REMARKS UPON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE. 523 



their habits, localities, &c., yet, even here some judgment will be 

 necessary, for if an animal frequent several localities, it will not be 

 exactly correct to call it by such specific names as Sylvaticus, Pra- 

 tensis, &c., unless it be the only one in its genus that inhabits the 

 wood or the meadow. 



It is much to be regretted that, whilst chemistry and other important 

 sciences observe an almost rigid adherence to certain conventional 

 terms, the language of zoology and botany is necessarily changing. 

 And what is the consequence ? we are overburdened with synonymes, 

 and the language of one naturalist instead of being understood by 

 another, is not comprehended in consequence of their each applying 

 different terms to the same objects. The synonymes create as much, 

 if not more, confusion than did the provincial terms, in the absence of 

 scientific nomenclature. Some of the synonymes, it must be confessed, 

 have their origin in accident, but the majority of them were purposely 

 and unnecessarily introduced, and, in many instances, without any 

 reasons whatever being assigned for the innovation. But, however, 

 as we cannot rid science of her synonymes, it behoves every true lover 

 of natural history to attempt to discover some effectual means of 

 preventing their causing further confusion, and also to devise, if it be 

 possible, some plan for preventing their further increase. Mr. Blyth 

 says, that the confusion arising from the synonymes " may, in a great 

 measure, if not entirely, be prevented, by adding to the approved 

 systematic name of an animal, that also by which it was first known 

 and described in systematic nomenclature." If the vile passion for 

 altering names were once quelled, this plan might do, but while it 

 rages as at present, it is impossible to tell which are the approved 

 systematic names. The inconvenience resulting from the synonymes 

 would be materially lessened, if not eventually obviated, if we possessed 

 good dictionaries of natural history, with the various scientific terms 

 duly arranged in alphabetical order. But there is but little chance of 

 our ever having this great desideratum supplied, if persons object, as 

 has lately been the case, to have the scientific names made by them, 

 collected, and disposed in merely a systematic order. Within these 

 few months, the compiler of the " Systematic Catalogue of British 

 Insects," published a new and improved edition of his work, and with 

 the view of rendering it a complete catalogue, he, as a matter of course, 

 included in it all the various specific names to be found in other 

 catalogues of indigenous species. In this new edition he has included 

 all the names to be met with in the " Guide to an Arrangement of 



