54 



24. Antonnarius Cominerson, 1791, and Cuvier, 1817, vs. Histrio Fischer, 



1813. — Antennarius Commerson is an uuinoininal generic name (Art. 2) 

 of an author who used a binary (Art. 25) (though not binominal) 

 nGmenclature. It received nonienclatorial status by virtue of its 

 publication by Lacepede, 1798, and should date from tliat time instead 

 of fr^m Cuvier, 1817. It is therefore not necessary to suppress it in 

 favour of Histrio, 1813. 



Vote : AiErmative 12 ; negative ; not voting 3. 



25. Bamesiella Tornquist, 1899, vs. Bamesella Walcott, 1905. — Under 

 Article 36, Eecommendations, it is not necessary to reject Damesella, 

 1905, because of the existence of JDamesicUa, 1898 (1899'?). 



Vote : Affirmative 11 ; negative 1 ; not voting 3. 



26. Cypsilurus vs. Cypsehirus. — In view of the number of typographical 

 errors in Svs'ainson, 1838 and 1839, the Commission is oi the opinion 

 that Cypsilurusis, an evident typographical error and should be corrected 

 to Cypselurus. 



Vote : Affix'mative 10 ; negative 1 ; not voting 4. 



27. Ewpfelia and Bupellia vs. Bilppellia. — Since a typograpjiical error is 



evident, Buppelia and Bupellia should be corrected to liujjpetlia. 



Vote : Affirmative 9 ; negative 1 ; not voting 6. 



28. Shall the ' Nouvelle Classification' of Meigen, \SQO, he given precedence over 

 Meigen's ^Versuch,' 1803? — The generic names contained in Meigen's 

 ' Nouvelle Classification,' 1800, must take precedence over those in his 

 ' Versuch,' 1803, in every case vs^bere the former are found valid under 

 the International Code. 



Vote : Affirmative 11 ; negative ; not voting 4. 



Official List of most frequently used Zoological Xames. — 

 Tliere is a clesii^e on the part of some zoologists that certain 

 veiy commonly used zoological names should be excej^ted from 

 the application of the LotW of Priority, and a proposition to this 

 effect has been presented to the Commission from the British 

 Association for the Advancement of Science and the Eastern 

 Branch of the American Society of Zoologists. That this desire 

 is so widespread and so deeply rooted as is assumed by some of 

 our colleagues has not been confirmed by inquiries made by 

 several members of the Commission. Further, an effort made by 

 the Secretary to collect from zoologists the most commonly used 

 and most important generic names has as yet met with such poor 

 success, that the conclusion does not seem entirely unjustified 

 that some of our colleagues who may be in favovir of such a list 

 are not as yet sufficiently enthusiastic over the proposition to 

 induce them to demonstrate their desire by placing into the 

 hands of the Commission the data upon which such a list must 

 of necessity be based. Further, there are many colleagues who 

 are known to us to be directly and enthusiastically opposed to 

 such list. 



After careful consideration of the subject and of the many 

 difficulties involved, the Commission has decided to propose 

 to the Congress the trial of a proposition which it is hoped 



