﻿52 
  Dr. 
  J. 
  Chester 
  Bradley 
  on 
  the 
  Synonymy 
  

  

  The 
  chief 
  points 
  upon 
  which 
  the 
  decisions 
  of 
  this 
  article 
  

   differ 
  from 
  those 
  of 
  Morice 
  and 
  Durrant 
  result 
  from 
  the 
  

   following 
  facts 
  : 
  — 
  

  

  (a) 
  The 
  " 
  Histoire 
  naturelle 
  generale 
  et 
  particuhere 
  des 
  

   Crustaces 
  et 
  des 
  Insectes," 
  par 
  P. 
  A. 
  Latreille, 
  Tome 
  III, 
  

   1802, 
  cannot 
  be 
  accepted 
  as 
  defining 
  the 
  types 
  of 
  genera 
  

   not 
  originating 
  within 
  its 
  pages. 
  After 
  describing 
  each 
  

   genus 
  it 
  cites 
  an 
  " 
  Exemple," 
  more 
  rarely 
  " 
  Exemples." 
  

   But 
  there 
  is 
  no 
  evidence 
  that 
  Latreille 
  intended 
  these 
  

   " 
  exemples 
  " 
  to 
  be 
  in 
  any 
  sense 
  types. 
  The 
  International 
  

   Code, 
  Art. 
  30, 
  paragraph 
  [g], 
  says 
  : 
  " 
  The 
  meaning 
  of 
  the 
  

   expression 
  ' 
  select 
  a 
  type 
  ' 
  is 
  to 
  be 
  rigidly 
  construed. 
  

   Mention 
  of 
  a 
  species 
  as 
  an 
  illustration 
  or 
  example 
  of 
  a 
  

   genus 
  does 
  not 
  constitute 
  selection 
  of 
  a 
  type." 
  

  

  (6) 
  Concerning 
  Lamarck, 
  1801, 
  there 
  is 
  room 
  for 
  doubt. 
  

   At 
  first 
  sight 
  the 
  case 
  would 
  seem 
  to 
  be 
  identical 
  with 
  the 
  

   one 
  just 
  discussed, 
  Latreille 
  1802. 
  But 
  Lamarck 
  (1801 
  : 
  

   viii) 
  explains 
  his 
  intentions 
  as 
  follows 
  : 
  " 
  Pour 
  faire 
  con- 
  

   naitre 
  d'une 
  maniere 
  certaine 
  les 
  generes 
  dont 
  je 
  donne 
  

   ici 
  les 
  caracteres, 
  j'ai 
  cite 
  sous 
  chacun 
  d'eux 
  une 
  espece 
  

   connue, 
  ou 
  tres-rarement 
  plusieurs, 
  et 
  j'y 
  ai 
  joint 
  quelques 
  

   synonymes 
  que 
  je 
  puis 
  certifier; 
  cela 
  suffit 
  pour 
  me 
  faire 
  

   entendre." 
  

  

  It 
  is 
  difficult 
  to 
  decide 
  whether 
  Lamarck's 
  intentions 
  are 
  

   thereby 
  sufficiently 
  clearly 
  shown 
  to 
  have 
  been 
  equivalent 
  

   to 
  our 
  idea 
  of 
  type 
  fixation, 
  as 
  to 
  permit 
  us 
  to 
  " 
  ligidly 
  

   construe 
  " 
  his 
  actions 
  as 
  selecting 
  types 
  in 
  the 
  sense 
  of 
  

   the 
  Code. 
  My 
  own 
  opinion 
  is 
  that 
  we 
  cannot 
  accept 
  his 
  

   species 
  mentioned 
  as 
  types. 
  It 
  is 
  my 
  intention 
  to 
  refer 
  the 
  

   question 
  to 
  the 
  International 
  Commission 
  on 
  Zoological 
  

   Nomenclature 
  for 
  decision. 
  

  

  (c) 
  Blumenbach, 
  1788, 
  can 
  by 
  no 
  means 
  be 
  accepted 
  as 
  

   designating 
  genotypes. 
  The 
  case 
  is 
  exactly 
  similar 
  with 
  

   Latreille, 
  1802. 
  

  

  {d) 
  The 
  genera 
  of 
  Latreille 
  (1796), 
  pubhshed 
  without 
  

   mention 
  of 
  included 
  species, 
  but 
  accompanied 
  by 
  a 
  suffi- 
  

   cient 
  diagnosis, 
  are 
  vahd, 
  and 
  date 
  from 
  1796.* 
  The 
  species 
  

   first 
  subsequently 
  mentioned 
  as 
  belonging 
  to 
  the 
  genus, 
  and 
  

   coming 
  under 
  the 
  generic 
  definition, 
  are 
  available 
  for 
  

   selection 
  of 
  the 
  type, 
  and 
  only 
  those. 
  

  

  (e) 
  The 
  elimination 
  method 
  of 
  type 
  selection, 
  used 
  to 
  a 
  

  

  * 
  This 
  fact 
  is 
  established 
  by 
  Opinion 
  46 
  of 
  the 
  International 
  

   Commission 
  on 
  Zoological 
  Nomenclature. 
  See 
  also 
  the 
  discussion 
  

   under 
  the 
  family 
  Thyreopidae, 
  seq. 
  

  

  