52 Journal New York Entomological Society. [Vol. x i y - 



tera, to take the first species uniformly as type would cause consider- 

 ably less change in the present classification than to take the middle 

 species. In the Lepidoptera, either course would cause a very radical 

 change, about equal in either case. It has been proposed to cite as 

 type of the Linnsean genera the common European species included 

 under each. This is objectionable, because it is not capable of general 

 application, as there are some groups without any common European 

 species and others with two or more. 



We are reduced therefore to squarely favor the first species method. 

 Let us make what changes this requires now, which are perhaps not so 

 many, and have the names finally settled on a permanent basis. 



BOOK NOTICES. 



The International Code of Zoological Nomenclature as Applied to Medi- 

 cine. By Ch. Wardell Stiles. Bulletin No. 24 of the Hygienic 

 Laboratory, Treasury Department, Public Health and Marine- 

 Hospital Service of the United States. Washington: Government 

 Printing Office. 1905. 



This very important paper presents the international code in 

 available form with explanatory comment by the author, who is well 

 qualified to explain the code, being the secretary of the permanent 

 committee of the International Zoological Congress. There are 36 

 articles and a valuable appendix giving rules for the transcription of 

 Greek words and geographic names to be in Latin form. These rules 

 would be more valuable if there were any obligation in the code itself 

 to respect them, which there is not. Unfortunately the code does not 

 embody the recommendations which we have urged in editorial com- 

 ment in this Journal and in an article with Mr. Caudell on the types 

 of genera (Journ. N. Y. Ent. Soc, XII, 120, 1904). We object to 

 articles 4, 5, 14, 25 and 30. 



Articles 4 and 5 do not go far enough. They state how the 

 family name shall be formed, but do not tell us how to select the type 

 genus. Is it to be the oldest one, or the one first selected historically? 

 When changed, why should the name not go to the next oldest one 

 (as advocated by us), or to the one next used for family type his- 

 torically, rather than to the substituted name (as advocated by 

 article 5) ? 



Article 14 states that specific names in adjective form must agree 



