1884.] Allen on Zoological Nomenclature. 339 



consequence of pressing official business. From the full report 

 of the meeting- given in 'Nature' we condense the following 

 abstract of proceedings : — 



The Chairman, Professor Flower, in his opening remarks, 

 alluded to the exti'eme importance and difficulties of the subject, 

 for while the name of any natural object is one of its most trivial 

 and artificial attributes, laxity in the use of names causes endless 

 perplexities and hindrances to the progress of knowledge. He 

 often found little difficulty in making out the characters and 

 structure of an animal, but when called upon to decide by what 

 name to call it he often found himself in a sea of perplexity. He 

 hoped the present discussion would help to clear up our ideas on 

 the subject. Abstaining, with the impartiality due from the 

 chair, he would withhold his opinion upon the merits of the rival 

 schemes to be proposed until after hearing the arguments, and 

 called upon Mr. R. Bowdler Sharpe to i^ead a paper 'On the 

 expediency, or otherwise, of adopting Trinomial Nomenclature.' 



Mr. Sharpe said he approached the discussion of the subject 

 without the least prejudice either for or against the adoption of 

 trinomial nomenclature. He alluded to the fact that for some 

 time the system had been recognized and followed by zoologists 

 on the other side of the Atlantic, and stated that to a certain 

 extent the principle had been admitted by more than one worker 

 in the Old World. The presence in this country, he said, of one 

 of the most able advocates of the system, Dr. Elliott Coues, has 

 reCentl}' stimulated tlie thoughts of many of us as to the wisdom 

 of its adoption for the zoology of the Old World, and it had 

 occurred to him that a friendly meeting to discuss the matter with 

 Dr. Coues and some of the leading British zoologists could cer- 

 tainly do no harm, and might be productive of a considerable 

 amount of good. It seemed to him that there are certain facts in 

 nature which we all recognize, but about the expression of 

 which many of us entertain different views. He proposed 

 merely to bring forward certain difficult aspects of the question 

 as they presented themselves to him, and would be glad to have 

 an expression of opinion upon the focts to which he should call 

 attention. In illustration of the difficulties he laid upon the table 

 a series of specimens illustrating what he considered to be one of 

 the most intei'esting examples of what he conceived to be a series 

 of subspecies, or representative races, of one dominant form. 



