852 



SCIENCE 



[N. S. Vol XLIII. No. 1120 



eased individuals as such do not enter. On the 

 other hand we have the problem of the pre- 

 vention of the spread of diseases from the sick 

 to the well. In private practise we have, on 

 the one hand, the treatment of sick individuals 

 in whose welfare the public as such, aside from 

 humane sympathy or the danger of attendant 

 financial burdens, has no concern and, on the 

 other hand, the treatment of individuals who 

 so long as they are ill are of more or less 

 danger to the community at large. The fields 

 of the sanitarian in the prevention of the 

 spread of disease from one individual to an- 

 other and of the private practitioner in his 

 care of individuals afflicted with communicable 

 disease interweave. The duty of the public 

 health officer is to see that such persons are 

 cared for in a way that prevents so far as pos- 

 sible the spread of disease. The private prac- 

 titioner attending such individuals is required 

 to observe regulations in the interest of the 

 public health. Questions of public interest 

 should determine to what extent treatment of 

 individuals by private practitioners should be 

 supplemented by state officers. There cer- 

 tainly need be no fear that medical treatment 

 furnished sane adult individuals for their own 

 welfare by public officials will be forced on 

 them at the expense of their individual liberty. 

 In medical supervision in the public schools 

 it has not yet been determined to what ex- 

 tent medical inspection of the school children 

 should be supplemented by furnishing medical 

 treatment at public expense, but such treat- 

 ment is likely to increase in the future. In 

 the assumption by the public of responsibility 

 for the health of children as individuals, a re- 

 sponsibility that is beginning to extend back 

 of the school years, public health duties are 

 assumed which reach far beyond the control 

 of contagious diseases and are of great impor- 

 tance to the welfare of the race. Perhaps 

 some time we shall see in times of peace as 

 effective a medical service as nations which 

 desire success must have for their armies in 

 times of war. Here we see no line drawn be- 

 tween services for preventive medicine and 

 curative medicine. Fortunately our own army 

 medical service has been able to furnish some 

 of the most important recent advances in pre- 



ventive medicine, of value alike in times of 

 peace and times of war, an interesting summary 

 of which has recently been given by Henry 

 B. Hemenway.i It is noteworthy that the most 

 important American contributions both to the 

 science of public health and to the application 

 of this science have been made by medical 

 services which include within their scope re- 

 search, prevention and treatment, the Army 

 Medical Service and the Federal Public Health 

 Service. C. E. Baedeen 



NOMENCLATORIAL CONSISTENCY? 



Nothing more strikingly illustrates the hope- 

 lessness of unanimity among systematists on 

 nomenclatorial matters than a footnote in a 

 recent article by Mr. Hebard, Ent. News, 

 Yol. XXVIL, p. 17 (1916). Here he protests 

 strenuously against the resurrection of the 

 orthopterous genus Pedeticum of MclSTeill, 

 which he maintains is preoccupied by the 

 hemipterous genus Pedeticus of Laporte. But 

 these two names do not conflict according to 

 the apparent meaning of Article 36 of the 

 International Rules of Zoological iN'omencla- 

 ture, where it is recommended that names even 

 derived from the same radical and differing 

 from each other only in termination are not to 

 be considered as conflicting. Furthermore, 

 opinion 25 of the International Commission 

 bears directly on this subject, quotes from the 

 above mentioned recommendations and de- 

 cides that Damesella does not conflict with 

 Damesiella. Dr. C. "W. Stiles, the secretary of 

 the International Committee on Zoological 

 ISTomenclature, and our foremost authority on 

 nomenclature, when consulted regarding the 

 matter of Pedeiicum and Pedeticus, expressed 

 the opinion that these two names should not 

 be considered as conflicting. But Mr. Hebard 

 contends that the ornithologists and mammal- 

 ogists have long ago settled this matter, the 

 one-letter rule being suppressed unless indi- 

 cating different word derivation. This being 

 true, how about those, including Mr. Hebard 

 himself, who profess themselves followers of 

 the International Eules? Is it to be assumed 



1 ' ' American Health Protection, ' ' Bobbs-Mer- 

 rill Company, 1916. 



