13G Miscellaneous. 



Oray did not use the expression "type," except in his last para- 

 graph, we have only to compare it with other papers by Gray in 

 the same volume to see that tiie single species quoted were intended 

 by him as genotypes. If, then. Gray is put out of court by the rigid 

 application of the Code, a fortiori must this be the case with Brandt 

 and others. 



" It seems to " Dr. Clark " absurd to suppose that Brandt (1835) 

 expected or intended that both his ' Section A ' and ' Section B' of 

 Cidaris were to be called Phi/Udccmthus." This is not quite what 

 1 said. In the first place, Brandt did not mention a Section A 

 and Section B of Cidaris. He established Phi/llacanthus as a new 

 subgenus of Cidaris (or Cidarites Lam., as he called it), and he said 

 in his diagnosis of Phi/Uac^tnthus that the ambulacra might be 

 Rtraight or waved. He then divided rin/lJacanthwi into two 

 Sections : A, with ambulacra straight ; B, with ambulacra waved. 

 Since the collection of Merteus contained only examples of one 

 species — C. {Plujlhicanlhas) duhia — and since this came into 

 Section B, Brandt mentioned Section A in the footnote alone. The 

 type of Section A is undoubtedly Cidarites trihidoides Lam. ; the 

 type of Section B was not fixed. From this it is not so clear to me 

 as it is to Dr. Clark that Brandt " selected duhia as the type of 

 Phifllacanthns." 



Having disallowed Gray and admitted that Brandt does not 

 " distinctly state that tribuloides is the type of Cidaris s. str.," 

 Dr. Clark then falls back on elimination, and contends for stability 

 of nomenclature, more particularly the nomenclature established in 

 the ' Uevision of the Echini.' Mr, Alexander Agassi/,, when he 

 penned the admirable chapter on " Nomenclature " in that great 

 work, frankly stated (p. 13) that he did not intend to impose on 

 any one the names there adopted, often in defiance of the Codes. 

 It is rather too late now for his coadjutor to begin the attempt. 

 A\'e all desire stability of nomenclature, but the best way of 

 attaining it is to see that the foundations are secure and the super- 

 structure in accord with the canons of the builder's art. 



F. A. Bather. 



Natural History IMuseum, 

 London, S.W., 

 .Oth June, 1908. 



Note on the Squirrel-Genus " Zetis." By Oldfield Thomas. 



I regret to find that in giving the name Zetis to the long-nosed 

 Oriental squirrels of the pemi/i-^-vJigenis group (Journ. Bombay 

 Nat. Hist. Soc. xviii. p. 244, 1908) I overlooked the fact that Pere 

 Heude had already proposetl for the genus the name Dremomys 

 (Mem. H. N. Empire Chinois, iv. pt. 2, p. 54, 1898). That name 

 must therefore be used for all the squirrels referred to Zetis in my 

 list, including the new Formosau species Dremoini/s owstoni. 



