﻿2 
  PROCEEDINGS 
  OF 
  THE 
  NATIONAL 
  MUSEUM 
  vol. 
  m 
  

  

  compared, 
  for 
  example, 
  with 
  so 
  active 
  an 
  animal 
  as 
  the 
  gibbon, 
  but 
  

   the 
  reason 
  for 
  this 
  seems 
  to 
  be 
  that 
  room 
  is 
  lacking 
  for 
  the 
  exercise 
  of 
  

   its 
  full 
  powers. 
  It 
  is 
  interesting 
  to 
  speculate 
  on 
  the 
  comparative 
  

   speed 
  that 
  might 
  be 
  attained 
  under 
  natural 
  conditions 
  by 
  these 
  widely 
  

   different 
  but 
  both 
  outstandingly 
  active 
  New 
  World 
  and 
  Old 
  World 
  

   representatives, 
  respectively, 
  of 
  the 
  order 
  to 
  which 
  they 
  belong. 
  In 
  

   following 
  spider 
  monkeys 
  in 
  the 
  forest 
  a 
  man 
  may 
  keep 
  up 
  by 
  run- 
  

   ning 
  if 
  the 
  ground 
  is 
  clear, 
  but 
  if 
  impeded 
  by 
  having 
  to 
  go 
  around 
  

   underbrush 
  he 
  is 
  quickly 
  left 
  behind. 
  Spider 
  monkeys 
  are 
  considered 
  

   very 
  good 
  to 
  eat 
  by 
  the 
  native 
  populations 
  of 
  many 
  countries 
  and 
  

   are, 
  therefore, 
  in 
  danger 
  of 
  extermination. 
  

  

  Many 
  names 
  for 
  spider 
  monkeys 
  have 
  been 
  based 
  on 
  inadequate 
  de- 
  

   scriptions 
  of 
  animals 
  from 
  unknown 
  localities, 
  and 
  if 
  a 
  type 
  specimen 
  

   was 
  used 
  it 
  may 
  no 
  longer 
  be 
  extant. 
  The 
  result 
  has 
  been 
  great 
  con- 
  

   fusion 
  in 
  the 
  literature 
  bearing 
  on 
  the 
  identification 
  of 
  material, 
  and 
  

   of 
  the 
  distribution 
  of 
  the 
  nominal 
  species 
  recognized 
  little 
  has 
  been 
  

   known. 
  

  

  The 
  status 
  even 
  of 
  the 
  generic 
  name 
  Ateles 
  has 
  been 
  open 
  to 
  ques- 
  

   tion. 
  The 
  spider 
  monkey 
  S[imia\ 
  Sapajus 
  paniscus 
  was 
  included 
  

   among 
  the 
  14 
  monkeys 
  allocated 
  to 
  Sapajus 
  when 
  this 
  subgenus 
  was 
  

   proposed 
  by 
  Kerr 
  (The 
  Animal 
  Kingdom, 
  CI. 
  I, 
  Mammalia, 
  p. 
  76, 
  

   1792). 
  No 
  genotype 
  seems 
  to 
  have 
  been 
  designated 
  for 
  the 
  subgenus 
  

   Sapajus 
  Kerr, 
  unless 
  the 
  statement 
  made 
  by 
  J. 
  A. 
  Allen 
  (Bull. 
  Amer. 
  

   Mus. 
  Nat. 
  Hist., 
  vol. 
  7, 
  p. 
  181, 
  June 
  20, 
  1895) 
  that 
  Sapajios 
  of 
  Kerr 
  is 
  

   equivalent 
  to 
  Cebus 
  Erxleben, 
  1777, 
  can 
  be 
  interpreted 
  as 
  restricting 
  

   the 
  application 
  of 
  the 
  term 
  Sapajus 
  to 
  the 
  species 
  of 
  Gehus 
  included 
  

   among 
  the 
  14 
  monkeys 
  mentioned 
  above. 
  In 
  order 
  to 
  eliminate 
  any 
  

   possible 
  misinterpretation, 
  the 
  genotype 
  of 
  Sapajus 
  Kerr 
  is 
  here 
  desig- 
  

   nated 
  as 
  S\i7nia'\ 
  Sapajus 
  capuclnus 
  Kerr 
  {op. 
  cit., 
  p. 
  78, 
  1792), 
  which 
  

   is 
  the 
  same 
  as 
  S[i77iia'] 
  capiwina 
  Linnaeus., 
  1766 
  {nee 
  1758). 
  Inasmuch 
  

   as 
  the 
  genotype 
  of 
  Gehus 
  Erxleben, 
  1777, 
  has 
  been 
  fixed 
  (Elliott, 
  Field 
  

   Columbian 
  Mus. 
  Publ. 
  115, 
  zool. 
  ser., 
  vol. 
  8, 
  p. 
  560, 
  Mar. 
  4, 
  1907) 
  by 
  

   subsequent 
  designation 
  as 
  Sitnia 
  capucina 
  Linnaeus, 
  1766 
  {nee 
  1758), 
  

   which 
  in 
  turn 
  is 
  equivalent 
  to 
  Gehus 
  nignvittatus 
  Wagner 
  (see 
  

   Cabrera, 
  Rev. 
  Soc. 
  Argentina 
  Cienc. 
  Nat., 
  vol. 
  16, 
  pp. 
  21-22, 
  1939), 
  

   Sapajus 
  Kerr 
  is 
  herewith 
  relegated 
  to 
  the 
  synonymy 
  of 
  Gehus 
  Erxle- 
  

   ben. 
  

  

  Neither 
  opinion 
  147 
  (On 
  the 
  principles 
  to 
  be 
  observed 
  in 
  interpreting 
  

   article 
  34 
  of 
  the 
  International 
  Code 
  in 
  relation 
  to 
  the 
  rejection, 
  as 
  homo- 
  

   nyms 
  of 
  generic 
  and 
  subgeneric 
  names 
  of 
  the 
  same 
  origin 
  and 
  meaning 
  

   as 
  names 
  previously 
  published. 
  Opinions 
  and 
  declarations 
  rendered 
  

   by 
  the 
  International 
  Commission 
  on 
  Zoological 
  Nomenclature, 
  London, 
  

   vol. 
  2, 
  pt. 
  14, 
  pp. 
  123-132, 
  Sept. 
  30, 
  1943) 
  nor 
  article 
  34 
  (International 
  

   rules 
  of 
  zoological 
  nomenclature, 
  Proc. 
  Biol. 
  Soc. 
  Washington, 
  vol. 
  

   39, 
  p. 
  86, 
  July 
  30, 
  1926) 
  contains 
  an 
  express 
  ruling 
  as 
  to 
  whether 
  a 
  

  

  