326 Remarks on Mr. Ogilby s 



In our account of the douc however, as well as of the long- 

 nosed monkey, and its small ally, the S. recurvus, Vig. and 

 Horsf. we shall retain the above generic names as synonyms. 



(To be continued). 



Art. V. Remarks on Mr. Ogilby 1 s "Further Observations on Rules 

 for Nomenclature." By H. E. Strickland, Esq. F.G.S. &c. 



" Plato and truth are both dear to me, but it is my duty to give the prefe- 

 rence to truth." — Aristotle. 



I would not again have introduced this subject into your pa- 

 ges, were it not that Mr. Ogilby appears, in several instances, 

 to have so far misapprehended my meaning, as to oblige me, 

 in justice to myself, to put forward a few words of explana- 

 tion. I am fully disposed to believe, with Mr. Ogilby, that 

 we both have the same end in view, and that we differ less in 

 reality than in appearance. And if this discussion shall tend 

 to disentangle the truth from the complex net- work of words, 

 it will not be without its use. 



§ 1. — Retrospective operation of Rules. — When I stated at 

 page 200, that I had introduced into my code the conserva- 

 tive doctrine that the rules there proposed should not be re- 

 trospective, I certainly did not expect that Rules 5, 6, and 7 

 would have been brought forward as proof to the contrary. — 

 The rare and extreme exceptions provided for by these rules, 

 are such as I conceived no zoologist, however conservative, 

 would dissent from. Rule 5 provides for the extinction of 

 names which had before been applied to some other species 

 in the same genus, or to some other group of the same rank. 

 Rule 6 states that "a name maybe expunged whose meaning 

 is false as applied to the object or group which it represents." 

 This of course can rarely happen; and when it does, it is bet- 

 ter, I think, that the person who gave the false name should 

 pay the penalty of his negligence, by the obliteration of the 

 name, than that so obvious a source of error and confusion 

 should be made perpetual. Yet so conservative was the spi- 

 rit in which those rules were drawn up, that even here it is 

 provided that in those cases "where a name, though false, does 

 not really mislead, it should be retained, if long established" 

 e. g. Caprimulgus. Rule 7 provides that " a name may be 

 expunged which has never been clearly denned." I cannot 

 comprehend what objection Mr. Ogilby has to that. If a 

 name is not clearly denned at first, it cannot be recognized 



