NO. 8 Ol'IXIONS 124 TO 133 35 



schaft, Frankfurt a.M.; Zoological Museum, Berlin, Germany; Natu- 

 ral History Museum, Vienna; Musee nationale (I'llistoire naturelle, 

 Paris ; Zoological Museum, Copenhagen ; Field Museum, Chicago, 

 U. S. A. ; American Museum of Natural History, New York City, 

 17. S. A. ; and to the United States Geological Survey. 

 The experts consulted have reported as follows : 

 Paul Bartsch of the United States National Museum : 



While I do not favor exceptions to the Law of Priority, this case appears 

 to be one in which abiding by the rules would produce greater confusion than the 

 suspending thereof. I therefore favor Doctor Bather's opinion. 



W. C. Mendenhall, Geological Survey. Washington : 



The proposition now before the International Commission on Zoological 

 Nomenclature to suspend the Law of Priority in the case of two generic names 

 of ammonites, Lytoceras and Ophiceras, has been considered by the paleontolo- 

 gists of the Geological Survey now in Washington who are concerned with 

 zoological names — 



C. Wythe Cooke, George H. Girty. W. C. Mansfield, J. B. Ree- 

 side, Jr., P. \'. Roundy, T. W. Stanton, and L. W. Stephenson state : 



That they concur in the recommendation of Dr. F. A. Bather that the two names 

 Lytoceras Suess and Ophiceras Griesbach should be added to the list of " nomina 

 conservanda " under suspension of the Law of Priority. 



Edwin Kirk joins in this recommendation so far as Lytoceras is concerned 

 but thinks that the retention of Griesbach's Ophiceras would be unfortunate 

 because Suess' prior use of that name has been noted by Marshall in 1873 and 

 by subsequent bibliographers. 



R. Spiirck of the Universitetets Zoologiske Museum, Copenhagen : 



I absolutely recommend the proposition to suspend the Law of Priority in the 

 case of the two above mentioned generic names. I^r. Ravn, Head of the Depart- 

 ment of Paleontology, jcjins the recommendation so far as Lytoceras is concerned, 

 but is of the opinion that the retention of Griesbach's Ophiceras would l)t' 

 unfortunate. 



Rudolf Richter, Senckenhergische Naturforschende Gesellschaft. 

 Frankfurt a.M. : 



Suspension der Regeln .soil eine sehr seltene Ausnahme bleiben, weil die 

 haufigere Anwendung dieses Rechtes zu schlimnien Folgen fiir die Nomenklatur 

 fiihren wiirde. 



Im Falle von Lytoceras Suess und Ophiceras (iriesbach ist aber Siispoisioii 

 (fas all e in Richtige. 



B. B. Woodward, London : 



I am of opinion that Lytoceras sliould be placed with "nomina conservanda", 

 but that Ophiceras Griesbach, 1880, should not be accepted, Suess' earlier name 

 having passed into literature. 



