PRINCIPLES, CANONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS. 45 



CANON XXVII. When a subgenus is raised to full generic 

 rank, its name is to be retained as that of the group thus raised. 

 In like manner, names first proposed or used in a subspecific 

 sense are tenable in case the subspecies be raised to full specific 

 standing, and are to have priority over a new name for the sub- 

 species so elevated. 



REMARK. This of course relates to names which are otherwise tenable, 

 -in other words, have been duly published, and are not synonyms. 



CANON XXVIII. When it becomes necessary to divide a 

 composite species or subspecies, the old specific or subspecific 

 name is to be retained for that form or portion of the group to 

 which it was first applied, or to which it primarily related. If 

 this cannot be positively ascertained, the name as fixed by the 

 first reviser is to be retained. 



REMARK. This is simply the extension of the rules already provided 

 for the determination of generic types to species which are composite in char- 

 acter, to which the general principles of elimination already set forth are 



equally applicable. 



CANON XXIX. When a species is separated into subspecies, 

 or when species previously supposed to be distinct are found to 

 intergrade, the earliest name applied to any form of the group 

 shall be the specific name of the whole group, and shall also be 

 retained as the subspecific designation of the particular form to 

 which it was originally applied. In other words, the rule of pri- 

 ority is to be strictly enforced in respect to subspecific names. 



REMARKS. While this principle is generally recognized, one ornithologi- 

 cal writer of prominence 1 has introduced the practice of connecting the 

 names of conspecies or subspecies in accordance with the supposed nearest 

 affinities of such forms, regardless of priority of names. Such disregard 

 of the law of priority, however, can lead only to instability and confusion, 

 without any adequately compensating advantages. If we knew beyond ques- 

 tion what was the original or stock-form of a group of conspecies, and the 

 lines of evolution of the various imperfectly segregated forms, it would be 

 possible to show the genetic relation of such forms in our nomenclature, and 

 were nomenclature classification some gain might thus result. But since 



1 Mr. Henry Seebohm. 



