common Crinoul Xames. 41 



many and Jisnstrous whatever other solution we attempt. 

 'IMu'ii, much ns I admire the learned argument and legal skill 

 with which Mr. Sj>riiig<'r invokes the doctrine of prescription, 

 1 consider that there is a danger in the intio<luction of such 

 a principle as lapse of tinie. Who is to decide what period 

 .shall he set? And in such a case as the present it might be 

 urged that the use of Encrinus from Blumenbach to Lamarck 

 ahonld be weighed against the 8ubae(|uent use from the djiys 

 of J. S. Miller. When once rational argument is admitted 

 to such a dispute the controversy may go on for ever. The 

 .sim|)le8t i^olution of the gonlian knot was given once for all 

 by Alexander. Ijct us dare on occasion to be no less 

 arbitrary. But it will never do for each to act according to 

 his own idea of what is " common sense," if ordy because 

 sense in these matters never is common to all. The ordy 

 possible alternative to strict following of rules is that 

 zoologists should agree to accept as final the decision of some 

 authority by them ajipointed. The vehicle for such autiiority 

 already exists in the Nomenclature (Committee of the Inter- 

 national Zoological Congress, the only body that has any 

 claim to represent either all branches of zoology or all 

 nationalities. 



If I may indicate a convenient form of procedure, I would 

 suggest that those zoologists who wish to protect certain names 

 should lay thecom|)lete facts of the case before the (Jommittee, 

 and should accompany their request for the retention of 

 certain definite names in defiance of the Rules by the signa- 

 tures of as many workers on the group affected as they can 

 obtain. Due announcement of the proposed step should bo 

 made in cert:iin widely circulated journals, and a reasonable 

 time should be allowed for the reception of protests. The 

 ('ommittce should ultimately give its decision, and this 

 decision should be published in the aforesaid journals. A 

 summary of the labours of the Co:nraittoe in this direction 

 would of course be given from time to time in the publications 

 of the International Zoological Congress. 



tSome of my zoological colleagues appear to mistrust the 

 Nomenclature Conunittee of the International Congress. 

 Should their opinion bo widely shared, it might prove that 

 zoologists at large would not agree beforehand to submit to 

 the ruling of that Committee. As an alternative body, the 

 International Congress of Academies may be suggested. 

 This at present does not appear to number among its repre- 

 sentatives many zoologists familiar with the problems of 

 nomenclature, but it could no doubt appoint a committee 

 with the necessary qualifications. 



