Rules for Rendering the Nomenchtwe of Zoology Uniform. 351 



part of the Cincinnati Group, associated with Dendrocrinus caducem, 

 CijHoUtes dyeri, and other fossils peculiar to that range. Fragments of 

 the column, and plates from the cup, have been found at other place? 

 in that locality, but not elsewhere, so far as known. 



Rules for Rendering the Nomenclature of Zoology Uniform and Perma- 

 nent, repoHed and adopted at the Ticelfth 3Ieeting of the British Associa- 

 tion for the Advancement of Science, Iwld at Manchester, in June, 1842. 



PART I. — RULES FOR RECTIFYING THE PRESENT NOMENCLATURE. 



Limitation of the Plan to Systematic Nomenclature.— In proposing 

 a measure for the establishment of a permanent and universal zoo- 

 logical nomenclature, it must be premised that we refer solely 

 to the Latin, or systematic language of zoology. We have nothing 

 to do with vernacular appellations. One great cause of the neglect 

 and corruption which prevail in the scientific nomenclature of zoology, 

 has been the frequent and often exclusive use of vernacular names in 

 lieu of the Latin binomial designations, which form the only legitimate 

 language of systematic zoology. Let us, then, endeavor to render per- 

 fect the Latin or Linnsean method of nomenclature, which, being far 

 removed from the scope of national vanities and modern antipathies, 

 holds out the only hope of introducing into zoology that grand desid- 

 eratum, a universal language. 



La%o of Priority the only effectiud and just one. — It being admitted on 

 all hands that words are only the conventional signs of ideas, it is evi- 

 dent that language can only attain its end effectually by being perma- 

 nently established and generally recognized. This consideration ought, 

 it would seem, to have checked those who are continually attempting 

 to subvert the established language of zoology by substituting terms of 

 their own coinage. But, forgetting the true value of language, they 

 persist in confounding the name of a species or group with its definition; 

 and because the former always falls short of the fullness of expression 

 found in the latter, they cancel it without hesitation, and introduce 

 some new term which appears to them more characteristic, but which 

 is utterly unknown to the science, and is therefore devoid of all author- 

 ity. If those persons were to object to such names of men as Long, 

 LiUle, Armstrong, Golightly, etc., in cases where they fail to apply to 

 the individuals who bear them, or should complain of the names 

 Gmgh, Lawrence, or Harvey, that they were devoid of meaning, and 



