70 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 73 



(i) If any serious attempt has been made to apply the Rules con- 

 sistently to the tunicate generic names by designating the genotypes 

 in accord with Article 30, this fact has not been brought to the 

 attention of the Commission, accordingly, specialists in this group 

 do not appear to have brought their subject to the point where it 

 seems wise to set an example that might inhibit or handicap thorough 

 nomenclatorial work of that kind. 



(2) The presentation of the cases as submitted by the Appellants 

 has been shown to contain a number of errors, and to be very in- 

 complete. 



(3) Only four of the Commissioners (one of these is also one 

 of the Appellants) in their preliminary expression of opinions, ap- 

 pear to be inclined to the view that more than one of the six cases 

 submitted call for a possible suspension of the Rules, accordingly, if 

 these cases come to final vote at present, they are doomed to rejection. 



(4) As these are the first cases brought forward for action under 

 the Plenary Power, the Appellants were at 'a disadvantge in not 

 having precedents upon which they might judge the policy of the 

 Commission, hence they had no way of knowing how complete or 

 convincing an argument might be necessary to induce the Commis- 

 sion to suspend the Rules. 



(5) By laying these cases on the table, instead of rejecting them, 

 the Commission will not otily establish the precedent that suspension 

 will not be looked upon favorably on basis of incomplete data, but 

 it will escape the possible misinterpretation of doing an injustice to 

 a group of men by rejecting their proposition before they had any 

 way of knowing the policy the Commission would adopt in con- 

 struing its duty under the Plenary Power resolutions. 



(6) Finally, if the cases are tabled instead of being rejected, the 

 Commission can act upon them without further public notice. 



Motion concurred in by 11 Commissioners: Allen, Bather, Blan- 

 chard, Hartert, Hoyle, Jordan (D. S.), Jordan (K.), Monticelli, 

 Skinner, Stejneger, Stiles. 



Not voting, 7 Commissioners : Apstein, Dautzenberg, Handlirsch, 

 Horvath, Kolbe, Roule, Simon. 



The final results are as follows : The cases of Appendicularia 1874, 

 Dolioliim 1834, Fritillaria 1851, and Salpa lyjS, are tabled without 

 prejudice in order to give the Appellants an opportunity to present 

 more satisfactory and convincing evidence in support of their position. 



The case of Pyrosoma is decided in harmony with the Code, and 

 the result is identical with what the Appellants desired to obtain 

 under Suspension. 



