President's Address. 281 



and as far as possible to remedy the evils already created 

 by it, a committee was appointed by the British Associa- 

 tion for the Advancement of Science in 1842 ; and the 

 report of this committee, drawn up by the late Mr Strickland, 

 was published in the Proceedings of the Association for that 

 year. In 1865 these rules were amended by the Association, 

 under the reporter ship of Sir W. Jardine. 



The rules and recommendations comprised in that report 

 have received pretty general adoption in this country, and 

 must be well known to all naturalists who have made much 

 progress with their studies. Like the binomial system 

 itself, I must maintain that they have worked well, and for 

 the benefit of science. But they have not been in every 

 particular followed by naturalists abroad, and even in this 

 country we often hear ominous notes of dissent as to 

 their sufficiency for the wants of the science of the present 

 day. 



They must, however, form the basis for all subsequent 

 attempts to rectify the subject, and consequently I shall 

 adopt them as the text for most of the few remarks with 

 which I have to occupy your attention this evening. 



To enter into every intricacy connected with the subject 

 would, in a short address like this, be not only impossible, but 

 also unsuited for the occasion. I must therefore content myself 

 with touching on a few important points, concerning which 

 there seems at present to be some difference of opinion. 



The British Association Eules wisely commence by recognis- 

 ing that a scientific name is only a name like any other, and 

 not a condensed diagnosis or description, and that con- 

 sequently inexorable adherence to priority in generic and 

 specific names is the only safe and effectual rule. Even 

 names whose derivation was founded on mistaken ideas of 

 structure cannot be altered upon that ground, if their title is 

 otherwise good. M'Coy, for instance, named a genus of 

 fossil Brachiopoda " Athyris " (without a door), in the belief 

 that no foramen existed in the beak, but though it sub- 

 sequently turned out that a foramen was present, the name 

 Athyris must nevertheless stand. 



The claim of names to priority does not extend, however. 



