184 THE ENTOMOLOGIST. 



adopted) ; the twelfth edition was inserted by the Manchester Com- 

 mittee in 1842 (vide Sclater, p. 24). ' This was not done as being the 

 first in which the binomial nomenclature had been used, as it com- 

 menced with the tenth ; but as being the last and most complete of 

 Linnaeus's works, and containing many species the tenth did not.' 



" The Committee having admitted that the binomial nomenclature 

 originated with Linnaeus in the tenth edition, 1758, and having laid 

 down the principle of priority from the inception of the binomial nomen- 

 clature, illogically stultify § 1 and § 2 by adopting the twelfth edition, 

 1766-68. In this they cannot be followed ; their action was incon- 

 sistent with the principles they advocated." 



Mr. W. F. Kirby writes :— 



" I hold that the tenth edition of Linnaeus should be accepted, for 

 the following reasons : — 



(a) The binomial nomenclature was fully established in it. 



(b) The binomial nomenclature was accepted and employed by 



many eminent writers between 1758 and 1767. 



(c) The twelfth edition was not a new work, and made no new 



departure. It is only a revised and large edition of the 



tenth. 

 {d) Linnaeus's own species, described in the twelfth edition, cannot 



be properly elucidated without reference to works of his own, 



and of other writers, published between 1758 and 1767. 

 (e) The number of alterations in nomenclature necessitated by 



going back to 1758 will not be so great as to produce 



serious inconvenience." 



Prof. Fernald (U.S. America) writes : — 



" I am positively in favour of regarding the tenth edition of 

 Linnaeus as the basis of zoological nomenclature, for the reason that 

 in this edition of the ' Systema Naturae ' the author has not only given 

 us a distinct idea of the binomial system of nomenclature, but has 

 also consistently used it ; so that, if the latter editions of his work had 

 never appeared, there is no question in my mind but that the system 

 would have been adopted by later writers, just as was done by Scopoli 

 and Artedi. All agree that Linnaeus conceived this binomial idea, and 

 that later writers perceiving its decided advantages adopted it. If it is 

 claimed that it was not presented clearly enough in the tenth edition, 

 and for this reason the twelfth edition should be taken as the starting- 

 point, but that the works of Scopoli and Artedi using this system 

 clearly should be recognised, why then do not those who argue in 

 favour of the twelfth edition propose to have it start from 1763, the 

 date of Scopoli's ' Entomologia Carniolica ' ? " 



Prof. Smith (U.S. America) writes: — 



" Logically the tenth edition of the ' Systema Naturae ' should be 

 taken as the starting-point. In this work the binomial system is con- 

 sistently applied to all classes of organisms, and may be said to have 

 its real beginning. 



"The question is not a new one in the United States, and the 

 almost universal tendency is to make the tenth edition the starting- 



