OCR Text |
Show 220 MR. F. J. BELL ON THE NOMENCLATURE [Mar. 16, 4. On the Names to be applied to certain Echinoidea. By F. JEFFREY BELL, B.A., F.Z.S. [Eeceived March 10, 1880.] The tone which Prof. Agassiz has thought proper to adopt towards me makes any further discussion of the synonymy of the Echini impossible between us. It is, however, necessary that I should notify the Society of one or two matters lest m y co-fellows should be led to think, from the accusations that have been brought against me, that I have been guilty of great disrespect towards it. I am charged, first, with quibbling, and, secondly, with misrepresentation. In truth, however, the sentence which forms the basis for the first-accusation is obviously a dialectic artifice, by means of which the chief point under discussion is thrown into sharper relief. That point is, of course, the necessity for starting with Linnaeus in our nomenclature ; whenever that salutary rule is disobeyed an author can hardly escape some pitfall, and into such a pitfall Prof. Agassiz has fallen. "While I owe to every author w h o m I may quote the utmost exactness in representation, I owe it no less to the Society who did m e the honour to publish m y paper, and to the student who reads it. I shall not so far forget m y own dignity as to plead that I intended no misrepresentation; I will say at once that I have not been guilty of it, and that Prof. Agassiz does not support his accusation. In criticizing the method of bibliographical reference adopted by the author of the 'Revision,' I directed attention to a misleading reference which stands thus:-" Int. Mon. Scut." This is now allowed to be an unfortunate method of quotation ; but " it does not justify M r . Bell in assuming that he corrects a grave error, and gives information not to be found in the Revision." Here I submit the following facts:- (1) The following are the contents of the second livraison of the 'Monographies d'Echinodermes,' as published by Prof. Louis Agassiz - ( a ) Observations on the progress of the knowledge of the Echinodermata, and (/3) the " Seconde Monographic. Des Scutelles." The Monograph consists of (i) a short preface, (ii) «« Introduction. Du groupe des Scutelles en general," and (iii) a series of chapters on the different genera of the group. N o w which of these constituent parts is referred to by " Int. M o n. Scut." 1 why, of course, as all the world but M r . Bell knows quite well, the ' Observations . . .' are referred to! That there is an Introduction to the Scutellae has, it is notorious, been at no time an obstacle to such a use of the abbreviated reference. That this is really the case should be obvious from Mr. Agassiz's statement- "All writers on Echinoderms w h o have quoted these independent monographs (as I have done in the ' Revision') without reference to the number of the Livraison, but entirely from the contents as printed on the cover, always quote this ' essay'' as ' Monographie des Scu- |