32 | THE CANADIAN ENTOMOLOGIST. 
state every name which of late years has been made to give place to one 
of Hubner’s, and further, to treat the Verzeichniss bekannter Schn netterlinge 
as a mere Catalogue, which can never be quoted as an authority for 
genera.” 
Now with regard to the remedy for the evil complained of. There: 
have been various suggestions of Rules by foreign authors, many of which 
would meet the assent of most Entomologists, and it is easy to select from. 
these authors both Rules and arguments for their adoption. I will call 
attention to so many of these suggested Rules as seem to me to meet the 
difficulty of the case, and to others, which might properly form part of : a. 
Code, and will give short extracts illustrating them. 
I mention them for the purpose of exciting discussion as to their 
fitness for the end in view, and that Lepidopterists may know what is 
the opinion of students in other branches of Entomology besides their 
own :— 
1 There must be intelligible description and publication in case of a 
species, or arecognizable figure. In case of a genus there must be a 
definition giving the essential characters.—/v0m Dr. Thorells European 
Spiders, quoted in Wallaces Address, before cited. 
2. In determining the priority of specific names, notice should be 
taken only of those works in which the Linnæan binomial nomenclature is. 
exclusively and consistently employed.— 7 Aorell. 
Note—“ The binomial system of nomenclature was fully and distinctly 
propounded by Linnæus in the Philosophia Botanica, published in 1751, 
and there can be no reason whatever why authors who adopted and sys- 
tematically applied it should be set aside, because Linnæus himself did 
not apply it to the whole animal and vegetable kingdoms till 1758.”— 
Thorell. 
3. The same date should apply to generic as to specific names, both 
being characteristic of the binomial nomenclature, and it being impossible 
if we go back earlier, to determine what are to be considered as truly 
generic names.—/#;4. 
4. Between two specific names in use, the prior right shall belong to: 
the first named. But no name in use shall give way to an obsolete or 
rejected name, even though the latter be of prior date.—Wallace’s Ad- 
dress, p. 07. 
Note.— The idea of justice to the namer or describer of a species is 
sometimes appealed to, but the law of priority is founded on no such 
