288 Proceedings of the Royal Physical Society. 



To my mind the real and essential name of an animal or 

 plant is its specific one, which ought by no means to be 

 called a " trivial " name as was done by Linnaeus, and the 

 generic name is simply one added to show its close relation- 

 ship to allied forms as well as its distinction from other 

 species which may possess the same name. We might also 

 add the name of the family, order, and so on, but this would 

 occupy too great a space, and is rendered unnecessary by the 

 law which forbids the use of generic names already pre- 

 occupied. 



It is true that this view of the case is somewhat obscured 

 by the fact that generic names are always substantive, while 

 specific ones are usually either adjective or in the genitive 

 case, which gives an appearance as if the real and fundamental 

 name of the organism were the generic one, and the specific 

 one merely added to designate a variety. This is, however, 

 a purely conventional arrangement, which does not affect 

 the true nature of the case, which is clearly evident when 

 we consider that the name of the species is by the rule of 

 priority unalterable, while the combination is not subject to 

 any such law. Hence, in testing the accuracy of any identi- 

 fication, it is fundamentally necessary to go back to the 

 original description of the species, all subsequent generic 

 combinations being merely expressions of the opinions of 

 individual authors as to the position and classification of the 

 organism in question. Accordingly, considering that the 

 specific name is in fact the proper name of each organism, 

 I must fully agree with the committee of the British Asso- 

 ciation, that the authority for it should be quoted in preference 

 to all others ; though, as is also recommended, it is desirable, 

 when the genus has been subsequently altered, to indicate 

 this by adding the letters " sp.," or by placing the authority 

 in brackets. 



Furthermore, I consider that the citation of the author of 

 the species gives the expression a historical value which other- 

 wise it would not have if every author who chose to subdivide 

 an old genus is at liberty to put his own signature after the 

 new combinations he has produced. 



A sort of compromise has been recommended, and has 



