so 



SCIENCE. 



[N. S. Vol. VII. No. 158. 



ZIRKELITE — A QUESTION OF PRIORITY. 



In the Mineralogical Magazine, Vol. XI., pp. 

 S6-88 (read June 18, 1895) is described a new 

 mineral containing zirconium, titanium, lime, 

 iron, etc., under the name of Zirkelite. This 

 paper was prepared by my friend Dr. E. Hussak 

 and Mr. G. T. Prior. 



Later Mr. Prior (1. c, pp. 180-183, Read Nov. 

 17, 1896) published an analysis of the same 

 mineral. 



I wish to protest against the use of the name 

 Zirkelite for this mineral on the ground of the 

 prior use of it to designate a commonly occur- 

 ring rock belonging to the basaltic family. 



When two subjects are so intimately con- 

 nected as mineralogy and petrography it does 

 not seem to be for the interest of science that 

 names should be duplicated in them. So true 

 is this that I abandoned the name Rosenbuschite, 

 which I had given to a class of rocks in honor 

 of Professor Rosenbusch, because only a few 

 weeks previously it had been employed to des- 

 ignate a new mineral. 



The term Zirkelite was used by me in 1887, 

 or seven years before it was taken by Messrs. 

 Hussak and Prior. (See Preliminary Descrip- 

 tion of the Perioditites, Gabbros, Diabases and 

 Andesites of Minnesota. Bulletin No. 2, Geo- 

 logical Survey of Minnesota, 1887, pp. 30-32.) 

 It was used to desigaate the commonly occur- 

 ring altered conditions of basaltic glassy lavas 

 which are often called diabase glass, etc. Zir- 

 kelite occurs forming the entire mass of thin 

 dikes, and the exterior parts of many dikes of 

 diabase and melaphyr, as well as the surface of 

 old lava flows like the melaphyrs- and diabases 

 of Lake Superior, Newfoundland and elsewhere. 

 Zirkelite holds the same relation to tachylite 

 that diabase and melaphyr do to basalt, i. e. , an 

 older and altered type. The macroscopic and 

 microscopic characters of this rock were given 

 in the locality cited above. 



The term Zirkelite was again used in the same 

 way in my Report to the Geological Survey of 

 Michigan for 1891-1892 (1893, pp. 30, 97, 138, 

 etc.). 



It was also published in my classification of 

 rocks given in the Catalogue of the Michigan 

 College of Mines (Michigan Mining School) 1891- 



1892, p. 104; 1892-1894, Table XL; 1894-1896, 

 Table XL 



Further, the term Zirkelite is defined in ac- 

 cordance with my usage in Loewinson-Lessing's 

 Petrographisches Lexikon, 1893, p. 252 ; and 

 accounts of it are given in the Neues Jahrbuch 

 fiir Mineralogie, 1893, II., p. 292, and in 

 Kemp's Handbook of Rocks, 1896, p. 170. 



M. E. Wadsworth. 

 Michigan College of Mines, 



Houghton, Mich., December 17, 1897. 



SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE. 

 Catalogtis Mammalium tarn viventium quamfossil- 

 ium. Dr. E. L. Trouessart. New Ed. 

 Fascic. II., Carnivora, Pinnipedia, Rodentia 

 (Protrogomorpha and Sciuromorpha), pp. 

 219-452, June, 1897. Fascic. III., Rodentia 

 (concluded), pp. 453-664, Oct., 1897. Berlin, 

 R. Friedlander und Sohn. Price, $2.50 each 

 part. 



The second and third parts of Trouessart's 

 ' Catalogue of Mammals, living and fossil,' have 

 come to hand and carry the work through the 

 Carnivora and Rodentia. These parts are less 

 satisfactory than the first, and cannot be said to 

 represent the present state of knowledge of the 

 groups treated, particularly with respect to 

 American forms. Among the latter many 

 synonyms are accorded full specific rank, many 

 good species are degraded to synonymy, and 

 many forms are transposed in a manner that 

 shows an absence of appreciation of their afiini- 

 ties. And when it comes to the geographic 

 distribution of American species the most as- 

 tonishing inaccuracies creep in, as might be ex- 

 pected. 



In matters of nomenclature Dr. Trouessart 

 seems to be a law unto himself, and consistency 

 does not seem to be one of his canons. In 

 using Brisson he quotes the pre-Linnsean edition 

 (1756), which has no status in nomenclature, 

 instead of the edition of 1762 ; while in quoting 

 Linnseus he takes the opposite course and uses 

 the 12th edition (1766) instead of the 10th 

 (1758), which is accepted the world over as 

 marking the beginning of Zoological nomen- 

 clature. With respect to Brisson's genera it 

 will be interesting to know what rules, if any, 

 led to the adoption of Hydrochcerus and the re- 



