308 ; MR. P. L. SCLATER ON THE [ Mar. 3, 
in conformity with a resolution adopted by Section D of the 
British Association at Newcastle, reprinted the Rules (2). The 
Committee, of which he was Chairman, was directed to consider 
what changes, if any, it was desirable to make in them. Certain 
alterations (six in number in all) were proposed to be made by the 
Committee, as specified in their Report. This report (3) was 
finally adopted by the Association in Section D at the Bath 
Meeting on the 19th September, 1865, It is well to remark, 
however, that the six proposed alterations of the original Code, 
although specified at full length in the Report of the Committee, 
were never incorporated into the text of the Stricklandian Code. 
In 1878, at the request of the General Committee’ of the 
British Association, I prepared for publication a new edition of 
the Stricklandian Code, to which I added the Report of the 
Committee appointed at the Bath Meeting. This edition (4) was 
published for the Association by Murray of Albermarle Street, and 
copies of it may still be had on application at the offices of the 
British Association. There are some here on the table. 
In 1877 the American Association for the Advancement of 
Science took up the question of Nomenclature and appointed 
Mr. W. H. Dall to investigate the subject. Mr. Dall made an 
excellent report, which will be found printed in the volume of the 
Association’s Proceedings for 1878 (5). 
In 1881 the Société Zoologique de France proposed a Code of 
Rules prepared by a Committee. These were published at Paris 
along with a report on the subject prepared by M. Chaper (6). 
In the following year (1882) the Congrés géologique Inter- 
national published a set of Rules on Nomenclature (7). Both 
these codes were intended to apply to Zoology and Botany alike. 
The rules in both cases are few in number, but are accompanied 
by valuable commentaries. They do not materially affect the 
special points now in question, except in rejecting generic names 
previously employed either in Zoology or Botany. 
The highly elaborate and precise Code of Nomenclature which 
was adopted by the American Ornithologists’ Union in 1886, and 
was published along with the first edition of the ‘Check-list of 
North American Birds’ (8), although generally based upon the 
Stricklandian Rules, deviates from them in several material par- 
ticulars. The most important of these is, the proposal to commence 
Zoological Nomenclature with the tenth edition of the ‘Systema 
Natures’ (1758) instead of the twelfth (1766). The operation of 
this rule, which will be again alluded to presently, has, as is well 
known, caused very serious differences in the names applied to 
the same birds by the English and American ornithologists. The 
American Code of Nomenclature is also in conflict with us upon 
the two other points which are proposed for special discussion this 
evening. ) 
In 1891 the ‘ Allgemeine Deutsche Ornithologische Gesellschaft 
zu Berlin’ put forward their Code of Zoological Nomenclature, 
which was adopted at their General Meeting at Frankfort a. Main 
1 See ‘ Report of the British Association,’ 1865, p. 25. 
