I912.-J 227 



For example, is not Walker's generic name Datana as easily 

 recalled to memory as Phthorhnaea Meyrick, Aproaerema Durrant, 

 Mnesiclmra Wlsm., or Gnorimoschema Busck, all very finely con- 

 structed names, each with its more or less far-fetched significance, the 

 derivation of which, however, is not normally recalled, while we 

 struggle with their spelling and pronunciation ? Even worse than 

 these are the various actual misnomers. Will Mr. Meyrick maintain 

 that it is a help to his memory to have a species called crataegana 

 Hiibner, when it feeds on sycamore and willow but not on Crataegus ? 

 Or another, crataegella Hiibner, when it feeds on mosses? Or still 

 another, americana Linn., the home of which is the Mediterranean 

 region, and which is not found in America ? Or does he propose to 

 substitute " possible " names for these also ? 



No, the real objection to Mr. Kearfott's names is not their 

 " unmeaning gibberish," to use Mr. Meyrick's expression, but their 

 inane sameness, their stupid lack of distinctiveness ; any one of them 

 would have been acceptable, even if not commendable, but the deluge 

 of them is beyond excuse, and if Mr. Meyrick had contented himself 

 with his severe arraignment of the nuisance produced by Mr. Kearfott, 

 the writer would heartily join his English friends and peers. 



But it would appear, that with all the excuse which unusual 

 provocation afi^ords and with the best of intentions, Mr. Meyrick has 

 gone one deplorable step too far and made a bad mess worse, in 

 proposing new names for Mr. Kearfott's species. 



Even supposing that we could adopt his new names, it would 

 merely mean additional work ; we should have to look up this new 

 reference and find out which of Mr. Meyrick's names applied to a 

 certain one of Kearfott's, and then after all have to go back and refer 

 to Kearfott's name in order to find the description of the species. 



However, I doubt that any systematist seriously intends to break 

 the one saving riile of priority in order to adopt Mr. Meyrick's 

 classical, but under the circumstances, equally " impossible " names ; 

 these will thus merely augment the synonomy, and while a good 

 synonym, referring to a separate description, is rather a help than 

 otherwise, a mere synonym, without any description, which adds 

 nothing whatever to our knowledge, such as those in Mr. Meyrick's 

 list of names, is a burden adding to the labor of future workers. 

 This is all the more true, because some of Mr. Kearfott's species 

 already are synonyms of earlier described species, while others have 

 been redescribed and thus already possess synonyms. 



Washington, D. C. : 



July 25th, 1912. 



9 2 



