86 [September, 1841. 



ard, other naturalists would not be long at a loss to know what has 



been done ; and as the rest of the community interested are a vast 



majority, their convenience should have great weight in the matter. 



And when the meetings are not open to the public, the reading is 



still less a point to be depended upon, as the committee to whom 



the paper is referred might retain it for months, and in some cases 



years, and in the mean time numerous species be added to the 



paper through the carelessness or connivance of the committee, a 



long time after it was read, and perhaps after another naturalist 



had published them ; and thus if the first read be the rule, a great 



opportunity for trick and injustice be offered to the unscrupulous. 



And even when the meetings are public, the author might borrow 



the paper under pretext of verbal alteration or other excuse, and 



then interpolate additional species. The same objections in part 



hold good against the other argument in favour of the first read 



description : the correctness of the date of publication may be 



ascertained by all, but it is not so certain that the description of a 



species was read on a particular evening. 



The arguments in favour of priority of publication are, among 

 others, that it would be extremely unfair, that a man who has spent 

 months or years in searching for species abroad, and then perhaps 

 been at the expense of publishing them himself, should be deprived 

 of his hard-earned credit, by some one who has merely read a paper 

 of which the other could have no knowledge ; while, if he had known 

 that the Fauna or Flora of that district had been collected and des- 

 cribed, he would have made his researches in another quarter. 



Another reason is, that by making mere reading the standard, 

 all who were not present at the time, or had access to the minutes 

 of the society, might remain for a long time in ignorance ; especially 

 as a paper might not be recorded until reported on by the commit- 

 tee, who might retain it for years when the volumes appeared at 

 long intervals : even the members of the society who were absent 

 when the paper was read, would remain at a loss to know whether 

 any particular species were described or not. In this way the 

 numerous specimens which are constantly scattered through va- 

 rious collections would remain a long time undescribed and 



