1*72 THE CANADIAN ENTOMOLOGIST. 



worked field there, and plenty of new forms. About 200 species 

 (American) are thus far described. Of spiders a somewhat larger number. 



Mr. Emerton said there were some 400 described species, and that 

 naturalists generally had no idea what a very great variety of spiders 

 really existed. 



Mr. Mann read a letter from O. S. Westcott, of Maywood, III, sug- 

 gesting the formation of a stock company for the purpose of publishing 

 an American entomological journal, and after a lengthy discussion the 

 question was referred to a special committee consisting of Messrs. Mann, 

 Osborn, Horn, Aaron and Smith. 



Prof Fernald presented an invitation from the Agassiz Association, 

 received by him, inviting the members to be present at a lecture by Dr. 

 McCook, in Franklin Institute this evening. This invitation was accepted 

 by the Club. 



Prof. Fernald then asked for the opinions of the members on the 

 following points : — 



1. Where a name has once been published by an author, shall we 

 change the mode of spelling to one more consistent with the derivation ? 

 e. g. , Treitschke, Schmet. viii., established the genus Cocliyilis. Shall we 

 adopt his spelling, or the more correct Conchy/is ? 



Dr. Horn said he would not change it ; that generic names are mere 

 aggregations of letters representing a living thing, and that at least one 

 well known entomologist habitually formed generic names by coining 

 words without any meaning whatever, merely with a Grecian sound, and 

 generally euphonious. If such names were accepted, so should misspelled 

 names be. Some purists would make every name correspond with its 

 origin, and it had been proposed to change the well known and universally 

 accepted term, Bembidium, into Beinbicidimn; this was displaying learn- 

 ing without adding to knowledge. 



Mr. Mann agreed with Dr. Horn. Dr. McCook thought a manifest 

 error might be corrected, but would not make the correction if thereby 

 an author's right of priority were destroyed, i. e. , if the name thus changed 

 were pre-occupied at the time it was originally proposed. 



2. When an author once publishes a name which is manifestly incor- 

 rect in orthography, and m a later work corrects his own error, shall we 

 adopt his correction ? e. g., Treitschke published the genus Pendina, but 

 later corrects it to Fenthina. 



