12 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 73 



not designate the type for Spams anrata for British waters, and that 

 in using the generic name Sparus for the species Sparus anrata, he 

 simply acted nomenclaturally in accordance with his action of 1822. 



Opinion written by Stiles. 



Opinion concurred in by 14 Commissioners: Allen, Apstein, 

 Bather, Blanchard, Handlirsch, Hartert, Horvath, Hoyle, Jordan 

 (D. S.), Jordan (K.), Monticelh, Skinner, Stejneger, Stiles. 



Opinion dissented from by no Commissioner. 



Not voting, 4 Commissioners : Dautzenberg, Kolbe, Roule, Simon. 



The foregoing Opinion was submitted to all Commissioners for 

 vote and to more than 350 zoologists, zoological laboratories, colleges, 

 and scientific institutions for comment. No adverse criticism has 

 been received by the Secretary, but the following comments have been 

 sent to him : 



Commissioner Allen : Again it seems to me that Fleming may be 

 correctly assumed to have fixed the type of Spams in 1822 (by mono- 

 typy) as Spams aurata Linn. Fleming's Sparus (1822 and 1828) = 

 Les Daurades Cuvier (1817), to which Fleming appears to have been 

 the first to assign a name, selecting Spams for it. 



While Fleming did not formally, or in the strict sense of Article 30 

 of the International Code, designate a type for either -Pleuronectes or 

 Sparus, I should not in the least hesitate, were I forced to give a 

 decision in the case, to decide that, for all practical purposes, Fleming 

 did indicate PL platessa L. as the type of Pleuronectes, and Sp. aurata 

 L. as the type of Spams; at least I should hold that such a decision 

 was warranted by usage and in harmony with many precedents. 



Commissioners Bather, Hartert, D. S. Jordan, and Stejneger : Same 

 remarks as under Opinion 68. 



Commissioner Hoyle : As regards Sparus, I am not clear about the 

 action of Cuvier, 1817. If an author divides the genus and does not 

 retain the original name for one of the parts, does not that render 

 his action null and void ? Or can we pick out one of his parts, apply 

 the old name to that and neglect his new one ? 



Favorable opinions have been received from : P. P. Calvert, Barton 

 W. Evermann, W. C. Kendall, Lewis Radclifife. Hugh M. Smith, 

 Oldfield Thomas, A. A. Tyler, and H. L. Viereck. 



Miss Mary J. Rathbun: Also that aurata became the type of 

 Sparus in 1822 by Fleming, and, therefore, he did not designate the 

 type of that genus in 1828. 



Doctor Pappenheim : See remarks under Opinion 68. 



