56 E. Billings on the Genus Athyris. 
selected two species, ‘A. tumida Dal. or Herculea Barrande,” and 
specially named them as the types 
He retained Sprrigera for the group of which S. concentrica is 
the type. As to this latter group, by whatever name it may be 
hereafter known, its extent will most a always be that 
assigned to it in ‘the work in quest 
The genus Athyris, however, as ee defined, included Merista, 
a circumstance which, however, as I shall presently show, in no 
way vitiates the arrangement. In a note, he states,—“ before 
le ee baerots who maintained that McCo oy had “ ‘originally and 
positively ” applied the name Athyris to the S. concentrica group, 
and, therefore, it could not be transferred to the other principal 
section. He, t erefore, in the French edition of this introduc- 
tion (1856), abandoned his first arrangement,* and substituted Me- 
rista and Athyris, at the same time transferring the latter to 
rigera, as in the extract given in the note below. (Op. cit., 101.) 
Upon a careful examination of all the circumstances I think 
it will be found that according to the laws of nomenclature this 
change cannot be sustained. “I shall therefore quote some 0: 
se laws and endeavor to apply them to this case. 
rule reads thus 
_ “§. 1—The name fall given by the founder of a group or the 
describer of a species, should be pgs retained, to the Saeal 
of all subsequent synonyms 
It seems scarcely necessary to quote such a rule as this. I 
only do so in order to make the comment, that it is the most im- 
t of all the laws of nomenclature ; and that its opera- 
tion cannot be prevented in any case, by merely technical obj i 
Vy 
rent te Provided the original diagnosis contains sufficient in 
tance, to enable the scientific public to identify the group, 
trivial err ors, from which og Nees oF no — are free, 
trica; et Merista, Suess, 
= 1066, ee 
neues Jarek, 
