458 MELVILL: THE PRINCIPLES OF NOMENCLATURE. 
Cerithium ; but that Linnzeus had failed to comprehend these, 
and retrograded in placing such molluscs in the genus JZurex. 
Such is in abstract the report of the French Commission, 
which has been since upheld and augmented by that of the 
*International Geological Congress, which met at Bologna, 
188.1, under the secretaryship of M. H. Douvillé. In this the 
question of the genitival case for specific proper names was 
confirmed, and the question of the law of priority still further 
discussed. 
VII.—CoMMENTS BY VARIOUS WRITERS ON THE 
SUBJECT OF NOMENCLATURE. 
Dr. R. H. Traquair’st remarks on Binomial Nomenclature, 
contained in his introductory address delivered 19th November, 
1884, before the Royal Physical Society of Edinburgh, are well 
worth perusal, and we think many British naturalists will agree 
with his criticisms as to the alteration of an old specific name 
when the generic name becomes homologous with it, with the 
date-of-publication question, and with his remarks on priority. 
He likewise discusses trinomialism, of which he says “there 
are two kinds. ‘The first works by the institution of sib-genera. 
When the species of a large genus can be arranged in subordin- 
ate groups, s#b-generic titles are instituted for these ; and each of 
the species, excepting those of the typical sub-division, comes to 
have three names, the first generic, the second, sub-generic in 
parentheses, the third specific.” 
“To this I feel quite averse, as being an unnecessary inter- 
ference with the shortness, conciseness, and convenience of the 
binomial system.” 
* * * * * % * 
* Régles A suivre pour établir la nomenclature des espéces. Rapport du Secretaire de la 
Commission, H. Douvillé, Congres Géologique International, Compte Rendu de la 2me 
Session, Bologne, 1881-82. 
t Remarks on Biological Nomenclature, Proc, Roy. Phys. Soc. Edinburgh, vol. viil., 
Pp: 275-295, 1885. 
J,C., viii., Oct., 1897. 
