Nomenclature of Ornithologi/. 191 



names for those divisional groups of it, which possess a naturally 

 distinctive character : or on the other hand to retain the name as 

 generick, but with an awkward and unartistlike reference to its 

 sections or subgenera, — a process whereby the simplicity and 

 brevity so conspicuous in the Linnean nomenclature is necessarily 

 violated. In either case an infringement must take place on the 

 system of Linnaeus ; and the point of decision is in what parti- 

 cular we must desert that system. I myself feel no hesitation in 

 arranging myself on the side of those who would retain his 

 group and the character he has assigned it, but under the more 

 comprehensive title of family to suit its increasing bulk, and 

 adhere in more material points to the paramount principles 

 which he has established for the art. In this process it will also 

 be seen that the only alteration which takes place, is in the title of 

 his great group, the term family being substituted for that of genus ; 

 while his own generick term Falco is still retained for that division 

 of his group which he meant to be typical in it. and which, even 

 thus limited, contains more species at the present day, than what 

 constituted his original genus. Neither have I any doubt, that 

 this is the very step which that great naturalist would himself 

 have taken, could he have witnessed the vast improvements that 

 have latterly taken place in Ornithology. I form this judgment 

 from his practice in those other branches of Natural History, 

 where his knowledge was more extensive and more defined, and 

 on which he lived sufficiently long to confer a higher polish. I 

 shall take another opportunity of entering into a more detailed 

 examination of this point ; being of opinion, that even in his own 

 mind his groups in Zoology, were intended to form but the first 

 outlines of his system, to be filled up as time and opportunity 

 increased the necessary information ; and that the term genus was 

 not intended to bear the same strict acceptation, when referred 

 to them, as when applied to groups, where he was niore accu- 

 rately informed, as for instance in the department of Botany. 



Hitherto I have examined this subject with reference only to 

 the laws of nomenclature. But some arguments have lately been 

 brought forward against the institution of new genera, which aim 

 at the very essence of the science itself. Advanced by authority 



