June 5, 1896.] 



SCIENCE. 



versy. Then, perhaps, Dr. Merriam will tell us 

 whether he continues to recognize Lepus ameri- 

 canus and its subspecies L. a. virginianus. 



Samuel N. Rhoads. 

 Academy of Natubal Sciences, 



Philadelphia, April 17, 1896. 



AMEEICAN polar hares : A REPLY TO 

 ME. RHOADS. 



The above wail from Mr. Ehoads respecting 

 my review of his paper on the Polar Hares 

 calls for a brief reply. It was not the impor- 

 tance of Mr. Khoads' paper, as he seems to 

 suppose, but the importance of certain princi- 

 ples involved in his methods of treatment, that 

 led to the length of my review. My criticisms 

 were aimed mainly at two matters : one, a mat- 

 ter of description ; the other a matter of no- 

 menclature. In describing the new American 

 hares, Mr. Ehoads contrasted them with a Euro- 

 pean species (Lepus timidus) instead of with their 

 American relative (Lepus glacialis). This struck 

 me as bad systematic zoology. In treating the 

 Polar hare of BaflBnland he adopted the specific 

 name arcticus instead of glacialis, though both 

 names appeared simultaneously in the same 

 book. This struck me as bad nomenclature. 



The reasons for retaining glacialis as the 

 proper name of the animal were stated at 

 length in my review and need not be repeated 

 here. But in his reply Mr. Rhoads implies 

 that I have subordinated priority to the scieu- 

 tiflc standing of an author. This I deuy_ 

 Priority of publication is the cardinal principle 

 of nomenclature — the foundation of all modern 

 codes ; without it, stability in nomenclature is 

 impossible. But priority of publication and 

 priority of pagination are two widely different 

 things, and I deny that priority of pagination 

 constitutes priority of publication. It can 

 hardly be gainsaid that the different pages of a 

 book appear simultaneously ; hence names on 

 different pages of the same book should be 

 treated in the same way as names appearing 

 simultaneously in different books. Sequence 

 of pagination is a trivial circumstance, not to 

 be considered in fixing specific names except in 

 cases where no other reason for a choice can be 

 found. Even the A. O. V. Code quoted by 

 Mr. Rhoads concedes this, and goes so far as to 



accord greater weight to sex, age and season of 

 the type specimen than to priority of pagina- 

 tion. In other words, in choosing between 

 names of even date, sequence of pagination is 

 a last resort. 



It is useless to enter into a controversy with, 

 Mr. Rhoads over his astonishing statement that 

 of the descriptions of the American Polar hare- 

 given by Ross and Leach, "Ross' description- 

 is the better of the two." Reference to the- 

 work in which both appeared will settle this 

 point. 



In reply to Mr. Rhoads' inquiry as to the 

 source of the rule that ' in cases of equal per- 

 tinency the first reviser of the group has the 

 privilege of fixing the name,' it may be stated 

 that said rule expresses the practice of most 

 systematic zoologists — and I think botanists as 

 well — and is in complete accord with the spirit 

 of the A. O. U. Code, though not there formu- 

 lated as a distinct canon. In closing, I must 

 thank Mr. Rhoads for calling my attention to 

 what he considers would have been a proper 

 review of his paper. C. H. M. 



THE SUBJECT OP CONSCIOUSNESS. 



To THE Editor of Science : In the number 

 of Science for May 15th there is a letter from 

 Johannes Rehmke on the subject of ' conscious- 

 ness,' about which I beg leave to be indulged 

 in a brief statement. 



Take two equal weights with handles, one 

 weight being several times the bulk of the 

 other. Ask a blindfolded man to tell which is 

 the heavier, being careful not to let him touch 

 either weight, but only the handle, and he will 

 not judge of a difference. Now let the same 

 man, seeing the weights, but not knowing them 

 to be the same, decide which is the heavier ; he 

 will afiirm that the smaller is the heavier 

 weight. This is a common experiment in 

 psycho-physics. There are on record a vast 

 number of similar experiments which have been 

 abundantly verified, all leading to the con- 

 clusion that there are two elements in sensa- 

 tion, the one of consciousness of the effect upon 

 self and the other an inference relating to the- 

 thing observed by any one of the senses. All 

 of these experiments, and a vast body of ex- 

 periences which every individual undergoes,. 



