■' Tricliiiiitfriiiiid III ii.-<l mhi.'' 7 



divectiou, that any one niiglit suppose tlie tevminal portion to 

 be an amalgamation of three parts, nor wonkl be convinced of 

 the illusion without a careful examination of tarsi obtained 

 from other sjiecimeiis. ]:>ut be this as it may, it cannot 

 materially attect my expressed opinion of Col. Motscludsky. 

 T never said that he Avas an expert anatomist, though I might 

 have thought that his knowledge of the subject was rpiite 

 e(|ual to that of his contem})oraries. I have said before that 

 I am not ({ualified to express an opinion of Col. Motschulsky's 

 proficiency in other sections of Coleoptera. I have said before, 

 and I say it again, that his knowledge of the Trirli<)pfenj<jia 

 exceeded that of all other Entomologists. 



A little farther on in his K(n-iew, Dr. I )ohi'n remarks that the 

 name " Dnliriiii" given l)y me to the Trii-ji. fiisdiH'.iDiix of Halde- 

 man, cannot stand, T)ecause "liy the author's own o])inion 

 Trlcli. fas(iipe.}(iilt< is a synonym, and as there is no like-named 

 species except the PtHuun fmcipcDite, which dates from 1849, 

 and is thought l)y the author synonymic with Ft. tS/io/rii. Also 

 iVlotschulsky's sj)ecies Armtrirliis hrioiiitpennh, (Amer), Mat- 

 thews remarks "An T. Dohrnii par." The facts which Dr. 

 Dohrn has thus cited appear to me in themselves sufficient to 

 quash the name "fHscipeii.)iis" altogether. It is evident that 

 Professor Fcirster's PtiUniu fiiscipumitt was anterior in date to 

 T. fasclin'iniix of Haldeman, it is also certain that the same 

 name had been a|ii)lied t(j another species by Gillmeister, and 

 recorded in }). 48 of his " 'rrichoptcrygia." if 1 had been able 

 to recognize tiiat s])ecies L must of course have retainetl its name. 

 But though I failed, some other auth(ir may succeed in doing so, 

 and its name may now be restored to the list without creating 

 confusion. 



It apjiears to wvv that the only safe liasis ot iiomtMudature is 

 to adhere closely to this rule, I.e., that when onci' a name has 

 been used to designate a certain insect, the saim; name cannot 

 subse(|uently be applied to any other species of the same section. 

 I say section Ijccausc gcuiei-a are in their very essence changeable 

 terms, whoUy subject to tlir will of each separate author. If 

 therefVn'e a specific name should merely be restricted to a genus 

 and might again l)e repeated in the giims next !ii succession, 

 endless chanyies of nomenclature would ensue, espcciallv in a 



