112 NEWTON: NOTE ON NOMENCLATURE. 



September, 1851, upon Hydroids {*Antennaria {sic) indivisa and 

 Tubularia tricoides) growing on the submerged guns of the frigate 

 " Republicain," "qui, en sortant de la rade de Brest pour combattre 

 les Anglais, se perdit, le 25 decembre 1794, sur la roche Maingant." 



NOTE ON NOMENCLATURE. 



By R. BULLEN NEWTON, F.G.S., 



London. 



Ax alteration in zoological nomenclature, when not supported by 

 unimpeachable evidence, is surely open to severe criticism. The 

 law of priority has been recently set aside in a paper published in 

 the Proceedings of the Zoological Society, London, October 1st, 1892, 

 entitled "On the Mode of Growth, and the Structure of the Shell 

 in Velates conoideus, Lamk." The name of the shell, hitherto so 

 familiar to all students of the Paris Basin Eocene Mollusca as 

 Velates [A r erita] schmidelianus, has been changed, on the supposition 

 that the binominal system was not adopted by Chemnitz when, in 

 1786, he founded this species, in his famous work known as the 

 " Conchylien-CabinetP We are at a loss to comprehend how the 

 author of this paper could have come to so erroneous a conclusion 

 except by mistaking the value of Chemnitz's original description, 

 which is headed with "Nerita schmideliana sinistrorsa, fossilis." 

 Now the words ''sinistrorsa fossilis" indicate the group to which the 

 shell belongs, as it must be remembered that certain forms are being 

 described which come under the division called "Cochlae petrificatae 

 sinistrorsae." and, so far as the meaning is concerned, their position 

 in the sentence is immaterial, for we find that on p. 24 of the 

 "Register" to this volume (ix., parti., pp. 24, 130), they are trans- 

 posed, "sinistrorsa" standing last. Referring to the text itself, we 

 find that Chemnitz uses some complimentary phrases in honour of 

 his friend " Herrn. D. Schmidel," after whom he states, "... 

 tyabe id) fie Neritam Schmidelianam annutnt." We need not dwell 

 further on extracts, for this one is sufficient to prove that the names 

 employed there, and actually printed in Roman type to emphasize 

 their value, are in perfect harmony with all our modern notions of 

 binomial nomenclature. 



Whilst congratulating the author on his carefully prepared paper, 

 we must warn him against violating in future so important a maxim 

 as the law of priority. 



By this name seems to be meant the Antennularia indivisa of Lamarck, which is the 

 Antenmdaria aiitcunina of modern zoology ; Tubularia tricoides is a name unknown to me. 



