1 849.] NOMENCLATURE. 369 



The lowest class would contain the worst examples of the 

 kind, and their authors would thus be exposed to the obloquy 

 which they deserve, and be gibbeted in terrorem for the 

 edification of those who may come after. 



I have thus candidly stated my views (I hope intelligibly) 

 of what seems best to be done in the present transitional and 

 dangerous state of systematic zoology. Innumerable la- 

 bourers, many of them crotchety and half-educated, are 

 rushing into the field, and it depends, I think, on the present 

 generation whether the science is to descend to posterity a 

 chaotic mass, or possessed of some traces of law and organisa- 

 tion. If we could only get a congress of deputies from the 

 chief scientific bodies of Europe and America, something 

 might be done, but, as the case stands, I confess I do not 

 clearly see my way, beyond humbly endeavouring to reform 

 Number One. 



Yours ever, 



H. E. STRICKLAND. 



C. Darwin to Hugh Strickland. 



Down, Sunday [Feb. 4th, 1849]. 



MY DEAR STRICKLAND, I am, in truth, greatly obliged to 

 you for your long, most interesting, and clear letter, and the 

 Report. I will consider your arguments, which are of the 

 greatest weight, but I confess I cannot yet bring myself to 

 reject very well-known names, not in one country, but over the 

 world, for obscure ones, simply on the ground that I do not 

 believe I should be followed. Pray believe that I should 

 break the law of priority only in rare cases ; will you read the 

 enclosed (and return it), and tell me whether it does not 

 stagger you? (N.B. I promise that I will not give you any 

 more trouble.) I want simple answers, and not for you to 

 waste your time in reasons ; I am curious for your answer in 

 regard to Balanus. I put the case of Otion, &c., to W. 



