Miscellaneous. 109 



is, an Echinodcrm, a Hydroid, and a Tunicate. Let us grant that, 

 notwithstanding the existence of the tenth edition, which would 

 indicate that an Echinodcrm at any rate is not the ty[)e of the 

 genus, " tlio evidence as to the original tj'pe of the genus is not 

 perfectly clear and indisputable ; " " then the person," says the B. A. 

 rule, " who first subdivides the genus may affix the original name 

 to any portion of it at his discretion." 



The first writer later than 1707 was Pallas, who writes (1774) 

 (Spie. Zool. s. V. Jfolothurium zonarinm) : — 



"■ llolotliuriorum genus a Linuaeo ultima in editione sj/stemati,^ 

 miro modo compilatum et a natura alienum factum est, (juum tamen 

 iUud in editione decima systematis satis bene iiistitutum videretur. 

 Eoque raagis miror banc III. Viri levitatcm, cum sole meridiano 

 clarior esse debeat, cuivis in studio Molluscorum initiate, affinitas 

 Uolothurii frundosi, Phantapodis, Jlifdme Bohadschii, atque Hoi. 

 jicntactis (Syst. ed. xii. p. 1089. luOo. 1091. sp. 1. 2. 3. 8.) cum 

 AcfiniL^ Erownii, (geuere etiam a Linnaeo adoptato, maximeque 

 naturali) ad quod istas Holothurias Linnaeo nunc dictas plerasque 

 dudum retuli in Miscellaneis Zoologicis. p. 153." 



Holoiliurinm zonarinm is an Ascidian, and some other name 

 must be found for Holothurians. 



liut it will be remembered that Brissou's genera are allowed by 

 the B. A. rules ; was there no contemporary of Linnajus who used 

 Jlolothuria for an Echinoderm ? Yes, there was Bishop Gunnerus 

 (Act. Stockholm, 17G7, p. 115), who discusses the characters of the 

 genus Bolothwia, and is quoted by Linnteus himself. 



Yet again, if we accept the testimony of the Bishop, who wrote 

 in 1767, we must accept that of Pallas, who wrote in 17G(j*, and 

 who fully described and discussed Actinia doliolum. Now this is an 

 Echinoderm, a Holothuroid, a Colochirus. 



.■. Actinia is the correct generic name of a " Holothurian," and 

 not of a Sea-Anemone. 



Here, again, Euclid might be appropriately quoted. 



So that, after all, obedience to the laws of the B. A. leaves us in 

 a worse plight than before. 



It is clear that two courses only are open here : one is to adopt 

 Mr. Pocock's heroic but perfectly safe challenge to the skies, and 

 enforce the changes required by strict adherence to the laws of 

 priority ; and the other is — if I, too, may quote from a Latin writer : 

 '• Spectatum admissi risum teneatis, amiei?" — to avow a dislike to 

 appearing foolish more often than one can help, and retain Holo- 

 tliuria and Actinia for groups to which they have been applied for 

 more than a century. 



To enforce the rule of priority here wotdd be to strain it beyond 

 breaking-point ; where that point comes must. I suppose, be a 

 matter for individual discretion ; but in this case, T believe, zoologists 

 will credit me with showing a little common-sense. 



* Miscell. Zool. p. 152. 



