of the best harbours on this coast, and through it all the outside trade of Abyssinia has been conducted. Although practically not forming a part of the Abyssinian dominions, it has generally been looked upon as the port of that country, not only by the outer world but more especially by, the, Abyssinians themselves. Since 1557 it has been nominally under Turkish and Egyptian rule, but in 1884, under a treaty between King John (the Negus of Abyssinia), the English

and Egyptians, the Italians obtained a footing and have recently declared their intention of holding the place altogether. From Massaua to Saati (a place 25 miles inland to W.S.W.) the Italians have laid down a substantial railway well guarded by forts. Owing to recent hostilities, the port has been closed to commerce from the interior, and it will take some time to restore the native confidence and trade.

2. Physical Geography.-Massaua is situated in latitude 15° 37' 2 N., longitude 39° 27′ E., on a small island in a creek formed by Jerrar and Massaua bays on the N. and W.N.W., and Harkiko Bay on the S., which bays have good channels into them of five or six fathoms depth, forming good though not extensive anchorages. The island is connected by a long causeway to the mainland which here-as nearly all down the west coast of the Red Sea-stretches away as a flat plain to the foot of the low range of hills about three miles distant. This plain is formed of alluvium spread over the substratum of coral formations in many places (under the alluvium) in a very perfect state of preservation, while here and there the coral crops up above the soil in jagged rain-worn rocks. So unlike real coral are these rocks that it is only by a close examination that its real character can be determined. The hills are volcanic and are those known as the Aden volcanic series (Blandford). Beyond these hills stretches inland an almost uninterrupted succes-sion of hills and valleys forming in some places a most rugged country, and gradually rising in altitude from 500 or 600 feet at the first hills to the grand mountain ranges 10,000 feet high in Abyssinia. The hills near Massaua show no signs of recent volcanic activity, though a little farther inland, near Dogali, there are well-defined lava beds. From the valleysseveral wide and shallow river beds can be seen, one very well defined, passing by Makullo and debouching into Jerrar Bay, though I could hear of no water ever having flowed in it, on the surface. But at almost. any time of the year, water can be obtained by digging into the bed, in fact while I was there it could easily be got in a few minutes by scooping out. the soil with the hands to the depth of a foot. there have been many rushes of water down this bed. is proved by the fact, (1) that the plain is thickly covered in places (particularly N. of Otumlo Bay) with fragments of rocks such as obsidian, mica-schists, quartzite, porphyrite, and rhyolite, which could only have been brought down from the interior by rushes of water; and (2) the plain is formed by alluvial soil from the interior. The overspreading of the fringing coral reefs is particularly to be noticed, as by this means the Red Sea is slowly but surely being filled. up. In "Nature," of April 26th last, I particularly allude to the coral formations here, and also to the gradual upheaval of the coral, so that we have the two forces of upheaval and deposition working together. I consider there to have been upheaval

That

chiefly from the following fact. Many of the coral masses on the plain are very much undermined by the action of water, which action can be seen still at work round the harbour. From high-water mark seaward the water deepens gradually to about three or four feet just inside the edge of the reef, then shallows slightly immediately over the edge, then drops suddenly to four or five fathoms deep. The part between the edge of the reef and the high-water mark is slowly filling up with disintegrated coral débris and sand drift, and is also being raised by upheaval, which latter action seems to be intermittent rather than continuous. It would be extremely interesting if continuous observations on the growth, etc., of the coral were made at some such place as this. Everything is favourable for such observations to be taken, either in this port

or at Suakim. Most curious is it to note how in some places the edge of the coral reef may be quite close to the high-water mark, while in other places, at some distance off. Possibly this may be owing to the way in which the tide currents strike the reef, in some places continually bringing in fresh supplies of food, in others reaching the reef after being exhausted of food supply. On the seaward side of the coast there is a long line of coral islands, with a deep water channel inside, and I cannot help thinking that by the same process these too will be gradually joined to the mainland, not so rapidly, unless there is more rapid upheaval, for the alluvium will have farther to travel. Earthquakes are by no means rare phenomena here, and signs can be seen in Massaua, as cracked buildings, etc., which testify to the severity of the shocks.

3. Vegetation.-On my arrival towards the end of November there was very little vegetation on the plain, but it very soon began to sprout up in the most marvellous way, and, at the beginning of February, not only the plain but also the hills looked quite green and nice. Scattered about the plain were clumps of large cacti up which climbed several kinds of creepers, and then there was a large fleshyleaved shrub with a handsome yellow flower, said to be poisonous. There are dozens of pretty little flowering plants which seem to spring up as if by magic, out of what appears the most barren soil, though undoubtedly it does look so barren, yet it is very rich and with irrigation would grow almost anything. There are only a very few trees, and these have been planted and have to be well cared, or else the summer heat would soon shrivel them up. Although summer and winter are at the same time here as in England, yet their effect upon vegetable and animal life is practically reversed: plants flower, and animals breed in the winter, in summer all is quiet, no vegetation, few animals and no insects, all is at rest, owing to the intense heat.

4. Zoology. It is chiefly owing to the lack of