328 Messrs. Duncan and Sladen's Ohjections to the 



the author's remarks upon the genus it is evident that, although 

 Eolampas covered the same ground, he was not aware of it. 



In 1885 (^ch. Foss. de I'Alger. fasc. 9, p. 69) MM. Cot- 

 teau, Peron, and Gauthier admitted a genus Pseudopygaulus, 

 Coquand, 1862, M^m. de la Soc. Emul. de la Prov. v. ii. 

 Atlas, pl.xxxi. figs. 14-16, 1862, and Pei;a/as^er,Cotteau, 1884, 

 was placed as a synonym. As we were aware by that time 

 that Petalaster was a synonym of our Eolampas, although the 

 fact had not become patent to the authors of the Algerian work, 

 we naturally were anxious to know why Petalaster had been 

 sacrificed, and especially as our researches had failed to find a 

 definition of Pseudopygaulus anywhere. In the notice of the 

 history of the genus Pseudopygaulus given by MM. Cotteau, 

 Peron, and Gauthier {op. cit. p. 70) it turns out that up to the 

 date of the publication of their work in 1885 there was no defi- 

 nition of the genus published ! It is carefully stated that M. 

 Coquand described the only species under the name Gatopygus 

 jT^'i^en (Coquand, loc. cit. p. 274). After the printing of the 

 work was finished M. Coquand became aware that the species 

 could not be placed in Gatopygus, " et il se contenta, dans 

 I'Atlas, k la l^gende de la planche, d'indiquer le nom gend- 

 rique de Pseudopygaulus. 11 n'en a donne aucune diagnose, 

 et n'a pas meme consigned le fait dans un erratum." Al- 

 though it was admitted that no diagnosis had been published 

 and only the name had been appended to the plate of a 

 species, the authors of the ' l^ch. Foss. de I'Alg^rie ' thought it 

 their duty to respect " ce titre de priority." 



In the Pal. FrauQ. :Ech. terr. Eocene, 1887, p. 467 (livr. 12) 

 the following is found : — 



Pseudopygaulus, Coquand, 1862 j Peron et Gauthier, 



1885. 

 Eolampas, Duncan & Sladen, 1882. 

 Petalaster, Cott., 1884. 



And M. Cotteau considers that Eolampas "doit etre aban- 

 donnd, comme le genre Petalaster, a cause de sa date plus 

 recente." We demur to this proceeding, and decline most 

 decidedly to give way. There is no instance on record where 

 a " genus " has stood its ground without having been 

 diagnosed and published j and it is a rule not to permit 

 either species or genera to be considered of any value unless 

 publication has occurred. MS. names and titles to species 

 and genera do not carry weight or priority. 



M. Coquand did not publish or diagnose Pseudopygaulus in 

 1862, and the genus was really published in 1885 in the work 



