30 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS RENDERED BY THE INTERNATIONAL 



but that no new specific trivial name in those volumes was to be 

 accepted. In amplification of this proposal, Commissioner Stiles 

 added the foUowing note : — 



Dr. Bartsch and the Acting Secretary concur in the view that these 

 volumes represent a typical instance of binary * but not binominal nomen- 

 clature, similar to the cases for which the rules were suspended in Opinion 

 89, namely, the authors designate genera by a Single name but there is no 

 consistency in the designation of the species, some of which are either 

 intentionally or unintentionally binominal and others polynominal. Thus 

 the authors use a binary System, naming two things, but are thoroughly 

 inconsistent in the specific names. 



It will be noticed that the volumes were published during the years of 

 transition from the polynominal to the strictly binominal System. 



Under this opinion if any new generic names occur, they must be con- 

 sidered nomenclatorially, but all new specific designations can be ignored. 



If the application of the rules results in greater confusion than uni- 

 formity, it will be necessary for some one to request a Suspension of the rules 

 similar to action in Opinion 8g. In examining the volumes, Dr. Bartsch did 

 not notice any new. generic names which would produce confusion. 



5. In returning their votes on the proposed Opinion, only two 

 Commissioners offered any special comments thereon : — 



(a) Comment by Commissioner Rudolf Richter 



Der Opinion wird nicht zugestimmt. Da die Gattungs- und Art-Namen 

 den gleichen Nomenklatur-Regeln unterworfen sind, erscheint es wider- 

 sinnig, in einem Werk nur die Gattungsnamen, nicht aber auch die Art- 

 namen für yetfügbar zu erklären. Wie wir schon am 23. Juli 1935 ^ 

 schrieben, ist es empfehlens wert, alle in Martini & Chemnitz, 1 769-1 795 

 enthaltenen Namen zu verwerfen. Bei wichtigen Namen könnte von Fall 

 zu Fall eine Suspension der Regeln erfolgen. In Gemeinschaft mit meinem 

 Kollegen Dr. Hertens. 



(b) Comment of Commissioner Francis Hemming 



Jointly with Commissioners Jordan and Calman, I have carefully examined 

 the copies of volumes i-ii of the Conchylien-Cabinet of Martini and Chem- 

 nitz at the British Museum. The result of this examination may be 

 summarised as follows : — 



(i) In these volumes the authors accept the concept of a ' genus ' and 



that of a ' generic name ' as those concepts are now understood, 



though in citing the names of species they sometimes omit the 



generic name. 



(ii) In none of these volumes do the authors use the Linnean System of 



binominal nomenclature. 

 (iii) In some cases a species is cited under a binominal name but this is 

 accidental in the sense that these authors clearly did not consider 

 that a name, in order to be valid, must be formed in this way. 



* See footnote i . 



^ In the letter here referred to, Commissioner Richter had written :— 

 Es ist zu empfehlen, alle in Chemnitz, 1 769-1 795, enthaltenen Namen zu 

 verwerfen, da das Werk nicht ganz eindeutig binär und binominal ist. 

 Bei wichtigen Namen könnte von Fall zu Fall eine Suspension der Regeln 

 erfolgen. 



