NOMENCLATURE OF LEPIDOPTERA. 315 



These were indisputably intended by Linne as names of groups, 

 not as the names for ' genera.' But there were no generic titles at 

 the time out of which the}- could be formed, and they must fall 

 away. The idea of associating a particular species as 'type' of 

 a genus is comparative!}- modern, arising out of necessity." 



[Vide Grote 95. Durrani ?\ 



84. Hampson (Sir G. R), (2). 27 May 1897. 

 [Vide Hampson 74. DurrantP^ 



" I most strongly adhere to my opinions on the subject of the 

 tN'pes of genera given above ; i.e. that the first species in the list 

 that thoroughly answers the generic description shall be considered 

 the type, except that I accept Mr Mej-rick's restriction* that the 

 meaning of the generic name should be taken into consideration as 

 helping one to arrive at the meaning of the original author, thus : 

 no species could be the type of Tortrix that had not the appro- 

 priate larval habits, or of Xanthia that was not yellowish in 

 colour, etc." 



[* Reply 76/'. DiirrafitJ] 



85. Walsingham (Lord). 10 June 1897. 

 [Vide Walsingham 75. Dnrra/ifJ\ 



"\ accept Mr Meyrick's addition* that the type must conform 

 to the meaning of the generic name (if an}')." 



[* Reply 76 l>. Di/rrci?it.'\ 



86. Walsingham (Lord). lo June 1897. 

 [Vide Snellen 80. Durrani?^ 



"Heer Snellen stands quite alone in totally rejecting ie 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.' If zoologists were 

 infallible everyone could accept the proposition, but in practice we 

 find the reverse to be the case — the pure isotypical genus is the 

 exception not the rule, and how is it possible to purif}^ and establish 

 a heterotypical genus without (consciously or unconsciously) typi- 

 fying one section and weeding out the species differing in structure 

 from what we assume from the description and other evidence 

 (if any) to be the original conception before extraneous matter was 

 added. This process has been in operation ever since the time of 

 Linnaeus, and Heer Snellen has himself given his adhesion to the 

 system by using in his Vlind. Ned. many genera as restricted by 

 succeeding authors, e.g. ' Talaeporia Hiibn., Zell.' ' Tinea, L.' as 

 restricted by Zeller, &c. &c. It appears to me that Heer Snellen 



