96 Zoological Nomenclature. 
the true nature of language, they persist in sie a the name of a spe- 
cies or group with its definition ; and because the former often falls short of 
the Iness of ceatans ion found in the latter, they cancel it without hesitation, 
ntro et some new term which appears to them more characteristic, but 
which i is utterly unknown to the science and is the — devoid of all au- 
thority.* If these persons were to object to such n 
: “chil : 
u 
a at they etd ethe of meaning, and should hes propose to 
change e the ristic appellations, they would not act more 
pai eort ge tard or fabonbider ninhe than they do in the c poione before us; for, 
truth, it matters not in the least by what arenes onal sound we agree to 
steal ate an individual object, provided the sign to be employed be stamped 
with such an authority as will suffice to ihe e it pass current. Now in zodl- 
0 
be inferior s point of elegance or expressiveness to those eee es pro- 
ed, ought as a hy ies principle to be permanently retained. ‘To this con- 
sideration we ou ght to add the injustice 4 ag oy the name acai selec- 
ted by the person to ne ssi labors we owe our first knowledge of the object; 
origi raion 
which he himself has once published, xcept in accordance with fixed and 
uitable laws. It is well observed by, . — andolle, “ L’auteur méme qui a 
le premier établi un nom n’a pas ‘plus qu sate le droit de le eae r fan 
The name originally given by the founder of a group 
or bs describer of a species should be permanently retained, 
to the exclusion of all subsequent synonyms (with the excep- 
tions about to be noticed). 
Having laid down this principle, we must next inquire into the limitations 
which are found necessary in carrying it into practices 
Not to extend to authors older than Linneus.]—As our subject matter is 
strictly confined to the binomial system of nomenclature, or that which indi- 
cates species by means of two Latin words, the one generic, the other specific, 
and as this invaluable method originated solely with Linneus, it is clear ‘ that, 
are c ed, ght not to att e 
face ple of priority beyond the date of the 12th edition of the ‘Systema 
ature,’ Previous to that period, naturalists were wont to indicate 
by a name comprised in one word, but by a definition 2 
cuple e, the extreme verbosity f whieh method was productive 
of great beraapiscsiog © It i word sometimes sufficed e 
definition of a species, but these rare cases — ony binomial by accident 
and Ss - bi rn ete and — oye re in any instance to superse 
the binomial designations ain: 
* Linnzus says on this subject, ‘ ois ab hac innovatione que nuD- 
quam cessaret, quin indies aptiora detegerentur ad infinitum a 
