530 Mr. R. I. Pocock on Pherusa fucicola, Leach. 



of the last premolar, and — is equally broad. On the other 

 hand, these two molars are not so compressed antero-poste- 

 riorly as in S. achradophilum, and the internal gap between 

 them is broader. Finally, -_ is far smaller than in S. rufum, 

 not exceeding in transverse section one of the small outer 

 incisors. Lower teeth as in S. achradophilum, except for 

 their rather greater size. 



Palatal emargination narrow, parallel-sided, extending for- 

 wards to the level of the middle of — . 



External characters very much as in S. achradophilum, 

 except that the colour is darker and more uniform, the head 

 being dull brown, like the rest of the body. 



Dimensions of the type, an adult female in spirit : — 



Head and body 58 millim. ; ear, above crown, 12 ; fore- 

 arm 46 (=1*8 inch) ; lower leg 18. 



Teeth : distance from front of canine to back of — 7*0 

 millim. ; palatal breadth, outside 'JLJ: 9*5, inside *!hJ 39. 



Hob. Island of Dominica, West Indies. Collected, under 

 the auspices of the West-Indian Exploration Committee, by 

 Dr. H. A. A. Nicholls, in whose honour I have much pleasure 

 in naming the species. 



8. Nichollsi is interesting as being the first of the rare 

 genus Stenoderma found in the Lesser Antilles, S. achrado- 

 phyllum being, so far as is yet known, a native only of 

 Jamaica and Cuba, while S. falcatum is peculiar to the latter 

 island. The habitat of S. rufum is unknown. 



LXIII. — On Pherusa fucicola, Leach, and the Law of 

 Priority. By R. I. POCOCK. 



There are few zoological systematists who can say with Mr. 

 Walker that they have destroyed more species than they have 

 made. For this all carcinologists must be grateful ; but 

 most of them will, I think, feel regret at his decision in the 

 case of Pherusa fucicola, as set forth in the last number 

 of the 'Annals.' It seems to me that the position he has 

 taken up is on any grounds absolutely untenable ; and since 

 he has courteously mentioned my name in connexion with 

 his investigation (although the entire credit of the matter is 

 due to him), it is possible that I may be suspected by some 

 of agreeing with his views on the point. I consequently 

 take this opportunity of repudiating once and for all on my 

 own behalf such a system of nomenclature as that which he 

 adopts, and of attempting briefly to show in what, to my 

 mind, the faults of it mainly consist. 



