GEXEKA. 



more appropriate term has been discovered. This rule, 

 which the most judicious zoologists have uniformly respect- 

 ed, was underrated and violated by several French natura- 

 lists, during the period of the Republic. It was their 

 object, at that time, to make every thing appear to ori- 

 ginate in their own nation. The names both of genera 

 and species were therefore changed, to suit their pur- 

 poses. In Mineralogy, M. HAUY has contrived, by de- 

 grees, to change nearly all the generic names ; and it is still 

 more surprising, that many of these new names are coming 

 into use even in this country. In the writings of LACE- 

 PEDE and LAMARK, such innovations are but too frequent. 

 I would be deficient in candour, however, were I not to 

 state, that M. CUVIER has, with more propriety, in gene- 

 ral, avoided any obvious exhibitions of this national appro- 

 priation. Where useless changes are thus produced in no- 

 menclature, their authors, and their names, should be over- 

 looked. 



It has become customary, of late years, to add, imme- 

 diately after the generic name, the name of the author who 

 lirst established it. This is a very useful plan, as it facili- 

 tates research, and guards against the inconvenience of 

 synonymes. A few naturalists, in addition to the author of 

 the genus, add likewise the names of those who have adopt- 

 ed it, and even enrol their own in the number. Such quo- 

 tations, however, are, to say the least, unnecessary. 



2. Generic Character. As this is intended to distinguish 

 the different groups of a higher division from one another, 

 in the most expeditious manner, the more obvious and es- 

 sential marks only are employed. Where the previous 

 subdivisions have been executed with care, the generic cha- 

 racter may usually be expressed in a very short sentence, 

 not exceeding the Linnaean limits of twelve words. 



