PRINCIPLES, CANONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS. 33 



observed, especially by botanists, between the citation of the authority for 

 the names of genera, and that belonging to specific names. In the early 

 part of the eighteenth century a few botanists, among whom Tournefort 

 (Rei Herbar., 1749) may be especially mentioned, had progressed so far as 

 to recognize and name, under the title of genera, groups answering essentially 

 to the modern idea of genera. Linnaeus himself adopted a number of these, 

 using the names of Tournefort and others as authorities after the generic 

 name adopted by himself. In this the great Swede has been almost unani- 

 mously followed by botanists, though such names take date only from the 

 time of their adoption by Linnaeus ; very few authors, Bentham being the 

 most prominent of them, having refused to cite any one excepting Linnaeus 

 as the authority for such genera. 



Whether the course of the majority be considered judicious or not, it is 

 now the accepted usage in Botany. As regards names in general, botanists 

 appear to agree in adopting the date of the Linnaean ' Species Plantarum/ 

 1753, as the epoch from which their nomenclature must begin. This work 

 contains the first instance of the consistent use of the nojnen triviale, subse- 

 quent to the proposition of the rules in the ' Philosophia Botanica,' to which 

 modern nomenclature is due. 



Binomial designations cannot, of course, be reasonably claimed to antedate 

 the period when binomial nomenclature, in a scientific sense, was invented; 

 and, in spite of the solitary instance of 1745, no good reason appears for ex- 

 tending the range of scientific nomenclature to an earlier date than 1751. 



(The above is quoted in substance from Dall.) 



We have next to consider the action of the Manchester Committee of the 

 British Association in 1842. The wording of the original B. A. Code is as 

 follows : 



" As our subject matter is strictly confined to the binomial system of no- 

 menclature, or that which indicates species by means of two Latin words, the 

 one generic, the other spec'fic, and as this invaluable method originated 

 solely with Linnaeus, it is clear that, as far as species are concerned, we 

 ought not to attempt to carry back the principle of priority beyond the date 

 of the 1 2th edition of the ' Systema Naturae.' Previous to that period, 

 naturalists were wont to indicate species not by a name comprised in one 

 word, but by a definition which occupied a sentence, the extreme verbosity 

 of which method was productive of great inconvenience. It is true that one 

 word sometimes sufficed for the definition of a species, but these rare cases 

 were only binomial by accident and not by principle, and ought not there- 

 fore in any instance to supersede the binomial designations imposed by 

 Linnaeus. 



"The same reasons apply also to generic names. Linnaeus was the first 

 to attach a definite value to genera, and to give them a systematic character 

 by means of exact definitions; and therefore although the names used by 

 previous authors may often be applied with propriety to modern genera, yet 



3 



