LEWES'S SEA-SIDE STUDIES. * THE fault of this book is owing

to the form of its original publi- cation as a series of articles in Blackwood. The chapters that were each complete in themselves do not when collected together form a united whole ; neither, in spite of revision and addition, do they altogether get rid of a magazine character. It is quite right that we should have a sketch of the jaded feeling and the tempting spring. weather that took the author from Richmond to Ilfracombe early in 1856, to commence a course of " sea-side studies" on the lesser marine animantia ; but the fulness of detail, personal obtrusiveness, and sometimes forced jocularity, that are well enough for a single paper perused in a " light reading" mood of mind, are not so well fitted for a volume. Also it is proper to have sketches of the coast and inland scenery of the four places where Mr. Lewes carried on his studies, Ilfracombe, Tenby, the Scilly Isles, and Jersey ; as well as of the loungers at the watering- places, and above all, of the adventures in collecting specimens. These things, however, may be overdone ; and they should harmon- ize with the nature of the scientific pursuits. They associate well with the appearance and habits of the animantia, either in their native haunts or extemporized aquariums; they are not so well fitted for juxtaposition with speculations on life, experiments on reproduction, and discussions on questions mooted by other na- turalists or advanced by Mr. Lewes himself. In this point of view, the studies may have suffered from revision. Writing ori- ginally at the sea-side, without that access to books obtainable in. London, the author Could not enter so fully into many topics as after his return and the extension of experiment and reflection.

• Sea-aide Studies at Ilfracombe, Tenby, the Scilly Isles, and Jersey. By George Henry Lewes, Author of " Biographical History of Philosophy," the " Life of Goethe," &c. With Illustrations. Pnblished by Blackwood and Sons. Hence, probably, some of the incongruity. Originally it was a series of popular articles by a popular writer, pursuing actual sea- side experiments for the first time, and, as he avowedly intimates, teaching in order to learn : revision, without getting rid of the more popular character, has introduced discussions on minute sub- jects of zoophyte anatomy, and questions connected with the re- production of animal life.

There is no doubt that in a scientific point of view these disquisitions will be found most useful, and we may say rich and rare. Whatever may be thought of some of the author's views, his visit to the sea-side has brought a different kind of mind into the consideration of the life and habits of the lesser marine animals. A logician is among them; not a mere for- mal reasoner from the "manual," but one who has enriched his logic from the stores of metaphysics and ontology, and more than that has subjected logic itself to the scrutiny of his own mind. Then, Mr. Lewes takes nothing upon trust if he can bring it to the test of experiment. It is not because somebody has affirmed a strange fact, and many other somebodies have re- peated the affirmation, that it is admitted by our author. Give him but the chance, he will repeat the original experiment, sometimes to the modification or contradiction of the received wonder. Properly, too, he draws a distinction between observa- tions, which widely, owing to the character of the observer and the circumstances under which he observes, and experiments, which, if owing to human imperfectness they do not always exactly agree, ought to point to something like the same conclu- sion. It is these peculiarities, as much as anything actually done, that impart a distinctive value to these researches. Mr. Lewes has given the zoological mind a shake, and perhaps not before it wanted it. Illustrations drawn from any particular subject might not be so well understood without some previous know- ledge, as these remarks on human terms and abstract classifica- tions in the presence of Nature.

"No one has yet been able to distinguish, in the face of severe critical

precision, between the animal and plant organization, so as to be able au- thoritatively to say, This is exclusively animal.' To distinguish a cow from a cucumber, requires, indeed, no profound inauguration into biological mysteries;. • we can 'venture fearlessly to assert' (with that utterly un- called-for temerity exhibited by bad writers in cases when no peril what- ever is hanging over the assertion) that the cow and cucumber are not allied—no common parentage links them together, even through remote relationship : but to say what is an animal, presupposes a knowledge of what is essentially and exclusively animal; and this knowledge, unhappily, has never yet been reached. Much hot and not wise discussion has occu- pied the hours of philosophers in trying to map out the distinct confines of the animal and vegetable kingdoms, when all the while Nature knows of no such demarcating lines. The animal does not exist, nor does the vegetable ; both are abstractions, general terms, such as Virtue, Goodness, Colour, used

rt

to designate certain groups of particulars, but having only a mental exist- ence. Who has been fortunate enough to see the animal ; We have seen cows, cats, jackasses, and cameleopards ; but the 'rare monster' animal is visible in no menagerie. If you are tempted to call this metaphysical trifling, I beg you to read the discussions published on the vegetable or animal nature of diatomacea volvocinx, &c., or to attend to what is said in any text-book on the distinctions between animals and vegetables, and you will then BCC there is something more than metaphysics in the paradox. In the simpler

i organisms there is no mark which can absolutely distinguish the animal' from the vegetable ; and if in the higher organisms a greater amount of characteristic differences may be traced, so that we may, for purposes of convenience, consider a certain group of indications as entitling the object to be classed eunder the animal division, we must never forget that such classifications are purely arbitrary, and, as the philosophers say, subjective."

It must not be supposed that because of the necessary dryness of some disquisitional or descriptive passages, to those who know no- thing about the subjects and take no interest in them, that the general treatment is dry. Quite the contrary. The same power of reflective perception and of generalization visible in the pre- ceding extract is seen in the following, where a particular case is made to illustrate a general principle. " How, then, does the eolis breathe ? He does not breathe at all. But

lest this paradox should disturb you too much, I will soften the blow by adding, that when we talk of an animal breathing, we mean, or ought to mean, that it employs an organ, or group of organs, for the aeration of its blood ; and when the animal is of so simple an organization that it pos- sesses no such organ, although the aeration takes place quite as well, it does so in a different manner. Respiration as an animal function, and respira- tion as a generaly of tissue, are incessantly confounded in our loose language ; but t e • • ction should always be borne in mind. The ulti- mata fact of respiration is the interchange of gases, and this may be effected in many. ways ; but although the final result is similar, there is a great dif- ference between the property which all living tissues animal and vegetable, have of exchanging carbonic acid for oxygen, and the function of the special apparatus by which the exchange is brought about,just as there is a wide distinction between the general property of assimilation and the special function of digestion. The eolis we are considering must have its blood aerated ; but the means by which it is aerated do not come under the term

breathing.' In many of the lower animals aeration is performed entirely by the surface ; the air or water directly bathing the delicate tissues, and bringing to them the necessary supply of oxygen, without the intervention j of any special apparatus, just as food is brought to their tissues without the preparatory labour of arduous digestion."

The same critical accuracy is observable in matters where, rigid attainment of specific truth being less easy than in scientific experiment, people are prone to say what they think will tell

best. Popular " writers on a pursuit have a tendency to repre- sent it as more readily acquired than it is, and even to intimate that little more than will is wanting to become proficient. Mr. Lewes puts your first difficulties fairly before you.

"The evening of my arrival was spent in reconnoitering the coast and its

promises. What a flutter agitated me as I bent over the many rock-pools, clear as crystal, and sometimes enclosing perfect landscapes in miniature. It seemed as if I should have nothing to do but stoop and fill myjars with treasures ; for I had read in numerous books descriptions from which the inference was that nothing could be easier than collecting marine store.' You stroll along the beach and pick up so-and-so ' is the pleasant phrase of these writers, wishing, we must suppose, to make science appear easy. Now the truth should be told. It was quickly forced on my conviction, that although after a gale you may go down to the shore and find many things, mostly dead, which you will carry home with interest—for "tis an ill wind that blows nobody molluscs'—yet hunting among the rocks is not easy, nor always safe, nor certain to be successful. You must make up your mind to lacerated hands, even if you escape bruises, to utter soakings, to unusual gymnastics in wriggling yourself into impossible places. You can only do this at certain tides. And, after all, you may return empty - handed, unless you are very modest in your desires."

The sea-side, moreover, is not merely the sea-shore. The zea- lous naturalist, as he advances in science, becomes anxious to sound the shoals if not the depths of ocean, and furnishes another illus- tration of Mr. Craik's pursuit of knowledge under difficulties.

" In the previous chapters I described our hunting on the rocks, and picking up what gales might have thrown upon the shore ; and the amateur generally contents himself with these resources, unless his desires, en- larging with his knowledge, urge him, as they did me, to follow more am- bitious naturalists and try dredging. He knows that in depths never laid bare by retiring tides there are animals of price. He knows that the oyster. beds are hunting-grounds where a single venture will bring him more than a month can properly examine. It is true that he may also know that he will be sick ; but, as Schiller says, " • Es wichst der Mensal mit seinen grassern Zweckrn,'

(Our stature heightens with our heightening aims,)

and the hope of molluscs makes man's stomach equal to the occasion. Our boatmen told us of one well-known anatomist who went out every day during. his stay at Tenby, dredging as if dredging were his daily bread, al- ways sick, no matter how calm the sea ; always suffering, but never daunted by wind or storm. Very amusing it was to notice the puzzlement of these honest boatmen at what they evidently considered a sort of inexplicable eccentricity in our thus throwing away our days, our money—and our breakfasts—in the pursuit of worms, oyster-shells, and weeds. Had we gone fishing, they could have entered into our hopes and enthusiasm; had we sought for pearls in the oyster-shells, their sympathy would have been ready ; but that any sane man should be anxious for the rubbish which they nightly threw away when their nets were hauled in, and this not to eat the worms, not to sell them, but to put them in vases, and finally cut then open, that was inexplicable."