Nomenclature. 
As one of the most important things to know, in a somewhat extensive 
Catalogue, is the nomenclatorial stand-point of the Cataloguer, I deal with 
this at some length. 
It is obvious that simplicity in such a matter is the only hope of 
stability, but unfortunately simplicity is one of the last things considered 
by most authors. The great majority of zoologists is agreed that Priority 
is the only rule that can tend to bring about uniformity of usage in nomen- 
clature 1), but so many exceptions are made, on this score and on that, that 
the original idea is lost in a maze of bewildering details. 
Some of the best-informed Hemipterists, while accepting the principle 
of priority, hesitate to follow it out fully *). For example, Bergroth writes *), 
,Das sogenannte Gesetz der “bons sens’ kommt selten zur Anwendung, lasst 
sich aber wohl nicht ganz umgehen. Kirkaldys Einfiithrung des inveterierten 
Namens Lygaeus Fabr. fiir die Coreiden-Gattung Hoplopterna Stal und die 
daraus als Konsequenz folgende Umiinderung der Familien-Namen Coreidae und 
Lygaeidae in resp. Lygaeidae und Geocoridae dirften wohl niemals allgemein 
akzeptiert werden“. 
But, as Reuter well remarks‘), “there is, however, no doubt that a 
common acceptance of the right generic and specific names is only a que- 
stion of time’. The more entirely mechanical, the operations of nomen- 
clature can be made, “with the elimination of all elements of personal pre- 
ference, etc. (which you will agree with me, are the causes of instability 
and of discord’’°), the more perfect a system we shall have, and consequently 
the greatest degree of common agreement among systematists. 
The following paragraphs express the methods on which the nomen- 
clature of this Catalogue is based, and I believe that they are more free 
from complications and exceptions than any others yet proposed. 
A. Genera and species. 
1. The scientific nomenclature of genera and species is the ’binomial”? 
of Linneus, dating from the publication, in 1751, of his “Philosophia Bota- 
nica“; in this, the rules for that nomenclature were first distinctly formu- 
lated, and they are the foundation of later proposals. Zoological nomen- 
clature is kept distinct from botanical, 
NB. The mononymics of Amyot (1845—47, A. S. E. France) are 
clearly inadmissible either for genera or species, and have no place in a 
binomial system. 
’) This principle has been endorsed as a whole, by the latest Zoological Con- 
gresses and now has no serious opponents. , 
__ 7) “It sometimes happens that an author will, for the sake of peace and 
quietness, abstain from upsetting a recognized system of names, although he knows 
it to be rotten to the core, excusing himself on the trumpery plea that the correct 
ce ae an ses is mes eee that has been most often used for it. or that b 
which it is most common nown.” R. I. Pocock 1891. A. M. N. H. i 
8) 1906 Wien, Ent. Zeit. XXV. 10, ae ee 
‘) 1908 Ent. Mo. Mag. (2) XIX. 23, 
*) Prout 1905. J. N. York E. 8. XIII. 213. 
