a V.v. V. V. CamLrldge — A lieoif^ion 



the latter ^vill levcr tako position as iiulicating recognized 

 petieric groups, because the type ppecies Iiave never been 

 ideiitifierl, and ])ni=8ibly never will be; but if they ever should 

 ])e idei t tied and any generic group founded on them, or if 

 lliev be discovered to be congeneric with any grou|) founded 

 under some later name, then they will have to be recognized. 

 ]n any case the nanus themselves are not available for use 

 in any other branch of zoology; and since they are not in- 

 cluded in Scudder's ' Nomenclator Zoologicus,' it is advisable 

 lo publish them. 



Many of Simon's genera, however, will doubtless at some 

 future time take their place in systematic arachnology, for 

 the tendency is always towards increased sulxlivision, as the 

 anal^'sis of characters becomes more minute and their delinea- 

 tion more accurate ; and it is absolutely essential, if we are 

 ever to see an end to the present chaos, that type species 

 should be selected for them by one or other of the jnocesses 

 explained in my recent comnmnications (Ann. & Mag. Nat. 

 Hist. ser. 7, vol. vii., Jan. 1901 ; and op. cit. vol. viii., Nov. 

 1001). 



"With regard to these methods, I must here make one 

 restriction, and that with reference to the removal of a species 

 from a genus by *' imjiUcation " into another genus previously 

 founded. 



As a matter of fact, the action involved would amount to 

 an assumption that the author had no right to ])lace that 

 particular species under his genus on the grounds that it was 

 congeneric with the ty])e of some earlier genus, and had by 

 irnplication already been removed. 



Of course an author has a perfect right to include any 

 species he likes, and must face tiie consequences if the last 

 species left in his group by subsequent witlidrawals turns out 

 to be congeneric with the type of some earlier genu-!, whereby 

 he loses his own name as a synonym. 



The process, moreover, is indirect and leads to great con- 

 fusion, for it may afterwaids be urged that the implication 

 lijpothesized in the removal was erroneous, that the species 

 removed was not congeneric with the earlier genus, and that 

 therefore the selection of the type of the later genus, based 

 on that removal, is not valid. 



By this renewed claim of the .«»pecics in question to enter 

 egain amongst the species whence the type of the later genus 

 can be selected, the equilibrium is upset all along the line, 

 and down come a score, perhaps, of generic ninepins whose 

 stability depended upon the validity of this first step. 



Jt is not pos.-iblc of course to entirely avoid this tragedy of 



