200 Observations on the 



both, and yet to belong to neither, decides as conspicuously its 

 own station in nature, as if we had it in our power to place it 

 within the confines of one or the other. So far then from the dis- 

 covery of such a group giving us reason to reduce the number of 

 the two conterminous genera, and amalgamate them into one, it 

 rather proves that we have an addition to our original number, and 

 that we possess three genera instead of two. 



To enter into any formal observations in defence of the intro- 

 duction of the numerous new generick terms that must necessarily 

 creep into science by the acknowledgment of new genera, would 

 be an insult to your own enlightened views, and those of your 

 scientifick readers. Names may certainly be unnecessarily multi- 

 plied and applied to groups which have no distinct existence ; errours 

 of various kinds may arise in the progress of science ; genera may 

 be founded on a mistaken fact, or established on an accidental, 

 not a natural or constant, difference. These are but the neces- 

 sary results of our imperfect and near-sighted views. Nay, indis- 

 criminating makers of new genera may arise, who, carrying the 

 practice to the extreme, may bring discredit on the privilege of 

 which they know not how judiciously to avail themselves. But 

 this is the imprudent abuse of a privilege which substantiates 

 nothing against the prudent use of it. You, Gentlemen, and those 

 who think with you, do not require to be reminded, that groups 

 distinctively characterized, and names judiciously and expressively 

 conferred, however they may be augmented, will add to the lumi- 

 nousness, not to the confusion of science. And where is the true 

 lover of nature among us who would not rejoice in the augmenta- 

 tion of new genera and new names even by hundreds, while new 

 species and new forms, as in the last few years, pour in upon us 

 by thousands ? 



It is unfortunate that the cause which I have attempted to ad- 

 vocate in the foregoing desultory observations, is one which has 

 been long since determined by those, who, if we may be allowed 

 to judge from their labours and experience, are the most fitted to 

 lay down the law, and pass judgment, in all such cases. In 

 claiming for the British Zoologist the privilege of following the 

 modern views, and the modern nomenclature, of science, I only 

 ask for permission that he may communicate his discoveries in sen- 



