likely to be correct, the majority of them probably immigrated westwards of the commencement of the pleistocene periods, for they must be of great antiquity; moreover it is unreasonable to suppose that many of the species could have existed also in the south of Europe, even at the climax of the glacial period. According to the same authority only 8 species have been derived from Africa, and 39 from Asia south of Siberia. These must have immigrated into the south European province of the palearctic region after the termination of the glacial period as they belong to genera and types of tropical distribution. At the present day they occur in those countries bordering on the Mediterranean Sea.

The glacial species of butterflies--that is the most ancient forms, designated by Weismann "the original stirps "-are in many cases distinguished by their melanic and melanochroic tendencies. We thus find the forms inhabiting the more northern localities and the higher elevations on the mountains often of a darker hue, while their representatives in more southern latitudes and less elevated altitudes exhibit a brighter coloration.

North American Aphelininæ.-As the first of a technical series of bulletins to be issued by the Division of Entomology of the U. S. Department of Agriculture, Mr. L. O. Howard publishes a Revision of the Aphelinine of North America. Regarding the biology of the group Mr. Howard writes: The insects of this subfamily are all, so far as we know, parasitic either upon the Coccidæ, Aleyrodidæ, or Aphididæ. They are evidently many brooded, and issue from their hosts indifferently throughout the warmer months of the year, and through the winter on the insectary. With the Aleyrodidæ, Aphididæ, and the Diaspinæ among the Coccidæ, but one specimen apparently issues from a single host. Sufficient observations have not been made upon the early stages of the Aphelininæ. Their larvæ feed both upon the body of the scale insect and upon the eggs. They attack both sexes of the host, issuing when full-grown through circular holes, cut through the body walls, and, in the case of the Diaspinæ through the scale. With the scale insects of the genus Pulvinaria, the aphelinine larvæ live within the body of the female and not in the waxy egg mass which she secretes.

News. A List of Night-flying Moths from Kentucky, is published by Prof. H. Garman in the 7th Report of the Experiment Station of that State.

An extended account of the life-history of Phryganidia californica Packard is published by Messrs. V. L. Kellogg and T. J. Jack in the Proceedings California Academy of Sciences (Ser. 2, V, 562–570.)

Prof. J. B. Smith issues as Bulletin 111 of the New Jersey Experiment Station an account of experiments with "Raupenlime" and "Dendrolene," substances useful for applying to tree trunks to keep out borers.

PSYCHOLOGY.'

American Psychological Association.-The American Psychological Association held its annual meeting this year at the University of Pennsylvania, in connection with the meetings of the scientific societies affiliated with the American Society of Naturalists. Hitherto the Psychological Association has met independently, but the feeling has been growing that the close relation between the more recent forms of psychology and the biological sciences made it eminently suitable and desirable that their representatives should be brought together. The success which has attended this first step makes it probable that the policy will be continued in future.

No official outline of the proceedings of the Psychological Associaciation is at hand, and any account written from memory will be more or less defective. Consequently the present writer must beg indulgence from those whose words he endeavors to report if he has, in any case, misrepresented them. On the whole, however, he believes he is giving a fair outline of the more important points.

At the first session, on Friday, Dec. 27th, the opening paper, on "Physiology and Psychology," was read by Prof. George S. Fullerton of the University of Pennsylvania. Two years ago, at the New York meeting of the Association, Prof. Fullerton outlined the relation in which psychology as a natural science stands to metaphysic, and concluded that psychology should adopt, as far as possible, the methods and assumptions of the other natural sciences, and should relegate the task of criticising those assumptions to a distiuct science-that of metaphysic. The paper read this year was a continuation of the same general line of thought in the investigation of the relations of psychology and physiology. Taking Foster's "Physiology" as a standard, we find, said Prof. Fullerton, that the author is absolutely unable to give any

1 This department is edited by Dr. Wm. Romaine Newbold, University of Pennsylvania.

account of the functioning of the higher nervous centres without having recourse to sensations, ideas, volitions-in a word, without entering the field that properly belongs to psychology. While it may be not only right, but also necessary, for the physiologist to do this, we must not close our eyes to the fact that the mere fact of its necessity proves the imperfect condition of physiology, and tends to obscure the line dividing physiology from psychology. Prof. Fullerton claimed that the methods employed by the two sciences are distinct, and that it is important to the advancement of knowledge to recognize this distinction.

Dr. Livingston Farrand, of Columbia, submitted a scheme of physical and mental tests which will be used with the students of Columbia to determine, as far as can be done by direct experiment, their capacities in both respects at various stages of their college life. After some discussion, a motion was passed that the President be requested to appoint a committee of five to report upon the advisability of the universities represented taking concerted action in the adoption of some similar scheme.

Dr. Arthur MacDonald, of Washington, D. C., read a paper on "Some Psycho-Neural Data." He reported experiments somewhat similar to those of Dr. Farrand, made upon certain groups in the community, and apparently showing that between definite classes definite physical and mental differences are experimentally discoverable.

Prof. Lightner Witmer, of the University of Pennsylvania, introduced one of his graduate students, Mr. Oliver Cornman, who reported the results of "An Experimental Investigations of the Processes of Ideation." Mr. Cornman's method was that of giving a large number of individuals, usually children, a definite suggestion and requiring them to write for a definite period of time-usually 15 minutes-all the thoughts directly or indirectly suggested by it; he had found that in most of his subjects the idea trains were, for a short time, largely controlled by the concomitant suggestions of the time and place, and consequently the earlier terms of each series showed a marked similarity. This soon disappeared, and the further development of the idea trains seemed dependent upon the character and previous experience of the individual. We have, therefore, in this, a convenient method of " tapping," as it were, the ideational content of the individual. Mr. Cornman pointed out further, that, to get results at all comparable with one another in the case of different bodies of subjects, the original suggestions must be given in identically the same words without explanations or further suggestions on the part of the experimenter, and, to secure this end, should always be written.

At the afternoon session on Friday, Prof. J. McK. Cattell, of Columbia, read his President's Address. It was, on the whole, a defense of that experimental method of which he is the leading representative in this country, and was, therefore, in a way, a reply to the rather unfavorable estimate of the method and its results which had been expressed by Prof. James of Harvard in his President's Address of the preceding year. The burden of Prof. Cattell's argument was found in the statement, that every science is either genetic or quantitative in its method; that those sciences which have been predominently quantitative will undoubtedly, in time, be formulated in genetic terms, that, conversely, into the genetic sciences also, such as biology and psychology, the quantitative method will ultimately be introduced. This is the aim of experimental psychology in the narrower sense. While expressing the strongest conviction of the importance of this experimental method to the science of psychology, Prof. Cattell displayed such moderation in his estimate of the results thus far achieved by it, and such sympathetic insight into the aims and relative values of other methods, that his address was received with the warmest applause by all, and no one could be found to pass a criticism upon it.

Prof. Chas. A. Strong, of the University of Chicago, read a paper on "Consciousness and Time," of which, on account of its exceedingly abstract character, I could not venture to give an analysis from memory.

The morning of Saturday, December 28th, was occupied by a discussion on "Consciousness and Evolution."

Prof. William James, of Harvard, opened the discussion by outlining the general features of the problem at issue: First, whether consciousness is coextensive with the universe or originated in time; second, whether consciousness is an active force capable of controlling brain. movement, or whether it is a mere epiphenomenon, produced by the brain but not capable of affecting the brain; third, whether consciousness has been a factor in the production of adaptation.

Prof. Cope, of the University of Pennsylvania, who had been especially requested to take the leading part in the discussion, attacked the question from the point of view of the paleontologist. He held that natural selection is not sufficient to account for adaptation, that the adaptation of the individual organ is the result of use, and that the effects of use can be inherited. In supporting this position he gave many illustrations, based upon his personal observation. He held further that organic evolution involved combinations and recombinations of matter which not only never could have been produced by the opera

tion of known physical and chemical forces, but were of a character precisely the opposite of their known effects. To account for this, he thought we must assume in organic matter the existence of an activity distinct from all the other activities of nature. Progressive evolution is the chief outcome of this activity, and therefore he had proposed to term it an anagenetic, or upbuilding activity, as opposed to the katagenetic or destructive activities of physics and chemistry. This anagenetic activity Prof. Cope was inclined to believe due to the presence of sensation, and therefore maintained that consciousness is an active factor in the individual and in evolution.

Prof. Cope was followed by Prof. J. Mark Baldwin, of Princeton, who commented upon several points of Prof. Cope's argument, drawing special attention to the fact that recent investigation into the effect on young children of their surroundings makes it more easy to account for adaptation without reference to inheritance of acquired aptitudes. He also deplored the sharp antithesis between the doctrine of consciousness as a cause and as a epiphenomenon, holding that both views found their reconciliation in monism.

Prof. C. Sedgwick Minot, of Harvard, attacked the neo-Lamarckian doctrine from the neo-Darwinian point of view, supporting his position by evidence drawn from his own work in embryology. He suggested, as a speculation, that consciousness, although not itself a force, might be conceived to possess the property of selecting out of the brain forces that one which it is control conduct.

Prof. G. S. Ladd, of Yale, welcomed Prof. Cope's address as an important contribution from the purely scientific point of view to the support of doctrines held by himself in common with many other metaphysicians, and made a plea for the recognition of the metaphysician on the part of scientists as a coworker in the field of knowledge.

Prof. Fullerton, of the University, called attention to our actual ignorance on all these points, and expressed the opinion that fundamental differences exist which cannot be glossed over by such vague doctrines as that of monism.

Other speakers were: Prof. J. H. Hyslop, of Columbia; Dr. D. S. Miller, of Bryn Mawr, and Dr. Wesley Mills, of McGill University, Montreal.

Prof. Cope then concluded the discussion by adducing a series of arguments in favor of the inheritance of acquired attributes, any one of which, he held, would be sufficient to set the matter at rest.

At the afternoon session, Prof. G. T. W. Patrick, of the University of Iowa, reported an experiment on the effects of loss of sleep. A patient