180 Canon A. M. Norman on 



" misapprehension." But granted, for the sake of argument, 

 that his suggestion is true, he must see that lie has put the 

 strongest possible argument into my hands for the retention of 

 the rule as it stands. Here is a rule-of-three sum : If he 

 would supersede the use of twelve out of eighty names of 

 genera because the names, though not in use, had been 

 employed at an earlier date, what slaughter Avould he make 

 among the, say, tifty thousand generic names contained in 

 "Scudder"? 



The laws of priority were drawn up that justice might be 

 done to the earlier author, but were never intended to be 

 applied for the purpose of upsetting groups of genera which, 

 having the sanction of ninety years' usage, have been 

 em])loyed, and can still be employed, without injustice to any 

 one. " Possession is nine points of the law," and the undis- 

 puted retenlion of property for twenty years constitutes a right 

 of possession *. 1 would call attention to the " common 

 sense " contained in the suggestive note in this month's 

 (July) ' Annals ' by Prof. Jeffrey Bell, " A Test Case for the 

 Law of Priority." The overstrained pressure of every law 

 becomes its abuse — " Summum jus summa injuria." 



Comaster and Comatulidce. 



I must add a few words in reply to Mr. F. A. Bather's 

 observations (' Annals,' vol. vii. p. 464) on my notes on Cri- 

 iioidea. 



Mr. Bather calls attention to the fact that the name I pro- 

 posed for a genus to contain the doubtful Comatida multi- 

 ra(7/o<rt of Goldfuss, ^^ Gohlfussia,^^ is preoccupied. Though 

 not in the ' Komenclators,' I find this is the case ; but neither 

 Goldfiissia of Castelnau or of myself are likely to stand. I 

 only gave a name to take away the ojiportunity of any one 

 saying that ^^ Comaster is in use for something else," however 

 wrongly so in use. 



I shall reply to Mr. Bather so briefly that it will be neces- 

 sary to refer to what has been in ni}' and his notes written on 

 the subject to understand my meaning. 



Mr. Bather writes : — " (1) The priority of the name 

 Comaster to Actinometra is no new discovery j but (2) the 



* This day's 'Times' (July 10) contains a curious case of one Joseph 

 Jacobs, Avho.'^e cocks and hens cannot, by all (he authority of the London 

 County Council, be turned oU'tlie " now greatly improved* and beautlHed ' 

 Plumpstead Common, because it was proved (hat these cocks and hens 

 and their papas and nuunmas had taken their exercise (here for the last 

 tifty years. 



