473 



Ogneff, S. J., Materialien zur Histologie des Bid der sehen Organs der Kröten. 

 Arch. f. mikr. Anat. Bd. 71. 1907. — ■ Dortselbst weitere Literatur, beson- 

 ders Cerruti. 



Steinach. E., Untersuchungen zur vergleichenden Physiologie der männlichen 

 Geschlechtsorgane. I.— III. Mitteil. Pflügers Archiv. LVI. 1894. 



, Geschlechtstrieb und echt sekundäre Geschlechtsmerkmale als Folge der inner- 



secretorischen Funktion der Keimdrüsen. Centralbl. f. Phys. Bd. 24. 1910. 



II. Mitteilungen aus Museen, Instituten usw. 



1. Report of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature. 



ByDr. C. W. Stiles. 

 (Schluß.) 



90 i In accordance with this By-Law, the Commission herewith reports 

 upon the following amendments with the recommendation that they be in- 

 serted in their proper place in the Règles. 



91 Ì a. Suggested amendment no. 9, submitted by the First Inter- 

 national Entomological Congress has been modified slightly by the Com- 

 mission, and is reported in the following form as a Hecommendation. 



'It is recommended that in published descriptions of new species or 

 new subspecies, only one specimen be designated and labeled as type, 

 the other specimens examined by the author at the same time being para- 

 types'. 



92) b. Suggested amendment no. 13, submitted by J. A. Allen and 

 T.D. A. Cockerell. — After considerable discussion, the Commission voted 

 that the first portion of the proposed amendment (concerning (Javia, Fre- 

 gata , and Piccoides) and the first portion of the second paragraph (con- 

 cerning Plautus] are already covered by the Règles as interpreted by 

 Opinion 46. 



93) The idea also obtains for at least a portion of suggested amendment 

 no. 1, that the points in question are provided for in the Code, and a formal 

 Opinion to this effect is now contemplated. 



94 The Law of Priority. — The Law of Priority has been affirmed 

 by a number of Zoological Codes , and has been formally affirmed twice 

 (1892, and 1901) by the International Congress of Zoology. The original 

 Code of 1889 and 1892 permitted certain exceptions to this law. Contrary 

 to the very earnest appeals of the President and the Secretary of the Com- 

 mission, the Section on Nomenclature in the Berlin Congress adopted the 

 view that these exceptions should be eliminated and in said section the view 

 obtained that the Law of Priority should be rigidly enforced without any 

 exceptions of any kind in any group. When the matter came to 

 argument in the Commission, the president and the secretary after a long 

 discussion and with many misgivings , finally, for the sake of harmony, 

 accepted the will of the majority, but this was not until after they had re- 

 ceived positive assurance from prominent members of the Congress that the 

 Commission would be supported in its attempt to carry out the amended 

 law, for which, in the minds of the President and the Secretary, the zoolo- 



