1007.1 NATURAL SCIENCES OF rillLADELrillA. 363 



ON THE SYNONYMIC HISTORY OF THE GENERA CLAVA MARTYN, AND 

 CERITHIUM BRUGUIiiRE. 



15Y WILLIAM HEALEV DALL. 



The syiioiiyinic history of these genera is quite complicated, espe- 

 cially if one takes into consideration the minor subdivisions. 



Most writers have hesitated to undertake revision of the Cerithiacea 

 on account of the difficulties involved. During recent years the suljject 

 has been recalled to attention bj^ the elucidation of the true dates of the 

 volumes of Martvn's Universal Conchologist and by the publication of 

 Part VII of yi. Cossmann's Essais de PaleoconcJwlogic Comparee, which 

 included a review of the Cerithiacea. 



The conclusions in regard to the validity of certain generic names 

 established by Martyn, which resulted from my determination as to 

 their correct date, has been dissented from by M. Cossmann in his Essai^ 

 and he s\ipports his arguments by statements of fact which, if uncon- 

 troverted. would establish his case. 



The difference is. in the main, caused by a different viewpoint as to 

 the reformation of nomenclature, his argimients for which are supported 

 b}' inaccurate citations. 



In 1830 systematists considered it entirely proper to "ignore" little 

 known names; to alter names which did not suit the Latinity or the 

 taste of the person writing; to neglect more or less completely the early 

 history of names; and to cite prelinnean and polynomial writers for 

 systematic synonymy. These ideas, as we all know, were but slowly 

 modified, since they ai)pealed to the common preference for what is 

 familiar, as well as to the indolence and carelessness of the hasty or 

 amateur writer. As all know who have had occasion to use his ver}' use- 

 ful summaries, .M. Cossmaim has not, so far, entirely freed himself from 

 these prepossessions, and has even on more than one occasion intimated 

 that the acceptance of one or the other name of two in conflict should 

 depend on the eminence of the author originating the name, rather than 

 on the priority of publication ; while his indignation at the resurrection 

 of "obscure" names seems both sincere and profound. 



One cannot but feel some sympathy with the regret that familiar 

 (if erroneous) names nuist be eliminated from general use. 

 • For some years I urged the maintenance of the first British Associa- 



