792 Walks Round San Francisco. [ December, 
having access to the results of each other’s labors, have sepa- 
rately described the same species, and have each given it a name. 
Perhaps one has called it obesus because it was short and thick, 
another, sanguineus because it was red, a third, macrodactylus 
because it had a large toe, while a fourth has named it smithii 
after his friend, John Smith. . 
But it is now a recognized rule among naturalists, and it is a 
rule that ought to be rigidly enforced, that priority of publication 
shall give precedence, and as soon as it can be ascertained which 
of the names was first given, provided it was accompanied by a 
description, that name shall in future be the name, no matter - 
whether it is good or bad Latin, or even whether it is rightly or 
wrongly spelled. It is the baptismal name, and, like that of an 
infant, must ever remain its name. It is only by keeping to this 
rule that we can ever reach bottom in scientific nomenclature; if 
every aggressive genius were allowed to change a well-known 
name for one that, in his estimation, fits it better, and if every 
Latinist, ignoring every consideration but those belonging to his 
pet grammar, might alter terminations and orthography at his 
will, the synonymy of species would be endless. The same rules 
apply to specific names that apply to the surnames or cognomens 
of human beings. 
When men were fewer, and proper names like John and William 
were the only recognized ones, the various Johns and Williams 
were distinguished from each other as John the baker, John the 
butcher, etc., or personal peculiarities were made a note of, and 
William Tallboy and John Short, with other sometimes very 
curious names arose; or a man leaving his native town of, let us 
say, Lincoln, became known in his new residence as John of 
Lincoln. These names stuck to the families, the members of 
which changing their trades, or possessing different physical 
peculiarities, often become the antipodes of their names. Thus, 
John Baker may be an iron monger, John Short may be tall, 
William Armstrong may be no stronger in the arm than John 
Smith, and John Gross may be a Lilliputian. I must now beg 
_ pardon of our esteemed corresponding secretary of the California 
Academy of Sciences, because I have taken the liberty to append 
his name to a species of fish which I believe has hitherto not 
_ been described. Many other names would fit it; it is long, slen- 
_ der and round, so are all the tribe it belongs to; it is brown,SO 
