( xlviii ) 



to labelling one specimen out of tiie fifty as my type. As a 

 rule a species cannot be adequately described from one speci- 

 men^ but it can be from fifty specimens. What an absurdity 

 it would be therefore if an author described a new species 

 from fifty specimens with which he was well acquainted, but 

 that it happened that one out of the fifty could subsequently 

 be differentiated from the other forty-nine, while his type 

 label happened to be attached to that other unfortunate 

 specimen. 



I know also that great value is often associated with original 

 types because they may be the only clue to what their describer 

 had before him, and I well remember in my early days looking 

 with surprise at the late E. W. Jan son when he remarked to 

 me that the oi'iginal type of a species badly described was 

 worth more money than the type of a species well described, 

 because the latter could be easily identified from its descrip- 

 tion, while the former could not be identified except by a 

 reference to the original type specimen. If this were correct, 

 Gentlemen, what is the use of descriptions 1 Are they not all 

 waste of time and printing 1 If, however, the description 

 exists on its own merits the type may disappear. Let me try 

 to put my contention more concisely. Man is supposed to 

 have begun business by barter, i.e. he exchanged some of his 

 possessions which he could spare for some of the possessions 

 of another man which he wanted, just as one of us may 

 exchange his own duplicates for the duplicates belonging to 

 another person, whereby a mutual advantage is secured. Of 

 course certain possessions were of more value than others, such 

 as it might take six oxen to exchange for one woman — if she 

 were a good-looking specimen in perfect condition, or say three 

 oxen if she were an old and battered specimen — so certain 

 Entomological duplicates are worth more than others. But just 

 as civilisation progressed, a money value attached itself to all 

 articles, so that interchange was always effected by some form 

 of money, which became the universal medium in place of 

 bartering ; so I consider that the civilised method of dealing 

 with Katural History specimens is through the descriptions, 

 w^hich like the British sovereign, have a recognised value in 

 all parts of the world. To carry the simile somewhat farther, 



