468 Mevieivs — Bernard's Madrepoi-arian Corals. 



structural divisions would have been far less useful if meaningless 

 names had been given to the forms. It seerns to me that we have 

 no other alternative than that between ' trivial ' names and symbols. 

 It is not possible to invent a long list of short names, each one 

 of which shall convey useful information, except on some fixed 

 plan, and that, sooner or later, means the construction of symbols 

 or of symbolic names." (p. 191.) 



Notwithstanding this bold and determined attempt to reform 

 zoological nomenclature, and to rid us of the long lists of synonyms 

 which fill so many pages of every systematic work, the author has 

 to admit that he has been warned again and again that there are 

 rigid formalists who firmly believe they would be doing zoology 

 a service by naming, that is, " mahing species " of, all the forms here 

 recorded by geographical symbols. Mr. Bernard, from recent 

 experience, finds he is compelled to respect this warning and to 

 give a list of Latin equivalents for his geographical symbols which 

 may stand instead of specific names, which the rigid formalist may 

 catalogue and accept as such. One hundred and forty-four of these 

 provisional names are listed, each preceded by the author's symbol, 

 which he is warned will not be accepted in lieu of a name, so they 

 read thus*. — 



GoNiOPORA : (symbol) G. New Guinea 1 (which stands for, or is) 

 = Goniopora Nova-giiineensis prima [and in those cases in which the 

 forms hav« been assumed by previous writers to represent separate 

 and distinct sj^ecies, the name of such species is given in brackets ; thus 

 to the above name we must add {G.pedimculata, Quoy & Gairaard)] ; 

 G. New Guinea 2 = G. Nova-giiineensis secunda ; G. New Ireland 1 = 

 6r. Nova-hibernica prima ; G. Solomon Islands 1 = G. Salomonis 

 prima ; and so on. 



Two objections present themselves to Mr. Bernard's admirable 

 proposals — yea, three might be urged — (1) The symbol alone is 

 insufficient. (2) The name in full in addition or in place of the 

 symbol is too long} (3) Is it not unfair to annex all the geographical 

 names for one group ? Furthermore, it involves the introduction 

 of the trinomial system into zoology, which is certainly not a thing 

 to be greatly desired. The symbols alone, we fear, will not meet 

 with cordial acceptation in any case. 



The main difficulty which will be felt by systematic zoologists 

 in adopting Mr. Bernard's method of nomenclatuBe in corals is 

 that it is unlike that in use for similar natural divisions, so that 

 this class of organisms must stand aloof from, and cannot con- 

 veniently be brought into line with pre-existing arrangements of 

 other orders and families. 



Whatever attitude we may adopt with regard to Mr. Bernard's 

 system of nomenclature we must all be most grateful to him for 

 one thing, namely, that he has taken in hand the long neglected 



^ Especially when we have so often to use some other name as well to qualify it, 

 as pointed out above (viz. G. pedunculata, Q. & G.). There are 51 such additional 

 recognised names which must he used and cannot he set aside. 



