No. i.] SECOND REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE. 55 



agent, of their papers to some recognized office, or to some such paper as 

 the Zoologischer Anzeiger. The details of expense must be settled 

 between the author and the society. 



(4) ' That it is desirable to express the subject of one's paper 

 in its title, while keeping the title as concise as possible.' 



It is satisfactory to find no objections raised to this recommenda- 

 tion, since there is no doubt that there is room for much improve- 

 ment in this direction. Such phrases as ' Further contributions 

 towards our knowledge of the . . . ,' or ' Einige Beobachtungen 

 iiber . . . ,' or ' Essai d'une Monographic du genre . . . ,' might 

 well be dispensed with as superfluous. The ornithologist who, in 

 1895, published a book with a title of ninety-one words would seem 

 to have forgotten the functions of a preface. 



On the other hand, it is pointed out that certain periodicals, such 

 as the Bulletin de la Societe Entomologique de France and the 

 Sitzungsberichte der Gesellschaft naturforschender Frcunde zu Berlin, 

 publish communications without any title, to the constant con- 

 fusion of naturalists. The Committee begs to urge the reform of 

 this practice, in which it can see no advantage. 



(5) 'That new species should be properly diagnosed, and 

 figured when possible.' 



The only comment on this is the proposed omission of the words 

 'when possible.' With this the Committee sympathize, but wish to 

 avoid all appearance of laying down a law that would constantly be 

 broken. 



(6) ' That new names should not be proposed in irrelevant 

 footnotes or anonymous paragraphs.' 



Naturally nobody supports such actions as are here objected to, 

 but since some have doubted the possibility of the latter, it is as 

 well to state that the suggestion was based on an actual case occur- 

 ring in the Report of a well-known International Congress. The pro- 

 posal of a new name, without diagnosis, in a footnote to a student's 

 text-book, or in a short review of a work by another author, is a by 

 no means rare occurrence. The Committee believes that such prac- 

 tices are calculated to throw nomenclature into confusion rather than 

 to advance science. 



(7) ' That references to previous publications should be 

 made fully and correctly if possible, in accordance with one 

 of the recognized sets of rules for quotation, such as that 

 recently adopted by the French Zoological Society.' 



