" Observations on Rules for Nomenclature.'''' 199 



work out anything like an harmonious system by their un- 

 guided and independant exertions, is a proceeding of quite as 

 radical a tendency as to establish new laws and to amend 

 old ones. Mr. Ogilby, therefore, has surely committed an 

 error in nomenclature, when he applies the term " zoological 

 radicals," not to those who would put down law,and establish 

 anarchy, but to those who are labouring to bring back Zoology 

 from its present state . of anarchy, to one of order and good 

 government. Not that such persons are Carlists, — they do 

 not sigh for the antiquated yet happy despotism of Carolus 

 Linnaeus, but merely wish that a well digested constitution 

 should be established, suited to the present advanced and 

 diffused state of zoological knowledge. The only effectual 

 step towards this happy consummation, would be (as I have 

 before remarked, Mag. Nat. Hist. n.s. vol. i. p. 128, and vol. 

 ii. p. 166), to form a congress, or in humbler phrase, a com- 

 mittee of naturalists from all parts of the scientific world, to 

 draw up a code of zoological laws, not indeed to be like those 

 of the Medes and Persians, yet to be adhered to for the sake 

 of order and convenience, till a good reason for changing 

 them shouldbecome apparent. Such a committee, if carefully 

 constituted, might confer a lasting benefit on Zoology, by 

 consigning to oblivion the vast mass of dross which now en- 

 cumbers the science, and by refining, analyzing and coining 

 the precious metals ; — in plainer terms, by drawing up a 

 general outline of the animal kingdom,— by preparing cata- 

 logues of zoological works, distinguishing the degree of au- 

 thority which attaches to each, — by defining rules for nomen- 

 clature, — by deciding the claims of rival generic and specific 

 terms, &c. &c. The law^s established by this means would of 

 course have no other sanction than that of opinion, yet if based 

 on common sense, and on truth, there would be no fear of 

 their not being generally adopted. Then should we see all 

 museums arranged on the same system, and all naturalists 

 speaking the same language. But such a plan would fail of 

 its effects unless placed on a truly cosmopolitan basis, and 

 unless the narrow prejudices caused by a few miles of salt 

 water, or by an imaginary boundary line were pro tanto laid 

 aside. Such a plan is well worthy the attention of the Bri- 

 tish Association, though from the prevalence of international 

 prejudices, the time is probably far distant when it may be 

 brought into advantageous operation. What then is to be 

 done in the mean time ? Shall we go on accumulating the 

 riches of nature in our vast warehouses, each man describing, 

 naming, re-naming, classifying, and " improving" according 

 to any preconceived crotchet, or according to no crotchet at 

 Vol. II.— No. 16. n. s. r 



