136 SCIENCE SKETCHES, 



The ''Code" maybe considered first in its adap- 

 tation to the needs of ornithologists. In this re- 

 spect there is Httle to criticise. The fact that the 

 ornithologists have been able to agree upon it, and 

 that they have applied it in detail to the produc- 

 tion of a check-list, would show that for their use 

 the rules are good and sufficient There are in 

 the "Code" some traces of compromise, — cases 

 in which the sharpness of a positive ruling is 

 somewhat blunted by exceptions. Some of these 

 doubtless arise from difference of opinion among 

 the ornithologists, and others, perhaps, from pe- 

 culiarities in the literature of ornithology. But 

 whether these modifications be unavoidable or not, 

 it must be remembered that no compromise can 

 be binding on future authors, and exceptions not 

 necessary in the nature of the case will be ignored. 



A serious difficulty with all preceding codes of 

 nomenclature has been the lack of explicitness in 

 dealing with details. It has been hoped by zoolo- 

 gists generally that in this " Code " all the more 

 important difficulties would be fairly met and dis- 

 posed of in ways which could be followed in other 

 sciences. In other words, we have hoped that this 

 ** Code " would be one for zoologists and botanists 

 generally, and not solely for ornithologists. That 

 such a hope was in the minds of the Committee 

 also, is evident from the care with which they have 

 considered and worked over all previous codes, as 

 well as from their own explicit statement (page 

 11): ''These rules were considered in their bearing 

 upon zoology at large, as well as upon ornithology 

 alone; it being obvious that sound principles of 



