20 MATHEWS— Orn tholmikal Xomendatwe. 



tained until the present dav. Yet, in every decade, some fad- 

 dist has. from ignorance of the history as well as the reason ot 

 the use. railed against the recognition of priority, proclaiming 

 the right of custom; but priority is the custom, and has always 

 been since the days of Linne. When travel and literatuT-e in- 

 creased largely, it became impressed upon all the scientific 

 writers that only absolute acceptance of priority would enable 

 definite recognition of birds throughout the world, and this was 

 continually urged. Just one hundrerl years ago British orni- 

 thologists urged this fact, and as usual opposition came from 

 a small coterie of non-scientific men. who desired to name the 

 bird according to their own ideas of the suitability of the name 

 selected. Thus the Goat-sucker does not merit its name, 

 though custom had so named it. A latin equivalent, Capri- 

 mulfjus. had been used by Linne, and was commonly in use, 

 irresj>octive of its merits, as it was customary. One of the 

 Englishmen, demurring to this name as unmerited, sought to 

 improve it by substituting Xj/rfirhr]idon : this was similarly 

 objected to by another, who proposed Phdlaruirora as more 

 appropriate; while a third recommendF'd Tooifrrafor. This 

 was lending to absolute chaos, so that the leading scientists felt 

 compelled to draw up a scheme of rules to govern zoological 

 nomenclature. It Avill be thus seen that it was through disre- 

 gard of custom, i.e.. priority, that the Nomenclatural Laws be- 

 came a necessity. This brings us down to the year 1S42. from 

 which year we date them, custom previously being the law. 



The Bi-itish Association for the Advancement of Science 

 appoin ♦"(■(! a rommittee to deal with the transgressions of cus- 

 tom and initiate a series of Eules which would be accey>table to 

 working scientists, though faddists might still demur. It 

 should be noted that it was considered necessary for the ad- 

 vancement of science that laws should be made. The secre- 

 tary of the Committee was named Strickland, and from con'es- 

 pondence and conversation with the leading scientists in the 

 world he drew up a set of Rules, and when these were corrected 

 and assented to. they were published, and have provided the 

 basis of all subsequent Rules. A short name was commonly 

 used, though not official, viz. : "The Stricklandian Code." nnd it 

 is possible that some readers may have considered this an arbi- 

 trary effort of an individual instead of an official resume of rbe 

 opinions of the world's scientific leaders. 



It is to be regretted that, with the same perversity that is 

 still seen, certain individuals, jealous at not being consu^red, 

 deliberately attempted to belittle the code and its users. Never- 



