Vol. xxiii] ENTOMOLOGICAL NEWS 227 
rules’ sake after they become an encumbrance and a limitation to en- 
deavor is to merit ridicule. 
There is no a priori value in the law of priority. It is a means 
to secure the end of a uniform, and stable usage. Use it in so far as 
it is the best means, but not one step beyond. Yet in many recent 
applications—comparatively few in number, yet revolutionary in result 
—it works the opposite way. 
There has been no little criticism of the mode of organization of 
the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature. It must be 
conceded that at any International Congress local representation will 
far outnumber, and will likely outweigh in voting, that from more 
distant quarters. In a question which so vitally concerns all natural- 
ists as the names of animals, adequate provision should be made to 
secure a consensus of the opinion of all zoologists. 
This could be accomplished by having all fundamental questions, 
and perhaps the election of members of the commission, referred to 
the zoologists of the world by mail. There would he expense at- 
tached to this, but the list could be restricted to those who were will- 
ing to pay their share of the cost of such communications, which need 
not be large, perhaps a dollar a year. Certainly any one who was vital- 
ly interested in the nomenclature of zoology would welcome the oppor- 
tunity of voting upon questions affecting it, and of bearing the neces- 
sary expense of obtaining the opportunity, and would feel much more 
inclined to accept decisions reached in that way than those reached 
by a Commission in the appointment of which he has had no word. 
Excellent and logical as many of the opinions of the International Com- 
mission on Nomenclature may be, I voice the sentiments of many 
when I say that they would be far more generally acceptable if they 
were known to represent a consensus of opinion, rather than that 
of four or five and especially of one man. A list of nomina conser- 
vanda voted on and accepted by a majority of the working zoologists 
of the world would not be ignored by subsequent writers, nor would 
we ever have to fear subsequent alteration or rejection—J. CHESTER 
BRADLEY. 
We fully concur in the above statement—H. D. Reep, A. H. Wricut, 
Rosert Marueson, G. C. Empopy, Wm. A. RitEy, GLENN W. HERRICK. 
The Executive Committee of the German Zoological Society has 
requested all German zoologists to notify the Secretary of the Society, 
Prof. Dr. A. Brauer, Berlin, on or before March 15, whether, iike the 
120 Scandinavian and Finnish investigators, they are against the strict 
application of the law of priority in all cases and desire that the most 
important and generally-used names shall be protected against any 
alteration, or whether they favor, as two Scandinavians did, the strict 
application of the law of priority in all cases. The result of the vote 
