1SS4.] Ai.LEN on Zoological NomcHclaturc. 347 



were with him would follow the system of adopting trinomial 

 nomenclature for all forms he for one would gladly employ it in 

 all those cases in which the geographical range of certain forms 

 is clearly ascertained. 



Dr. Sclater would remind Dr. Coues that this mode of desig- 

 nating the forms of life was by no means new, as might be seen 

 by reference to Schlegel's 'Revue Critique,' published in 1844. 

 His own chief objection to the system of trinomial nomenclature 

 was its liability to abuse. The time had now come when 

 it would be advisable to a certain extent to use trinomials. It 

 is only in cases where faunas have been fully worked out that 

 trinomial names should come into use, and for such forms he 

 was quite prepared to adopt the system. 



Mr. Blanford advanced some objections to the proposed 

 system. It involved more terms, any one of which was liable to 

 be changed to suit personal views, and therefoi'e rendered fixity in 

 nomenclature more remote than before. He thought it also less 

 suited to some other classes of animals than to birds, and alluded 

 to the fact that the system was almost universally rejected 

 by a recent meeting of geologists.* He did not consider that the 

 time had come for any innovation. 



Professor Bell agreed with Mr. Blanford that the method 

 would not be univei^sally applicable. 



Air. W. F. Kirby said that it was necessary to distinguish sub- 

 species and varieties at times ; but he feared that the system of 

 naming varieties w^as open to great abuse, especially in entomol- 

 ogy, where the number of species is so great. He urged, very 

 properly, that whenever a named form previously regarded as a 

 variety was raised to specific rank, the varietal name, wherever 

 practicable, should be retained for the species, instead of a new 

 one being imposed as is sometimes done. 



Lord VValsingham cited a number of cases of geographical 

 variation among insects and inquired how the system would apply 

 in . the particular cases instanced. 



Dr. Shai-p, a well-known entomologist, thought a system of 

 names for forms lower than species would lead to complete chaos, 



* It should be said, however, that there was no one present to properly explain its 

 scope and aims, or who understood its purpose well enough to speak intelligently in 

 its defence. A glance at the report of the discussion is sufficient to show that it failed 

 partly through prejudice against innovation, but mainly through ignorance as to what 

 the system really is. 



