34 MADREPORARIA. 



close comparison of his specimens with all the kno^^•n representatives of their respective genera 

 to the experts who have made the several genera their special study. He need simply compare 

 them with those described from the same localities as his specimens, and though possessing no 

 previous special knowledge, he will be able to publish records of all specimens not hitherto 

 ■known from the several localities without fear of adding to the present prevailing confusion in 

 the coral system. The modern method which compels such a recorder to give a name to any 

 specimen he describes either as a new species or as one already described, must, in the great 

 majority of cases, add to the vast pile of blind guesses through which we have to dig our way 

 towards true knowledge. It must do so, for, in tlie corals, we rarely possess the data which 

 would justify us in coming to either of those conclusions. 



How great is the need for some method of designation which records only incontrovertible 

 facts, quite apart from purely subjective opinions of the individual worker, may be gathered 

 from tlie following pages. Such names as "peduncitlata," "viridls," "ramosa " and "epithecata " 

 will be found to ha\-e been mere pigeon-holes into which many very different kinds of Goniopo7-a 

 have been hidden away. The older the name and the more difficult it is to ascertain what the 

 original specimen it was intended to denote was like, the more frequently has it been used. 

 See also under "G. Singaijore 3 and S" p. 80, for an example of the result of " founding a new 

 species " l^y a naturalist whose work was far above the average. 



In arranging the larger geographical groups, Polynesian, Australian, etc., I have made no 

 attempt to define the areas. All that is necessary is to be able to record the locality where 

 each specimen is found. As long as this is made clear, the necessary facts will be readily 

 accessible however one changes the areas. One difficulty of defining these regions is due to 

 the fact that they have not been permanent. The distribution of land and water was obviously 

 very different when the Goniopoi'ce, now found fossil far in the inland of India, Persia, Egypt, 

 and elsewhere, were growing on reefs. The regions are, therefore, purely artificial 

 and used partly to lighten the dead weight of the number of descriptions, and partly to facilitate 

 reference. The real difficulty in this geographical designation is in indicating the locality. It 

 is not practical to give the exact details in a designation to be iised for purposes of reference. 

 It is necessary to invent a district name : for example, " Gooiiopora Singapore, 1, 2, 3," etc. 

 designates corals found in the neighbourhood of Singapore ; " Goniopora Paris Basin, 1, '2, 3," 

 etc. designates fossils found within the geological area known as the Paris Basin. Here we liave 

 taken two natural districts of different kinds. In other cases, we have to take political 

 districts: " Gomopora Gironde 1, 2, 3," etc. for fossils found round Bordeaux and so on. All 

 that has been aimed at has been to indicate a district which shall include the exact locality. 

 It may be objected that others may decide upon another district name or may break up the 

 district and thus designate the same specimen by a different geographical name. This 

 would of course make reference somewhat more complicated, but it must be remembered 

 that these designations are not the names of species or really the names of anything. 

 They are indications as to the places where specimens occur, and, vary them as you like, 

 they will always lead you to the same locality. The synonymy, therefore, which may 



