•64 A. E. Yerrlll — Bermudlan and West Indian Reef Corals. 



The diagnoses of the Linnsean species are very poor and imperfect, 

 and have led to much confusion. The longer descriptions of Pallas 

 {1766) are excellent for that period. 



In this article I have treated many of those genera and species 

 that are among the most confused, but have not attempted to discuss 

 all such cases, even among West Indian corals. 



Mr, Vanghan (op. cit,, 1901) has refei-red to the very poor charac- 

 ter of the works of Duchassaing and Michelotti on the West Indian 

 ■corals, which have led to much confusion and have very much 

 retarded the elucidation of the synonymy. My own opinion of 

 their works are entirely harmonious with Mr. Yaughan's, Fortu- 

 nately Mr. Vaughan has been able to study the types of these authors 

 that are in the Museum of Turin, and therefore he has been able to 

 rectify many of their mistakes. In such cases I can but follow his 

 ^determinations of their species, for I have not seen the types, I 

 have, however, formerly studied a collection of corals sent to the 

 Museum of Comparative Zoology by Duchassaing, as examples of 

 their species. But I found that in very many cases the specimens 

 sent did not at all resemble the species described under the same 

 names, and concluded that Mr. Duchassaing himself was unable to 

 identify their species. 



Mr, Vaughan has also recently studied some of the types of 

 Ehrenberg and of Edwards and Haime, and has thus been able to 

 correct several errors. 



That the nomenclature adopted by Dana, Edwards and Haime, and 

 other standard authors is not in accordance with the strict rules of 

 priority in zoological nomenclature, has been well known to me and 

 others for many years.* Personally, however, I should have preferred 

 to have left the current names undisturbed, considering that long 

 usage gives sanction to many slight irregularities of this kind, in the 

 earlier writings, and I have hitherto avoided making many changes 

 in current names for such strictl}" technical reasons. 



* I do not share the opinion expressed by Mr. Vaughan (op. cit., p. 4) that 

 M.-Edw. and Haime were iniiuenced by unworthy motives, or autocratic ideas. 

 Nor would I accuse them of changing names " arbitrarily" or " through ignor- 

 ance.'' They did not hold precisely the same views of the rules of nomenclature 

 that Mr. Vaughan follows, but they were in accord with the best usage of their 

 period and country. Their great works are monuments of long, laborious, and 

 faithful study, continued for over twelve years, and embracing all known corals. 

 That they made a few mistakes is natural. We are all liable to do that. No 

 one is infallible. I find it necessary to change 13 out of the 28 names of corals 

 in Mr. Vaughan's revised list, p. 8. 



