GO INTRODUCTION. 



tion of the wrong he was doing, and his practice was 

 in tliis particular very loose. M. Deshayes, in the 

 Encydoijedle^ seems to have been careless in looking 

 up his authorities, and had not awakened to the impor- 

 tance of reforming the nomenclature bj restoring origi- 

 nal names, for which he has since proved himself to be 

 an able and zealous advocate. But it may be said, 

 without justly incurring reproach, that neither of them 

 seems to have considered it to be necessary, to pro- 

 vide himself with the means of makins; such references 

 to American authors, as was proper and essential in 

 order to render his own works more accurate, and to 

 guard against injustice to others. Indeed, so late as 

 1839, M. Deshayes, in liis continuation of M. F^rus- 

 sac's work, in giving the synonymy of Helix septem- 

 volva ascribes the specific name to M. Ferussac, over- 

 looking entirely the fact that Mr. Say had pubhshed 

 the species four years in advance of M. Ferussac, as 

 plainly appeared from the dates of the respective works 

 to which M. Deshayes referred in his own description. 

 It may be said, in excuse, that the writings of Ameri- 

 can naturalists, scattered as they are through various 

 periodical pubhcations, are procured with difficulty in 

 Europe. This is probably true, to a considerable ex- 

 tent, but it is no more true than that similar European 

 publications can hardly be obtained here. They can 

 be obtained by those who deem them sufficiently im- 

 portant to warrant some trouble in procuring them ; 

 and the author who undertakes a general work, like 



