PROCEEDINGS OF THE MALACOLOGICAL SOCIEXr. 131 



gradually made more and more definite by appeal, not only to shell- 

 characters, but to embryology and anatomy. 



M. Dautzenberg added : " Species alone are clearly defined entities ; 

 genera, on the contrary, ought to be considered, at least at present, as 

 unstable, and only more or less ingenious attempts in the formation of 

 groups. If Hervier had known of the existence of Fleurotoma {Drillid) 

 suavis. Smith, he would have taken care not to give the same name to 

 another species of the same group. Hervier, however, committed an 

 error which had to be rectified, and the introduction into the genus 

 Drillia of Fleurotoma suavis, Smith, should naturally result in the 

 disappearance of suavis, Hervier. Mr. Hedley was wrong in replacing 

 suavis. Smith, by prosuavis, Hedley. 



"The case before us is relatively harmless — a name has uninten- 

 tionally been employed twice, and calls for only a single rectification, — 

 but a much more serious state of things is produced by the intentional 

 use of the same name for species in allied genera. This is to be noticed 

 most fi'equently among the Helicoids, owing doubtless to the difiiculty 

 of finding new specific names in this group. But the genera of 

 Helicoids are probably far from stable, and I am convinced that certain 

 of them are superfluous, and that species with the same name will have 

 to be transferred from one genus to another, when they are more 

 completely studied, anatomically and conchologically. Under these 

 circumstances, authors who give the same name to different species 

 seem to be doing harm, for if the alterations which I foresee are 

 realised, disturbances of nomenclature will result — serious in pro- 

 portion to the number of duplicate specific names." 



The contrary opinion (viz. that the species in genus B retains its 

 name) was held by Colonel Beddome, G. K. Gude, C. Davies Sherborn, 

 and Lieut. -Colonel "Wilmer, the reason being assigned that the specific 

 name of longest standing in genus B has the priority. 



The meeting then unanimously passed a resolution that in their 

 opinion the specific name orginally given in genus A stands.^ 



II. — A form is described as a variety of one species, and subsequently 



is described as a new species, with a new name. Which name 



stands ? 



After the President had explained the actual case (Pilsbry, Manual 



of Conchology, Monograph of Anoma) by which the question was 



called forth. Dr. Blanford, in opening the discussion, pointed out 



that this was a much more complicated question than the first, and 



that the answer depended apparently to a great extent upon what 



is actually meant by a variety. In the case of mere variations, such, 



for instance, as those of garden plants, depending upon differences 



Since the discussion a letter has heeu received by the President from Mr. Hedley, 

 in which he expresses the view that a specific name should be regarded only from 

 its date of insertion in a genus, and that the name longest in the genus has, 

 therefore, priority. He points out that the contrary view might lead to much 

 contusion, as it might involve a change of name in the case of the type of a genus, 

 should a second species of similar name be subsequently transferred to that genus. 



