MATHEWS— OriiitlioUxjirul Nuuteuchdun 



rlic k--s. it uas used by the best workers for many yetirs, but 

 unfortunately many well-situated workers, throujrli careless- 

 ness as much as malice, neglected to conform to the Rules, f)f 

 course, such ill-considered work suited the opponents who jibed 

 at the Rules, and one well-known ornithologist suggested and 

 employed the name which he considered had been used by the 

 mnjority of writers up to his time, in direct contravention to 

 the usage of priority. It is remarkable that none of his selec- 

 tions have been upheld save where priority coincided with his 

 approval. However, the misuse of names, in conjunction with 

 opposition, led to the reconsideration of the Rules, and in every 

 reconsideration priority has been successfully shown to be 

 absolutely necessary. In matters of detail alterations have 

 been made but in the eighty years since the preparation of the 

 Rules there has been no real amendment. The only important 

 one was the recognition of the date of the beginning of binomial 

 nomenclature. In 1842 a majority decided that 1766, the date 

 of Linne's twelfth edition, should be accepted as the starting 

 point, but exceptions were allowed. Consequently, after years 

 of usage, these exceptions were standardized by reversion to 

 17~)'^. thf date of Linne's tenth edition, and the one in which he 

 first and fully introduced the binomial system. The earlier 

 Rules included means of altering names not classically correct, 

 and this has been a source of trouble, many workers desiring 

 to impress tlieir classical knowledge at the expense of ornitho- 

 logy, but now this has practically been abolished. Of course, 

 international jealousy was certain to cause interference, and 

 while accepting the basis of the British Rules, other nations 

 sought to provide improvements. Thus the French Zoologists, 

 arguing thnt a Frenchman had anticipated Linne in introduc- 

 ing the binomial system in botany, and that other specialists 

 had al'^o used more or less binomial names in their works, 

 decided that sur-h workers should be considered. American 

 workers, with no very ancient history to oa]\ tiDon. early de 

 termined upon the necessity of fixing the Stricklandian Code. 

 'Ither countries had also details they desired to Q:et acknow 

 ledced. and consequently as divergence was imminent Inter- 

 national Laws were considered necessary. After discussion, 

 thesp were fashioned, and ai-e now in use. It soon became 

 f»bvious that with the multitude of workers in every land great 

 importance must be given to tho technical nomination of aui 

 ma Is discussed, especially when the anatomy and morpholoiv 

 were considered. .Again anatomists and morphologists were 

 the most ca7-eless workers in coTijunclion with names; thov v.er" 



