1880.] PROF. AGASSIZ ON THE SYNONYMY OF ECHINI. 3.7 



As regards the name carinatas, neither Mr. Bell nor any one else 

 can do more than make happy guesses until the original collection 

 of Leske, upon which Gmelin based his uame, is found and iden- 

 tified. 



Passing now to p. 655, Mr. Bell himself quotes the reasons which 

 have induced me to adopt Hipponoe, Gray, in place of Tripneustes, 

 Agass. I will only state again as my reason a part of what he 

 quotes on p. 656: — "When specimens are accessible which have 

 served as basis for any systematic work, their results should be 

 accepted, when correct, even when they upset a nomenclature 

 generally recognized" ('Revision of the Echini,' p. 301). The 

 questions of spelling and of sense or nonsense in generic names it is 

 useless to discuss anew. 



Professor Louis Agassiz himself suspected the identity oi Hipponoe 

 and Tripneustes, and says that G-ray's name in that case should be 

 preferred to his. While at the British Museum I endeavoured to 

 trace the specimens on which Gray based his name Hipponoe. 

 Dr. Gray himself was kind enough to show me what he called 

 Hipjwnoe in 1840, the same species named by him Hipponoe 

 sardica in 1855. 



On the same page (656) Mr. Bell further says : — " In the Biblio- 

 graphical List the only references appended to the name 



Tripneustes are ' Lit. Monog. Scut.' {sic) and ' C. R. Ann. Sc. Nat. 

 vi.' " He is quite astonished so easily to recognize the last refe- 

 rence, and, having assigned the first to the * Monographic des Scu- 

 telles,' concludes by saying that he has searched the pages of the 

 Introduction in vain for such a name. This statement he subse- 

 quently modifies by giving a bit of history about the second livraison 

 of the ' Monographies d'Echinodermes ' [Scutelles], in which he says 

 there was published a "short essay " entitled 'Observations sur les 

 progres recens de I'histoire naturelle des Echinodermes.' 



Mr. Bell does not state in what part of the second livraison this 

 so-called " short essay " is placed, but leaves the reader to infer that 

 the second livraison was composed of a series of monographs, of 

 which the ' Monographic des Scutelles ' made one, instead of being, 

 as it actually was, the only one. In this introductory " essay " he 

 finds Tripneustes, which antedates (July) its pubhcation by Agassiz, 

 in the preface to the 'Anatomic du ^'em-e Echinus' (December); he 

 then goes on to say (p. 657) : — " I do not think that there is any 

 need to particularize such a method of detailing the history of a 

 name in a work which is entitled a Revision ; but I have thought it 

 right, while giving an account of Professor Alex. Agassiz's method 

 of working out his subject, to give all the material necessary for 

 other naturalists who desire to investigate for themselves the matter 

 in question." 



It may not have occurred to Mr. Bell that I probably know as 

 well as any one what Professor Louis Agassiz himself thought of this 

 " short essay." As is well known to all students of Echinoderms, 

 the Monographies were issued in livraisons, each livraison having 

 a printed cover stating its contents ; the general titlepage was issued 



3* 



