New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1847-11-09

The Ariculasd Animals General Division into Worms,
Insects and CTussacee Errors 10 the Classification Of
Animals. Results Of Recent Inyestis .MlstAkes
should be Corrected Curious Facts about the Barna-
eies General Structure Of the Artieulsta Peculiar
chaid Worms. Great Variety Of Form and struc-
turs. The Helrnthes or Intestinal Worms How do
they to Exist IN other Animals History Of the
Formation Of Intestinal Worms Curious Discoveries
The Theory Of Spontaneous Generation Exploded.
LADIES' AND GENTLEMEN The subject Of the
Lecture this evening will be the structure Of the
articulsted animals in general and Of the worms In
particular.
The general structure Of this order Of animals is
well known. The bodies OF these animals are per
fecty symmetrical The two sides are equal
We have no longer here any such differences be.
tween the right and left hand sides as We have
among the molusca, or anything similar to the "a.
dated structure Of the lowest type Of the animal
kingdom. The crustacea only show in their limbs
in their claws-such a difference. In them we see
frequently one Of the claws much longer than the
other
But it is well known TO what circumstances
this difference is owing. The crustacea frequently
lose the claws and these limbs are reproduced but
usually OF diminished size. When the animal does
not meet with such an accident the claws continue
!
still farther illustrated by the fact that sometimes it
is the left and sometimes the right claw which is
smaller than the other This shows that the differ
ence in size is not a Characteristic Of the type
propose 10 divide the articulated animals into
only three classes-the Worms, tue Insects, and the
Crusf0ccd.
Thistype has always heretofore been divided into
a great number of classes and even some classes
have been left out Of the articulata, which think
really belong to that division, and here, in this
nection design 10 make a few critical remarks
on the general classification of animals as we find
them in the most recent works on Natural History.
This classification has not kept pace with the pro
gress Of our knowledge. Our textbooks do not
give the results OF recent investigation and discOv-
cry ] would refer TO the best Of the classified.
tons, not perhaps the most recent, but the most
extensive-that contained in the great work
of Cuvier on the Animal Kingdom. That
is the greatest work on Natural History not
very volunnOus, In five octave volumes, IN which
the celebrated author has given the general char
acterstics of all the principal types of the Animal
Kingdom, and for the first time classified them &C
cOrdiDg to their organization. IL was Culver who
for the FIRST time divided the Animal Kingdom into
four types-who recognized four different modes
of arrangement in the structure of animals, and
that there was not simple graduation from the low
or 10 the highest animals. When he divided the
Animal Kingdom into those four groups he desig-
mated those groups by a very happy name Tor
T.
plicit. He called these divisions entertainments.
BY this he conveyed the idea in telictous man
ner that the groups OF the Animal Kingdom did
neither form single series nor parallel lines, bat
complicated grouping OF individuals connected TO
gether by affuies Ia similar way as the branches
of tree, forming groups with very natural proper
tons though not Invisible into families OF equal
value The groups we may call types-great di-
visions of the A Animal Kingdom. For want OF a bet
ter name, some have proposed the term depart
ments" Thus, you see, II / am correct, that we
have not in the English language any term which
conveys the idea so happily as that employed by
Cuver
When Cuvier divided the Animal Kingdom into
these four groups some Of the groups had not yet
been studied anatomically as fully as they since
have been studied, and therefore IL 10 not ~ be
wondered at that that lustrious naturalist intro
duced iutO several Of these groups animals which
did not properly belong to them-that have only an
external likeness-wbich are analogous 10 them,
but not really identical in their structure. For III
stance, in the group OF radiata to which refer
only three casses-the polyps, the acephaa, and
the echnodermata-Cuvierh had five classes, one
of them being the class of intestinal worms-the
Helmiaihes and besides the IntHs0rid,-a class
which ! think, must be entirely broken up and
does not form a natural group, but contains AMI
mails of very different structure, and which have
been combined together as class only IN conse-
guence of their minute size. That 10 the only
Characteristic which they have In common but
their structure is not such 10 justify this union IN
one class nor to justify their admission as natural
group among the radiata
Culver Lamarc and other eminent naturalists
were induced to maintain the class oil iniusorla, IN
consequence of the general arrangement OF vibra.
tory ella around the mouth, presenting the form oil
a circular disc vibrating round the mouth and CIV
ing these animals an appearance OF radiated struc-
ture like some of the polypi. But on examining
the bodies OF these animals IT has been found that
there are transverse divisions in these animals
Some OF the iniusoria have been found to agree so
fully with articuated animals that nobody now
doubts the proprety of combining at least the so
called ROtifera with the crustaceous animals 9th
ers are worm like, and belong more properly TO the
vermes than any other group, and we kno" that
many of the so called iniusOria are merely germs oil
plants which have been mistaken for animals and
germs Of different other animals which have been
mistaken for full-grown animals. Thus II has been
discovered recently that organizations which have
been regarded as indie pendent animals and as such
have been placed among the iniusorla, are really
the Young OF certain mollusca-certain gasteropo
dous mollusca.
Now such mistakes should be corrected When
they were made, the facts by which we are enabled
TO correct them were not known. The works Ia
which the mistakes occur are and must long con
tinue to be the great fundamental books OF natural
history and hence the greater necessity for recty
ing these errors.
The class of intestinal worms, heretofore ranked
with the radiata, belongs TO the articulaia. All
these worms are articulsted transversely. These
articulations are very numerous. But they have
a circle of radiated folds around the mouth. Hence
the mistake to which have alluded in classifying
them with the radiata. The existence OF nervous
system with ganglia was then unknown-so that
the mistake OF Cuvier cannot appear strange, par
ticuarly when we reflect on the extreme difficulty
of observing the structure OF many Of the intestinal
worms.
have said that divided the articulata into on
ly three classes, though admit all the intestinal
worms and the greater number OF the iniusorla
Cuvier admitted more classes than | think proper
TO admit The spiders were considered by him
ms a class distinct from the common insect. be-
cause they have no wings and because their resPir
atory organs are somewhat different from those OF
common insects But many true insects have no
wings aud when tracing all the notifications oil
certain insects we find the transitions so gradual as
not 10 allow the differences between them 10 be Of
the value which was formerly placed upon them
and 80 the class of spiders is now merged IN the
general group of insects. Beside we have now
ascertained that the metamorphoses OF insects are
not so peculiarly trait OF that class as was ior
merly supposed, and therefore IN the absence Of
that characteristic in the spider We DO not see the
same ground OF making prominent distinction be
81. ~