1898] THE LATE LAMENTED LATREILLE 243 



fied as the type " of that genus — by himself. But light can be 

 shed on the subject from his earlier works as well as his later. In 

 1802 he published the first four volumes of his " Histoire naturelle, 

 gen^rale et particuliere, des Crustac^s et des Insectes." Here, just as 

 in 1810, we have " Famille cinquieme. Homardiens ; astacini," with 

 the first genus " Ecrevisse ; astacus," signalised by a single species 

 thus — " Exemple. Astacus fiuviatilis,Fa.h." A little research, there- 

 fore, would have shown Dr Faxon that Latreille uses ' exemple ' 

 and ' type ' as precise equivalents. The sixth volume of the 

 " Histoire," published in 1803, describes seven species of Astacus, 

 giving the first place to " Ecrevisse homard ; astacus marinus." In 

 the "Genera Crustaceorum et Insectorum," published in 1806, where 

 only two species of Astacus are mentioned, it is still the Astacus 

 marinus that holds the place of honour. But if this local position 

 on the printed page gives no indication of Latreille's opinion as to 

 the typical species, why, it may be wondered, does he trouble him- 

 self to tell us in the " Histoire " (vol. vi., p. 230) that, " il est facile 

 de conclure des observations d'Aristote, que son astacos est I'ecrevisse 

 de mer ou le homard," and offer proofs that by this name " Aristote 

 designe positivement le homard." It cannot be supposed that he 

 wished to flout Aristotle by taking as type of the genus, not the 

 lobster which Aristotle positively designates, but the river crayfish, 

 of which, he says, Aristotle makes no mention. 



The same line of argument which indicates for Leach the 

 generic names of the lobster and the crayfish, will indicate for 

 Stimpson the distinction between the prawns Leander and Palacmon, 

 and once more for Leach the distinction between the sand-hopper 

 Talitrus and Orchestia the shore-hopper, Talitrus is Latreille's 

 ow"n genus. In 1802 he gave two examples of it. The first has 

 from then till now retained the name of Talitrus. The second was 

 transferred to Orchestia by Leach in 1814. It is this latter species 

 which Latreille in 1810 names by itself as 'type' of the genus 

 Talitrus. But that he had the least intention of establishing it as 

 the type, it is not only hard but impossible to believe, for as well in 

 the " Nouveau Dictionnaire d'Histoire Xaturelle," vol. i., 1816, as in 

 the "Families Naturelles " of 1825, and "Le Eegne Animal," vol. 

 iv., 1829, he recognises Orchestic and Talitre as distinct genera. 

 Now Orchestia could only be a synonym of Talitrus, were the 

 species mentioned by Latreille in 1810 as an illustrative example 

 to be taken as a governing type. 



In 1801 the brilliant Lamarck published his " Systeme des 

 Animaux sans Vertebres," a manual on much the same plan as 

 Latreille's volume of 1810. In his " Avertissement " he says: 

 " Pour faire connoitre d'une maniere certaine les genres dont je 

 donne ici les caracteres, j'ai cite sous chacun d'eux une espece 



