l8o JOURXAI. OF COXCHOl.OGV, VOL. II, NO. 6, APRIL, I905. 



5. The rules adopted in 1894 by the German Zoological Society 

 after a report by J. V. Carus, L. Doderlein, and K. INIobius 



6. The Merton rules referring to Entomology, adopted in 1896 

 by Lord AValsingham for the publications issuing from his private 

 museum. 



It will be seen, therefore, that proposals have not been wanting and 

 we might mention even more of them,^ but all have made the mistake 

 either of being applicable only to one division of the animal kingdom 

 (such for example as fossils) or of being only the expression of per- 

 sonal opinions or of emanating simply from learned societies acting 

 on their own initiative. 



Such a state of things must inevitably be prejudicial to scientific 

 progress, and it is, therefore, easy to understand why the founders of 

 the International Zoological Congress should have considered one of 

 its most urgent duties to be the recasting of the rules of the Zoological 

 Nomenclature, taking account of the animal kingdom in its entirety, 

 and treating the question from an international standpoint. 



The first International Congress met at Paris in 1889, and Professor 

 R. Blanchard presented a detailed report,- the discussion of which 

 occupied several days. Notwithstanding the attention devoted to this 

 important question, it was not possible to do more than examine a 

 portion of the work and ratify p.irt of its conclusions.'' The continua- 

 tion of the discussion was adjourned to the Second Congress, which 

 was fixed for Moscow, in 1892. 



On this occasion Professor R. Blanchard presented a new report 

 upon the questions which had been adjourned, the detailed discussion 

 of which occupied several sittings. With very few modifications the 

 conclusions were ratified in their entirety.' 



The International Congress had thus accomplished an important 



1 See the report of R. Blanchard, quoted later on, Bull. Soc. Zool. France., vol. 14, p. 213 

 et segg., 1889. 



2 R. Blanchard, " De la Nomenclature des Etres oiganisi^.s. Rapport present^ au Congres 

 international de Zoologie," Bull. Soc. Zool. France, vol. 14, p. 212-282, 1889. "Rapports pre- 

 sent's au Congres international de Zoologie," 160 p., Svo., Paris, 1889 (cf. p. 87-157). " Compte 

 rendu des Seances du Congres international de Zoologie," 1 vol.', 513 p., 8vo., Paris, iSgc {cf. 

 P- 333-404)- 



3 " Regies de la Nomenclature des Etres organiscis, adoptees par le Congres international 

 de Zoologie. Compte-rendu des seances du Congres international de Zoologie," publiii par 

 R. Blanchard, Paris, au siege de la Soci'te Zoologique de France, i vol., 8vo., 1S90 (cf. p. 419-424). 



4 R. Blanchard, " Deuxieme Rapport sur la Nomenclature des Etres organises," Mem. Soc. 

 Zool. France, vol. 6, p. 126-201, 1893. 



5 " Regies de la Nomenclature des Etres organisi^s, adoptees par les Congres internationaux 

 de Zoologie" (Paris, 1889; Moscou, 1892). Cong-res internat.de Zoolo£-ie, (\evix\eme session, 

 Moscon, 1892 {c/. 2e partie, supplement, p. 72-83). 



