Into the anatomy of the adult Dracunculus I do not enter, but I may remark in passing, that the structure of the worm has been exhaustively treated of by Busk and Bastian. A _résumé_ of their views is given in my introductory treatise. Carter and Leuckart have also added important details. As regards the structure and development of the young worms, I have to observe that the discovery of the viviparous mode of reproduction in Dracunculus is due to Jacobson. Nearly a quarter of a century ago I recognised the fact that the uterine organs of the adult worm almost completely filled up the perivisceral cavity, and that they were crowded with microscopic worms. Referring to this “find,” the late Sir George Ballingall, of Edinburgh, in his well-known work on ‘Military Surgery,’ recorded the circumstance in the following terms:--“The Assistant Conservator of the Anatomical Museum in our University has detected _in the oviduct_ of an adult specimen from my collection myriads of minute and perfectly-developed (embryonic) Dracunculi. They can be very well seen with an half-inch object-glass, but their structure is best exhibited if the magnifying power be increased to two hundred and fifty diameters linear.” As already stated in my introductory treatise, these observations were made during the winter of 1853-54. In July, 1854, M. Robin made a similar statement after examining a fresh _Dracunculus_ which had been extracted from the leg of a man by M. Malgaigne. Robin, not unsuitably, compared the worm to a double tube, one tubular sheath, as it were, enclosing the other. “The second tube,” he distinctly affirms, “_is the oviduct, or, rather, that part which represents the uterus_. The young still remaining in the uterus were nearly all coiled, sometimes with the tail sallying outwards, at others rolled like the rest of the body.” I have thought it only due to Robin and myself to show that from the first we were perfectly well acquainted with the fact of the “great development of the genital tube and of its close adherence to the parietes of the body.” To be sure, many discrepancies occurred in our writings, and in those of Busk and Carter. It was Bastian’s skill and good fortune to correct these errors. Thus, most of us agreed in recognising a slightly trilobed or tripapillated mouth; but Carter failed to demonstrate the existence of these tubercles, and spoke of the oral aperture as being simple and “punctiform.” The body throughout its three upper fourths appeared to me to be cylindrical, but Robin found that it was flattened. It is finely striated transversely, except at the part where it contracts to form the slender, pointed tail. According to Carter, Robin, and Davaine, the young attain a length of about 1/33 of an inch, but Bastian gives it as about 1/42″. In thickness, Carter gives the approximative diameter as 1/633″, Robin makes it 1/990″ to 1/1320″, whilst Bastian gives their breadth at 1/1428″, and Davaine at 1/2500″.