312 MB. p. L. SCLATBB ON THE [Mar. 3, 



Naturae ' as our starting-point (as is enacted in the Stricklandian 

 Code) we allow Linnaeus this privilege. If we take the tenth 

 edition, as proposed by the American ornithologists, and now 

 adopted in the two German Codes, we deny him the right of 

 correcting his own work, which, under the circumstances, appears 

 to be obviously unfair aud injudicious. For it is unquestionably 

 the case that Linnteus altered some of his names in his last and 

 most perfect edition of 17GG-C8, and added others to his list. If 

 we acknowledge the authority of the authors who wrote between 

 1758 and 1766 we shall have to change some of Linnaeus's best- 

 known names. Por example, the Ilorned Screamer of South 

 America has been universally known to ornithologists as Palamedea 

 cormita, asnamedby Linnaeus in the twelfth edition of the ' Systema,' 

 the genus having been omitted in the tenth edition. In the 

 meanwhile, however, Brisson in 1762 (Orn. v. p. 518) had used 

 " Anhima" of Marcgrave as its generic name, and Mr. Stejneger 

 has accordingly proposed to call the Ilorned Screamer Anliima 

 corimta (Stand. Nat. Hist. iv. p. 135). If this alteration be adopted, 

 the names of the family Palamedeidce and of the suborder Pala- 

 medece will likewise have to be changed. 



I will take another example of the inconvenience of allowing 

 Linnaeus's names to be superseded. The Common Darter of 

 Central and South America is the riotvs anlmuja of Linua}us'8 

 twelfth edition and is almost universally known under this name, 

 which also gives its name to the family Plotidw. Unfortunately, 

 Brisson in the intei-val between the two editions of the ' Systema ' 

 proposed the generic term Anhinga for the same bird, and the 

 American Check-list consequently proceeds to call the Darter 

 "Anhinga anliinga," and the family " AnJiingidce." It must be 

 admitted that both these alterations, which are consequent upon 

 the adoption of 1758 as the commencement of binary nomenclature 

 in place of 1766, as well as many other changes of the same 

 character which I need not now cite, are matters of considerable 

 importance. Strickland, the founder of our modern Codes of 

 Nomenclature, after deliberately considering the point, adopted 

 the latest and most perfect edition of the ' Systema Naturae ' as 

 his starting-point. I think we should do unwisely to deviate 

 from Strickland's views on this subject. It is true that Strickland 

 proposed to allow such of Brisson's names as were additional to 

 those of the twelfth edition of the ' Systema Naturae ' to be 

 retained, but ho certainly did not contemplate the supercession of 

 any of Linnaous's names by those of Brisson or of any other 

 authority. Oji the ground of priority, therefore, I claim that, as 

 first decided by Strickland, we ought to adopt the twelfth and most 

 perfect edition of the 'Systema Naturaj'as the basis of modern 

 Nomenclature. Even if we adopt the tenth edition as our starting- 

 point, a special proviso should be made that none of the names 

 contained in the twelfth edition should be allowed to be disturbed. 



There are two or three less important points in Zoological 

 Nomenclature upon which I wish to add a few words. 



(1) The German Code, which we are now principally considering 



