220 MR. F. J. BELL ON THE NOMENCLATURE [Mar. 16, 



4. On the Names to be applied to certain Echinoidea. 

 By F. Jeffrey Bell, B.A., F.Z.S. 



[Eeceived March 10, 1880.] 



The tone which Prof. Agassiz has thought proper to adopt towards 

 me makes any further discussion of the synonymy of the Echini im- 

 possible between us. It is, however, necessary that I should notify 

 the Society of one or two matters lest ray co-fellows should be led 

 to think, from the accusations that have been brought against me, 

 that I have been guilty of great disrespect towards it. 



1 am charged, first, with quibbling, and, secondly, with mis- 

 representation, in truth, however, the sentence which forms the 

 basis for the first accusation is obviously a dialectic artifice, by means 

 of which the chief point under discussion is thrown into sharper 

 relief. That point is, of course, the necessity for starting with 

 Linneeus in our nomenclature ; whenever that salutary rule is dis- 

 obeyed an author can hardly escape some pitfall, and into such a 

 pitfall Prof. Agassiz has fallen. 



While I owe to every author whom I may quote the utmost ex- 

 actness in representation, I owe it no less to the Society who did me 

 the honour to publish my paper, and to the student who reads it. 

 I shall not so far forget my own dignity as to plead that I intended 

 no misrepresentation ; I will say at once that I have not been guilty 

 of it, and that Prof. Agassiz does not support his accusation. 



In criticizing the method of bibhographical reference adopted by 

 the author of the ' Revision,' I directed attention to a misleading 

 reference which stands thus: — "Int. Mon. Scut." This is now 

 allowed to be an unfortunate method of quotation ; but " it does not 

 justify Mr. Bell in assuming that he corrects a grave error, and gives 

 information not to be found in the Revision." Here I submit the 

 following facts : — 



(1) The following are the contents of the second livraison of the 

 * Monographies d'Echinodermes,' as published by Prof. Louis Agassiz 

 — (a) Observations on the progress of the knowledge of the Echino- 

 dermata, and (/3) the " Seconde Monographic. Des Scutelles." The 

 Monograph consists of (i) a short preface, (ii") " Introduction. Du 

 groupe des Scutelles en general," and (iii) a series of chapters on 

 the different genera of the group. 



Now which of these constituent parts is referred to by " Int. Mon. 

 Scut."? why, of course, as all the world but Mr. Bell knows quite 

 well, the ' Observations . . .' are referred to ! That there is an In- 

 troduction to the Scutellse has, it is notorious, been at no time an 

 obstacle to such a use of the abbreviated reference. That this is 

 really the case should be obvious from Mr. Agassiz's statement — 

 "All writers on Echinoderms who have quoted these independent 

 monographs (as I have done in the ' Revision') without reference to 

 the number of the Livraison, but entirely from the contents as printed 

 on the cover, always quote this ' essay ' as ' Monographic des Sou- 



