I estimated their greatest length and breadth to be 1/30″ by 1/1000″. Robin and myself thought we recognised a distinct, rounded, anal orifice; and whilst Busk, on the one hand, saw nothing which in the slightest degree indicated the presence of an anal opening, Carter, on the other hand, described the structure which we called the anus as a gland, at the same time placing the alimentary outlet on one side and a little above it. According to Bastian, “the intestinal tube is about 1/87″ in length, and appears to consist of a simple canal of varying calibre, pursuing a nearly straight course, and terminating exactly at about the middle, in length, of the worm.” Like Robin, Bastian recognised œsophageal and stomachal divisions, and in a few examples he observed the cæcal or terminal portion of the intestine to be partially reflected upon itself. In regard to the circular opening which Robin and myself described as the anus, Bastian says there is a rounded body, “about 1/2200″ in diameter, with a dark or light spot in the centre, according to the varying focal distance, and which seems to represent a central aperture. Sometimes, above this, traces of two or three large cells may be recognised, whilst behind nothing definite can be made out, save that the cavity of the body is visible for about 1/400″. In other specimens of the young worm the central body and spot are wanting, but, in its stead, two lateral sacculi are met with, about 1/3300″ in diameter, that communicate with the exterior by a minute channel through the integuments, which can sometimes be distinctly recognised. At other times the channel is obscured by protrusion, which appears to have taken place through it, of a minute bilobed papilla, projecting 1/10,000″ from the side of the body. When the projections are seen, the sacculi are indistinct.” [Illustration: FIG. 44.--Embryos of _Dracunculus_. Magnified 500 diameters. After Bastian.] As Bastian found the young in all stages of development from the germ condition 1/5000″ in diameter up to the perfect embryo, and as, moreover, he, like the rest of us, could detect no sexual orifice in the adult Dracunculus, he was led to express his belief that the young were produced agamogenetically. He went so far as to call the germs _pseudova_. It was with great reluctance that I dissented from the views of so gifted an observer as Bastian; nevertheless, later researches have shown that I was justified in not hastily concurring in the theory of a non-sexual mode of reproduction for Dracunculus.