( 454 ) 



cerning the " Oken " names, which I have declined to recognise, but some of which 

 appear in the American Ornithological Union's Cheek-List. 



Opinion 10 contains a certain reference which indicates that the Commission 

 will advise their recognition: viz., "Plesiops Oken's Isis 1817 [p. 1183] is clearly 

 a quoted name taken from Plesiops Cuvier. Its status remains the same as in 

 Cuvier 1817, but no question can now arise as to its not being in Latin form." 



This follows the clause: "Accordingly, while Plesiops, despite the French 

 accent, might be interpreted as published as a Latin generic name." Note that 

 Cuvier wrote " Les Plesiops." This sentence implies that if any one were to accept 

 Cuvier's French names they might be sanctioned, 1 have never heard any indi- 

 vidual dare to suggest such a thing, yet the Commission gravely publish this 

 statement and write of "Plesiops 1817," but do not state whether they are using 

 Cuvier's French name or Oken's latinised form. But they conclude : " No question 

 can now arise as to its not being in Latin form." 



"What an extraordinary conclusion ! Now let us have some facts regarding the 

 very points at issue between the A.O.U. and myself. 



Cuvier, in the R'gxe Animal, vol. i. 1810 divided the Ducks as follows: 



Le grand genre des Canards {Anas, Lin.), p. 528, and indicated as sections : 

 p. 528: Les Cygues {Cygnus, Meyer). 



de Sarcelles. 



I cannot conceive any one venturing to propose the recognition of any of the 

 preceding French names, yet they are on exactly the same parallel as the name 

 which the Commission discussed. Now Oken issued a List {Isis, 1817, p. 1 183), and 

 therein is given the following : 



Anas ; Querquedula ; Anas, Tadorna, tSonchet, Marila, Eider, Clangula 

 Macreuse, Bernicla, Anser, Cygnus. 



Now do we conclude, as the Commission have asked us to, that there can be no 

 question regarding Souchet, Eider, and Macreuse being pure Latin ? 



This is the direct consequence of Opinion 19, and here is where the American 

 Ornithologists' Union have differed from myself. They have accepted the other 

 names in the above Oken List but ignored the three I have here named. I have 

 argued that either all or none should be recognised, and therefore, denying that 

 Souchet, Eider, in- Macreuse are Latin, have rejected all. 



Now which is right? Shall we have another opinion of a partim character, 



