152 Observatious on Rules for Nomenclature. 



second place he would lose the expression of the important 

 scientific relations conveyed in my nomenclature ; and all this 

 for no better reason than to comply with an arbitrary and ca- 

 pricious "rule." Nay, the very advantage of a "memoria tech- 

 nical the only legitimate object of the "rule" in question, is 

 entirely in favour of my nomenclature, and would be totally 

 destroyed by the adoption of the very "rule" which Mr. Strick- 

 land intends should secure it. The rule would be satisfied, 

 no doubt, but it would be satisfied at the expense of both sci- 

 ence and criticism ; a substantial scientific relation would be 

 sacrificed to a verbal shadow; and I think Mr. Strickland 

 himself will admit that the advantage is very incommensurate 

 with the sacrifice. 



The second rule which Mr. Strickland quotes as being vi- 

 olated by my nomenclature, is subject to the same contingen- 

 cies, and liable to the same objections, as the first. Generally 

 speaking, it may be a matter of convenience to form the fami- 

 ly name from that of some conspicuous genus included in the 

 group ; but, as in the present instance, it may not be always 

 either expedient or practicable to do so. By giving the name 

 of Simia to one or other of the genera of real apes, in compli- 

 ance with Mr. Strickland's "rule," I should have committed 

 the following three cardinal sins ; which, however venial they 

 may be in the estimation of the Dracos and Solons of zoolo- 

 gical nomenclature, are, according to my creed, worthy of utter 

 scientific condemnation. In the first place, I should have 

 used the word Simia in a new sense, different from its legiti- 

 mate acceptation, and from the meaning which has been 

 hitherto attached to it in zoology ; thus at the same time 

 burthening the science with unnecessary synonyms, and con- 

 fusing their import: secondly, I should have captiously alter- 

 ed an established nomenclature, without any commensurate 

 advantage, other than the very questionable one of satisfying 

 a purely arbitrary "rule ;" and, in the third place, I should 

 have countenanced the disreputable practice, which, I regret 

 to say, is but too prevalent both in this country and on the 

 continent, of imposing new names upon groups, with the for- 

 mation or definition of which the proposer is in no way con- 

 nected, merely because the old ones do not happen to suit his 

 individual taste, or the particular code of "rules" which he 

 patronises, or perhaps from the contemptible vanity of having 

 his name attached to it, and quoted by succeeding writers ; 

 thus, by a species of zoological petty larceny, filching the ho- 

 nest reputation of original observers, and unscrupulously ap- 

 propriating it to himself. 



That certain reforms in the generic nomenclature of the 



