28 report— 1865. 



I. That Botany should not be introduced into the Strickland rules and 

 recommendations. 

 II. That the permanency of names and convenience of practical appli- 

 cation being the two chief requisites in any code of rules for scien- 

 tific nomenclature, it is not advisable to disturb by any material 

 alterations the rules of zoological nomenclature which were au- 

 thorized by Section D at the Meeting of the British Association at 

 Manchester in 1842. 



III. The Committee are of opinion, after much deliberation, that the 



Xllth edition of the ' Systema Natura) ' is that to which the limit 

 of time should apply, viz. 1766. But as the -works of Artedi and 

 Scopoli have already been extensively used by ichthyologists and 

 entomologists, it is recommended that the names contained in or 

 used from these authors should not be affected by this provision. 

 This is particularly requisite as regards the generic names of 

 Artedi afterwards used by Linnaeus himself. 



In Mr. H. E. Strickland's original draft of these Bules and Recommen- 

 dations the edition of Linnaeus was left blank, and the Xllth was inserted by 

 the Manchester Committee. This was done not as being the first in which the 

 Binomial nomenclature had been used, as it commenced with the Xth, but as 

 being the last and most complete edition of Linnoeus's works, and containing 

 many species the Xth did not. For these reasons it is now confirmed by 

 this Committee, and also because these rules having been used and acted 

 upon for twenty-three years, if the date were altered now, many changes of 

 names would be required, and in consequence much confusion introduced. 



IV. In Rule 13th, " Specific names, when adopted as generic, must be 



changed." The Committee agree that it is exceedingly injudicious 

 to adopt a specific name as a generic name, but they are of opinion 

 that where this has been done, it is the generic name which must be 

 thrown aside, not the old specific name, and that this rule shoidd 

 be so altered as to meet this. 

 Y. The recommendations under " Ckisses of objectionable names,'' as 

 already pointed out, cannot be too carefully attended to. Specific- 

 names from persons have already been sufficiently prostituted, and 

 personal generic names have increased to a large and undeserving 

 extent. The handing down the name of a naturalist by a genus 

 has always been considered as the highest honour that could be 

 given, and shoidd never be bestowed lightly*. 



TI. The recommendation, " Specific names to be written with a small 

 initial." The Committee propose that this recommendation should 

 be omitted. It is not of great importance, and may be safely left 

 to naturalists to deal with as they think fit. 



These are the chief alterations and modifications the Committee have to 

 suggest. It is scarcely possible to make any code of rules for a subject so 

 extensive as zoology either perfect in itself or such as will meet the opinions 

 of every one. It must be a matter of compromise, and as working by no 

 rides is creating great confusion and an immense increase in synonymy, the 

 Committee would ask this Section to approve their present report or finding, 



* " Hoc imieum et siumnum prceinium laboris, sancte servandum, et caste dispen- 

 saiidum ad incitaruentuin et oniaruentum Botanices." — Phil. Botan., p. 171. 



