320 MR. P. L, SCLATER ON THE [Mar. 3, 
meant for a plant or an animal could seldom, if ever, occur. He 
thought the tautonymic principle ought tobe accepted. The 
correct ‘starting-point of Zoological Nomenclature, he was of 
opinion, was the 10th ed. of the ‘Systema Nature,’ because in that 
edition Linnzus first made use of the binary system of nomen- 
clature ; and as the question of justness had been mentioned he 
considered that it would be unjust to authors who created names 
between the dates of the two editions, if the twelfth were adopted ; 
he was, moreover, of opinion that if the 12th edition were adopted, 
because it contained corrections and emendations of the older 
edition, it would make a bad precedent, and that any other author 
might, if so inclined, claim to alter his original names after he had 
created and published them, and so cause confusion. He agreed with 
Mr. Sclater that the comma between the specific name and the 
authority was unnecessary. With regard to the law of priority, 
he thought that if that law was accepted at all it ought to be carried 
out thoroughly. He followed Mr. Sclater in his opinion on 
trinomials. 
Prof. Lanxzstser, F.R.S., said that the main consideration in 
regard to the rules of nomenclature should be that of convenience, 
and the digging up of old names ought to be avoided. He thought 
the 12th edition of the ‘Systema Nature’ should be adopted as 
the starting-point of Zoological Nomenclature, as a tribute of 
respect to Linnzus, since it was the last edition of that work and 
contained Linnzus’s revised list of genera and species. On the 
whole, he was inclined to accept the tautonymic principle, but he 
thought that some difficulty arose owing to the existence of doubts 
in some cases as to which was the original species intended to bear 
the name. He suggested that an International Committee under 
the auspices of this Society should be formed, not to draw up a 
code of rules, but to produce an authoritative list of names—once 
and for all—about which no lawyer-like haggling should hereafter 
be permitted. Rules such as those embodied in the Stricklandian 
Code might be laid down for guiding the futwre action of makers 
of specific and generic names. But with regard to the past what 
was needed was, not a principle as to the application of which 
everyone might argue and differ and cause confusion, but an authori- 
tative declaration admitting of no appeal and of no discussion. 
‘Let the zoologists of Britain, America, France, and Germany 
agree that such a list of the names of all known animals shall be 
produced once for all, and let this list take absolute and indis- 
putable precedence. 
Mr. Euwes said that the Rules of the Stricklandian Code, 
though excellent at the time they were instituted, were not 
now equally applicable to all branches of Zoology. The attempt 
to make the 10th or even the 12th edition of Linneus the 
starting-point for specific names would, if applied strictly, 
soon bring the nomenclature of Lepidoptera into a hopeless 
state of confusion, which would result in deterring beginners 
from following any rules but those of convenience. After all, 
