NATURE 



357 



THURSDAY, AUGUST 30, 1877 



THE ZOOLOGICAL RECORD 

 The Zoological Record for liTi ; being Volume Twelfth 

 nf the Record of Zoological Literature. Edited by 

 Edward Caldwell Rye, F.Z.S., M.E.S., &c. (London : 

 John Van Voorst, Paternoster Row, 1877.) 



ZOOLOGISTS, it must be said, are a somewhat un- 

 grateful set of men. There can be no question of 

 the extreme value to them of " The Zoological Record," 

 and yet they allow, as is notorious, the Association which 

 was formed to continue that useful publication to lead a 

 precarious existence, dependent on the charity of various 

 other scientific bodies. This is not creditable to the zoo- 

 logists of our own country, nor, though in a less degree, to 

 those of our colonies, past and present. Those of the 

 United Kingdom are unquestionably wealthy as a class, 

 but their wealth is very unequally divided. Many, and 

 among them we are glad to say are some of the best, are 

 amateurs who follow the study simply for their own 

 pleasure, and are sufficiently blessed with this world's 

 goods. Yet they see that many of their brethren have 

 need, without taking any trouble to help them. The 

 number of " literary and scientific " institutions, museums, 

 reading-rooms, and the like, throughout the country, is 

 very great, and there can be scarcely any of them that 

 does not possess one or more members who take an 

 interest in zoological pursuits. But how few of these 

 institutions and so forth, are there on whose bookshelves 

 " The Zoological Record " is to be found ! Surely but a 

 very slight amount of exertion is required on the part of 

 such members to get this work taken in by the institution 

 to which they belong .' As a rule the library-committees 

 of such bodies are not averse to books of reference, and 

 here is one that is absolutely necessary to every student 

 of or worker in zoology. It is no secret that the Zoo- 

 logical Record Association has the greatest difficulty in 

 " making ends meet," and a very moderate amount of the 

 support we have above indicated would go far to remove 

 the difficulty, and to prevent the possibility of indelible 

 disgrace accruing to the zoologists of this country, by the 

 cessation of this useful annual. 



The volume for 1875, which has just been issued, forms 

 the twelfth of the series, and maintains the high character 

 of its predecessors. It must be very satisfactory to Mr. 

 Rye, as editor, to find himself supported by so strong a 

 band of Recorders. Yet ihs personnel is, with one excep- 

 tion, entirely changed from that which was first enUsttd 

 by Dr. Giinther. The exception is Dr. Eduard von 

 Martens, who, with truly Teutonic tenacity, continues his 

 labours on Molluscs and MoUuscoids — nay more, since he 

 first began, he has added the Crustaceans to his cares. 

 The Mammals are in charge of Mr. Alston ; the Birds 

 have fallen to the lot of Mr. Salvin. Reptiles and Fishes 

 are taken by Mr. O'Shaughnessy ; Arachnids and 

 Myriopods by Mr. Pickard-Cambridge. The editor 

 himself bears the brunt of the battle ; not only does he 

 (as becomes one of the staff of the Entomologists' Monthly 

 Magazine) look after the Insects as a general subject, but 

 he also takes specially the orders, Coleoptera, Hymen- 

 optera, Diptera, and Rhynchota — leaving the Lepidoptera 

 Vol. XVI. — No. 409 



to Mr. Kirby and the Neuroptera and Orthoptera to Mr. 

 McLachlan. Dr. Liitken sweeps all the remaining groups 

 into his net. The services of each of these gentlemen 

 deserve the most conspicuous acknowledgment. Break- 

 ing stones on a road is the common expression for 

 employment which combines the dullest and hardest 

 handiwork with the lowest wages. Where mental labour 

 is concerned it may be paralleled by the vocation of 

 a Zoological Recorder. His task is certainly not more 

 easy or exhilarating and he is not requited at a higher 

 rate. There is scarcely one of the whole of these 

 gentlemen, we are convinced, who does not enter upon 

 or continue his occupation simply because he conceives 

 it to be his duty — and his chief reward must be the 

 satisfaction he receives from discharging it to the best of 

 his ability — for it were absurd to call the miserable 

 pittance, which is all that the Association can afford to 

 dole out to him, any remuneration for the hours of weari- 

 ness which the due execution of the Records requires. 



So strongly do we feel the self-denying nature of the 

 work done by the Recorders that we cannot find it in our 

 heart to criticise any portion of it. There is, we think, 

 and it is only to be expected that such should be the 

 case, a marked difference in the execution of the several 

 Records, and one that is not to be accounted for by expe- 

 rience or want of it on the part of their authors. The 

 worst will bear favourable comparison with anything of 

 the kind published elsewhere, and the accuracy of the 

 references is quite beyond praise — for we could name at 

 least one work of similar nature to consult which is often 

 to follow a guide who either did not know or had forgotten 

 the path. More than this — despite the difference of treat- 

 ment of which we have spoken — there is a wholeness 

 about the work that bespeaks an eminently able editor." 



The index to the genera and sub-genera recorded as 

 new in this volume includes nearly one thousand names, 

 and the excellent plan (first introduced, we beheve, by 

 the late Mr. Crotch) of indicating those names which 

 have been already preoccupied in zoology is still con- 

 tinued. Taking a most merciful view of what constitutes 

 a synonym, the editor has yet to mark fifty-nine of these 

 names (thereby implicating thirty-seven authors) as used 

 before — a far greater proportion than there of course 

 ought to be. Some zoologists in conferring new names 

 evidently pay very little attention to their predecessors' 

 labours, and hence scientific nomenclature is encumbered 

 by these unnecessary terms. One gentleman, indeed, 

 seems oblivious of his own success in genus-making, and 

 apparently has bestowed the same name on what he con- 

 siders to be two distinct genera within a dozen pages of 

 the same work ! This is M. Mulsant, and he stands out 

 as the greatest sinner in this respect. By hmiself he is 

 guilty of making three synonyms, and in conjunction 

 with M.Rey of t/iree more. Messrs. Chambers, Schneider 

 and Signoret are each responsible for four, Messrs. 

 Chapuis and Renter, for three, and Messrs. Boisduval, 

 Chaudoir, Harvey and C. G. Thomson for two. The 

 twenty-five who have committed this crime only once we 

 need not name, and of course it is possible that in some cases 

 their position is defensible, though in reality little is really 



■ Mr. Rye is so uncommon an editor that we believe he will be grateful to 

 us for having a misprint detected — and it is the only one of importance that, 

 alter some study, we are able to point out. Cyrrhcphthalmia (p. 359) should 

 surely b« Cyplwphttialmus, 



