| OCR Text |
Show 320 MR. P. L. SCLATER ON THE [Mar. 3, meant for a plant or an animal could seldom, if ever, occur. He thought the tautonymic principle ought to be accepted. The correct starting-point of Zoological Nomenclature, he was of opinion, was the 10th ed. of the ' Systema Naturae,' because in that edition Linnaeus first made use of the binary system of nomenclature ; and as the question of justness had been mentioned he considered that it would be unjust to authors who created names between the dates of the two editions, if the twelfth were adopted; he was, moreover, of opinion that if the 12th edition were adopted, because it contained corrections and emendations of the older edition, it would make a bad precedent, and that any other author might, if so inclined, claim to alter his original names after he had created and published them, and so cause confusion. H e agreed with Mr. Sclater that the comma between the specific name and the authority was unnecessary. With regard to the law of priority, he thought that if that law was accepted at all it ought to be carried out thoroughly. He followed Mr. Sclater in his opinion on trinomials. Prof. L A N K E S T E R , F.E.S., said that the main consideration in regard to the rules of nomenclature should be that of convenience, and the digging up of old names ought to be avoided. H e thought the 12th edition of the ' Systema Naturae' should be adopted as the starting-point of Zoological Nomenclature, as a tribute of respect to Linnaeus, since it was the last edition of that work and contained Linnaeus's revised list of genera and species. On the w7hole, he was inclined to accept the tautonymic principle, but he thought that some difficulty arose owing to the existence of doubts in some cases as to which was the original species intended to bear the name. H e suggested that an International Committee under the auspices of this Society should be formed, not to draw up a code of rules, but to produce an authoritative list of names-once and for all-about which no lawyer-like haggling should hereafter be permitted. Eules such as those embodied in the Stricklandian Code might be laid down for guiding the future action of makers of specific and generic names. But with regard to the past what was needed was, not a principle as to the application of which everyone might argue and differ and cause confusion, but an authoritative declaration admitting of no appeal and of no discussion. Let the zoologists of Britain, America, France, and Germany agree that such a list of the names of all known animals shall be produced once for all, and let this list take absolute and indisputable precedence. Mr. E L W E S said that the Eules of the Stricklandian Code, though excellent at the time they were instituted, were not now equally applicable to all branches of Zoology. The attempt to make the 10th or even the 12th edition of Linnaeus the starting-point for specific names would, if apphed strictly, soon bring the nomenclature of Lepidoptera into a hopeless state of confusion, which Mould result in deterring beginners from following any rules but those of convenience. After all, |
