ART. 7 EEVISIOlsT OF THE GENUS BASILEUTERUS — TODD S 



of the real affinities of his new species than most of liis predecessors 

 had of theirs in the same group. This brings us down to the year 

 1847 with eleven valid names for species pertaining to the group 

 called Basileuterus by Cabanis. 



There is, however, an unfortunate complication affecting the name 

 in question. Some authors date it from the Archiv fiir Naturge- 

 schichte (vol. 13, pt. 1, 1847, p. 316), but there it is only a nomen 

 nudum. The proper citation is apparently" Schomburgk, "Reisen 

 in British-Guiana (vol. 3, 1848, p. 666)." Here it is duly charac- 

 terized, and one species, ".^. vermivortbs Cab.," is placed under 

 it, which thus becomes the type by monotypj^ But the specific 

 name here used is not original with Cabanis ; it is taken from Vieillot, 

 as shown in the second reference quoted. Cabanis merely transfers 

 Vieillot's species to his new genus Bcmleutei'us. Now, it so happens 

 that the Sylvia vei'mivora of Vieillot refers primaril}^ to the Mota- 

 cilla vermivora of Gmelin, the worm-eating warbler. The case has been 

 fully discussed by von Berlepsch." Hence by a literal interpretation 

 of the rules Basileuterus Cabanis becomes a synonym of Helmitheros 

 Rafinesque, 1819. This is a pitiable end for a perfectly good generic 

 name.* But there is another rule, not formulated in any code and 

 not in favor with the literalist, which we feel ought to be invoked at 

 this point. This is the rule of common sense, which says that the 

 bird Cabanis had in mind for the type of his new genus was none 

 other than the one now known as Basileuterus aurlcajnllus olivascens 

 Chapman. This is clear from his remarks at the time, since he 

 expressly distinguishes the " Contramaestre coronado " of Azara 

 (which he must have supposed to be the base of Vieillot's Sylvia 

 vermivora) from the Helinaea vermivora of Latham and Audu- 

 bon. The circum^stance that he inadvertently used a name for the 

 former which had been originally applied to another and non- 

 pertinent species ought not to be allowed to overthrow his action, 

 and upset such a peculiarly appropriate and long-established name 

 for a large and important group. The present writer does not care 

 to take the responsibility for making a change under the circum- 

 stances, and for the purposes of this paper will continue to use 

 Basileuterus. 



3 Ibis, 1881, p. 240. 



* Dr. Charles W. Richmond, to whose attention this matter was caljed, writes as fol- 

 lows : " Canon XL of the revised A. O. U. Code seems to fit the case, where you will 

 find in brackets the statement 'A generic name based upon a designated described species 

 takes that species as its type, even though the founder of the genus may have misidenti- 

 fied the species.' * * * In addition to Canon XL of the A. O. U. Code, I think you 

 will find Opinion 65 of the International Nomenclature Commission to bear on the case. 

 In the summary of this opinion in the Proceedings of the Biological Society of Wash- 

 ington for 1926, headed ' Case of a Genus Based upon Erroneously Determined Species,' 

 is the statement, ' If an author designates a certain species as genotype, it is to be 

 assumed that his determination of the species is correct,' etc." 



