BIBLIOGRAPHY AND PUBLICATION. 



Zoological Bibliography and Publication. - - Second Report of 

 the Committee, consisting of Sir W. H. FLOWER (Chairman^, Pro- 

 fessor W. A. HERDMAN, Mr. W. E. HOYLE, Dr. P. L. SCLATER, 

 Mr. ADAM SEDGWICK, Dr. D. SHARP, Mr. C. D. SHERBORN, Rev. 

 T. R. R. STEERING, Professor W. F. R. WELDON, and Mr. F. A. 

 BATHER {Secretary). 



The Committee wishes to state clearly that it has no wish, even if 

 it had the authority, to lay down laws for zoologists or for publishing 

 bodies and editors. It is, however, plain that many are grateful for 

 some guidance, and the Committee hopes that it may serve as a 

 medium for conveying to those who need it the general opinion 

 of the experienced. There are also difficulties which, though they 

 appear to some insuperable, may possibly be surmounted in ways 

 that have been communicated to the Committee. 



(i) ' That each part of a serial publication should have the 

 date of actual publication, as near as may be, printed on the 

 wrapper, and, when possible, on the last sheet sent to press.' 



Five correspondents do not see the use of this, thinking that the 

 date on the wrapper is enough, and that in the case of annual publi- 

 cations the date of the year suffices. The Committee would point 

 out that wrappers are constantly lost in binding, and that periodi- 

 cals are often broken up by specialists or secondhand booksellers, 

 the consequent loss of date causing much trouble to workers of a 

 later day. To avoid this, the Cincinnati Society of Natural History 

 would add the date at the head of each paper, while Natural AV/< //<< 

 prints the month and year across every page opening. Some societies, 

 e.g., the Philadelphia Academy, issue a certificate of dates at the end 

 of the volume. The Liverpool Biological Society ' put at the head 

 of each paper the date when it is read, and are willing to add the 

 date when it is printed off ' ; neither of these dates are necessary, 

 and they may be misleading. In most cases the actual day of publi- 

 cation is immaterial, especially in cases where no new species are 

 described, but at least the month should always be given, and the 

 Committee does not see that there need be any difficulty in doing 



53 



