NOMENCLATURE OF LEPIDOPTERA. 307 



Analysis of Replies. 



[Heer Snellen stands quite alone in totally rejecting "le systeme des 

 types generiques." He does not admit that one species of a genus can 

 be more typical than another, and says that " un genre doit etre base sur 

 une description suffisante." In the following attempt to analyse and 

 tabulate the replies to Question VII. Heer Snellen is considered to have 

 retired from the discussion and the Committee to consist of 10.] 



1. The type of a genus nmst be a species originally included in it by 

 its founder. 



I Hampson, 2 Walsingham, 3 Meyrick, 4 Kirby, 5 Fernald, 6 Smith, 

 (7 Scudder), 8 Aurivillius, (9 Staudinger), 10 Grote. 



Result ; adopted by all. 



2. The type must conform to the original description of the genus {a 

 species excluded by the description cannot be the type). 



I Hampson, 2 Walsingham, 3 Meyrick, 4 Kirby, 5 Fernald, 6 Smith, 

 {7 Scudder), 8 Aurivillius, (9 Staudinger, by inference), 10 Grote. 



Result — ; adopted by all. 



2. A. Unless dij'ect error of observation can be inferred. 



I Meyrick, 2 Kirby. 



2+8 

 Result -^= — ; probably all would agree. 

 10 



2. B. And to the meaning {if any) of the generic fiame. 

 1 Meyrick, 2 Kirby, 3 Hampson, 4 Walsingham. 



Result i±^. 

 10 



3. That a species included with doubt cannot be the type. 



I Walsingham, 2 Grote, 3 Kirby. 



■^ + 7 

 Result ^ - ' ; probably all would agree. 

 10 



4. That a name included {without the species being known to the 

 founder) cafinot establish any claitn to the recognition of the species as a possible 

 type. 



I Hampson, 2 Walsingham, 3 Smith. 

 Kirby is apparently opposed. 



Result 3-^ ^^ 

 10 



[Some of the members have not expressed their opinions on each of the 



above propositions, but there appears to be no difference of opinion and 



probably all will accept these four rules.] 



20 — 2 



