not have been established, but, nevertheless, there were many features 

 that could have been adopted. He often reminded us in his lectures 

 that species of a genus varied but little in size, that is you could not 

 have under the same generic term one species the size of a mouse and 

 another the size of a bear. With families no great departure in size 

 would be shown, yet W. G. Binney, in commenting on my discovery 

 that Helix minutissima, the smallest land shell in the world, had a 

 mandible composed of sixteen separate plates and understanding that 

 the jaw of Orthaliscus undatus was composed of separate plates would 

 include both species in the same family! — one a turreted shell from 

 45 to 50 mm. in height, the other a discoidal Helix less than one half 

 a mm. in height; or including under the same generic name Helix 

 alternata, 20 mm. in diameter and Helix asteriscus, 2 mm. in diameter. 



The rational binomial terms of Linneaus that have endured 

 for over a century have now been encumbered by inserting the names 

 of varieties into the major names of the species, such as Pyramidula 

 cronkhitei catskillensis or Modiolus (Brachydontes) demissus plicatulus! 



The bitterness which many students feel against the work of 

 systematists in flooding nomenclature with a mass of generic names is 

 little understood by those who defend the practice. Professor J. S. 

 KiNGSLEY, of the University of Illinois, writes me; "I have read with 

 the greatest interest your remarks upon the vagaries of nomenclature 

 and say Amen to all of them. This constant changing of names is 

 anathema to me, and I refuse to allow the ' latest ' name in many cases 

 to appear in the Journal of Morphology. I loathe Amhly stoma, I 

 spurn Amiatus and I adhere to Acanthias, Natica is good enough for 

 me, I still talk occasionally of Amoeba, of Limulus and of Crangdon. 

 But you and I are old fashioned and we do not appreciate the great 

 advance in science which results in re-naming something already 

 well named!" 



Professor Harold S. Colton, of the University of Pennsylvania, 

 in a letter to me says: "My sympathies are with you on the matter 

 of the names of animals. I wonder if I ever sent you my tirade against 

 systematists of a few years ago in ' 'Science . ' ' The names of animals now 



28 



