1884.] Allen on Zoolo<^-ic(tl Nomcnchititre. 349 



names. lie would prefer to regard such forms as allied species 

 and retain a binomial nomenclature. Nomenclature was not 

 science, and he did not see how science could be advanced by the 

 most perfect system of nomenclature that could be devised (!). 

 It is true we could not get on without nomenclature, but the 

 simpler it is the l)ctter ; and the less time we spend discussing it 

 the more we should have to devote to real study. 



Dr. Cones, replying to previous speakers, said that the system 

 of trinomial nomenclature had nothing to do witl: indi\idual vari- 

 ations of specimens from one locality. It was not a question of 

 naming varieties or h^'brids, but there was a definite principle to 

 proceed upon, namely that of geographical and climatal varia- 

 tion. He was well aware that the use of three names to desig- 

 nate objects in zoology was no new thing ; but he believed that 

 the restricted application of trinomialism to the particular class 

 of cases he had discussed was virtually novel, and that the system 

 would prove to be one of great practical utilit3^ He thought that 

 the application of the principle was a question which, after this 

 discussion, and after further private discussions, might well be left 

 to the discretion of authors. 



The Chairman concluded the meeting by saying: "I hope 

 that Dr. Elliott Cones is satisfied with the manner with which his 

 views have been received. Although there are some uncompro- 

 mising binomialists present, many have pronounced themselves 

 as what ma}' be termed limited trinomialists, and some appear to 

 go as far as Dr. Coues himself. Distinctly defined species un- 

 doubtedly exist in great numbers, owing to extinction of interme- 

 diate forms ; for these the binomial system ofl'ers all that is needed 

 in defining them. But on the other hand there are numbers of 

 cases in the actual state of the earth, and far more are being con- 

 stantly revealed bv the discoveries of paltcontologv, and nowhere 

 so rapidly as in Dr. Coues's own counti'y, where the infinite gra- 

 dations defy the discrimination either of a binomial or a trinomial 

 svstem. Zoologists engaged in the question of nomenclature are 

 being gradually brought face to face with an enormous difficulty 

 in consequence of the discovery of these intermediate forms, and 

 some far more radical change than that now proposed will have 

 to be considered. In conclusion I must express the thanks of the 

 meetinsr to Dr. Coues for havinsr brousfht his views and those of 

 his countrymen, of whom he is such a worthy representative, before 



