564 



SCIENCE. 



[N. S. Vol. XXIV. No. 618. 



adopting the first species as the type and, 

 therefore, not being accustomed to use elim- 

 ination, declined to attempt to answer the 

 questions. Dr. Jordan and some others also 

 adopt the first species rule, but, having used 

 elimination at one time or another, answered 

 according to their interpretation of this 

 method. 



Dr. Stiles adopts his method of exclusion; 

 and Drs. Gill, Palmer and Evermann believe 

 that further knowledge of individual cases 

 would necessitate different answers from those 

 they have given, a view which to my mind 

 makes a hard and fast rule impossible and 

 opens the door wider than ever to individual 

 opinion. 



A summary of the answers follows : 

 Question I. 



13 answer yes to both. 

 1 answers yes to (a), no to (h). 

 1 answers yes, ' with reservations.' 

 1 ' depends on further history.' 

 Question II. 



10 answer sp. 3. 



4 answer sp. 2. 

 1 answers sp. 1. 



1 ' depends on further history.' 

 Question III. 



9 answer sp. 3. 



5 answer sp. 2. 

 1 answers sp. 1. 



1 ' depends on history.' 

 Question IV. 

 (a) 

 T say 1855. 

 8 say 1880. 



1 says date when synonymy was first recog- 



nized. 



(&) 

 8 say 1860. 



6 say 1880. 



2 say ' depends on history.' 

 Question V. 



(a) 

 12 say yes (4 with reservations). 



3 say no. 



1 ' depends.' 



(&) 

 15 say yes. 

 1 ' depends.' 



(c) 

 5 say change. 

 8 say no change. 



3 in doubt. 

 Question VI. 



14 say yes, 

 1 says no. 



1 ' not necessarily.' 

 Question VII. 



8 say sp. 2. 

 5 say sp. 4. 



2 in doubt. 



1 A = B absolutely, 



14 say sp. 3. 

 1 in doubt. 



Question VIII. 



U) 



15 say type A = 3. 



1 says A=F absolutely. 



(5) 



4 say sp. 4. 



2 say sp. 2. 

 4 say sp. 3. 



1 says 1, 2, 3 or 4. 

 1 says ? 



3 say F has no standing. 



These questions were purposely made as 

 simple as possible in order not to involve two 

 or more principles in one example, but the 

 cases encountered in actual practise are usu- 

 ally far more complicated; the diversity of 

 opinion upon them can readily be imagined. 



The points that I have tried to bring out 

 in this discussion are: 



(a) That ' elimination ' even in the best 

 hands will not give uniform results and that 

 any attempt to formulate minute rules for its 

 application will create a system too compli- 

 cated for general use. 



(b) That if elimination be uniformly ap- 

 plied to all complex genera, our nomenclature 

 will undergo more changes than if the ' first 

 species' rule be adopted. I have, I think, 

 proved this so far as ornithology is concerned, 

 and I have no doubt the same conditions will 

 be found to prevail in other branches. Elim- 

 ination has never been practised in Europe 

 and does not seem to be understood by foreign 



