behind the liver. Rathke states that the sexual apertures are not visible until the young crayfish has attained the length of an inch; and that the first pair of abdominal appendages of the male appear still later in the form of two papillæ, which gradually elongate and take on their characteristic forms. CHAPTER V. THE COMPARATIVE MORPHOLOGY OF THE CRAYFISH.- -THE STRUCTURE AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE CRAY FISH COMPARED WITH THOSE OF OTHER LIVING Up to this point, our attention has been directed almost exclusively to the common English crayfish. Except in so far as the crayfish is dependent for its maintenance upon other animals, or upon plants, we might have ignored the existence of all living things except crayfishes. But, it is hardly necessary to observe, that innumerable hosts of other forms of life not only tenant the waters and the dry land, but throng the air; and that all the crayfishes in the world constitute a hardly appreciable fraction of its total living population. Common observation leads us to see that these multitudinous living beings differ from not-living things in many ways; and when the analysis of these differences is pushed as far as we are at present able to carry it, it shews us that all living beings agree with the crayfish and differ from not-living things in the same particulars. Like the crayfish, they are constantly wasting away by oxidation, and repairing themselves by taking into their substance the matters which serve them for food; like the crayfish, they shape themselves according to a definite pattern of external form and internal structure; like the crayfish, they give off germs which grow and develope into the shapes characteristic of the adult. No mineral matter is maintained in this fashion; nor grows in the same way; nor undergoes this kind of development; nor multiplies its kind by any such process of reproduction. Again, common observation early leads to the discrimination of living things into two great divisions. Nobody confounds ordinary animals with ordinary plants, nor doubts that the crayfish belongs to the former category and the waterweed to the latter. If a living thing moves and possesses a digestive receptacle, it is held to be an animal; if it is motionless and draws its nourishment directly from the substances which are in contact with its outer surface, it is held to be a plant. We need not inquire, at present, how far this rough definition of the differences which separate animals from plants holds good. Accepting it for the moment, it is obvious that the crayfish is unquestionably an animal,-as much an animal as the vole, the perch, and the pond-snail, which inhabit the same waters. Moreover, the crayfish has, in common with these animals, not merely the motor and digestive powers characteristic of animality, but they all, like it, possess a complete alimentary canal; special appa ratus for the circulation and the aëration of the blood; a nervous system with sense-organs; muscles and motor mechanisms; reproductive organs. Regarded as pieces of physiological apparatus, there is a striking similarity between all three. But, as has already been hinted in the preceding chapter, if we look at them from a purely morphological point of view, the differences between the crayfish, the perch, and the pond-snail, appear at first sight so great, that it may be difficult to imagine that the plan of structure of the first can have any relation to that of either of the last two. On the other hand, if the crayfish is compared with the water-beetle, notwithstanding wide differences, many points of similarity between the two will manifest themselves; while, if a small lobster is set side by side with a crayfish, an unpractised observer, though he will readily see that the two animals are somewhat different, may be a long time in making out the exact nature of the differences. Thus there are degrees of likeness and unlikeness among animals, in respect of their outward form and internal structure, or, in other words, in their morphology. The lobster is very like a crayfish, the beetle is remotely like one; the pond-snail and the perch are extremely unlike crayfishes. Facts of this kind are commonly expressed in the language of zoologists, by saying that the lobster and the crayfish are closely allied forms; that the beetle and the crayfish present a remote affinity; and that there is no affinity between the crayfish and the pond-snail, or the crayfish and the perch. The exact determination of the resemblances and differences of animal forms by the comparison of the structure and the development of one with those of another, is the business of comparative morphology. Morphological comparison, fully and thoroughly worked out, furnishes us with the means of estimating the position of any one animal in relation to all the rest; while it shews us with what forms that animal is nearly, and with what it is remotely, allied: applied to all animals, it furnishes us with a kind of map, upon which animals are arranged in the order of their respective affinities; or a classification, in which they are grouped in that order. For the purpose of developing the results of comparative morphology in the case of the crayfish, it will be convenient to bring toge ther, in a summary form, those points of form and structure, many of which have already been referred to and which characterise it as a separate kind of animal. Full-grown English crayfishes usually measure about three inches and a half from the extremity of the rostrum in front to that of the telson behind. The largest specimen I have met with measured four inches.* The *The dimensions of crayfishes at successive ages given at p. 31, beginning at the words "By the end of the year," refer to the "écrevisse à pieds rouges" of France; not to the English crayfish, which is |