Proposed Reform of Zoological Nomenclature. 267 
to Zlian, Pliny, and Aristotle, till our zoological studies would 
be frittered away amid the refinements of classical learning.* 
We therefore recommend the adoption of the following pro- 
position :— 
§ 2. The binomial nomenclature having originated with 
Linneus, the law of priority, in respect of that nomen- 
clature, is not to extend to the writings of antecedent 
authors. 
[It should be here explained, that Brisson, who was a contem- 
porary of Linneus and acquainted with the ‘ Systema Nature,’ 
defined and published certain genera of birds which are additional 
to those in the twelfth edition of Linneus’s works, and which are 
therefore of perfectly good authority. But Brisson still adhered 
to the old mode of designating species by a sentence instead of a 
word, and therefore while we retain his defined genera, we do not 
extend the same indulgence to the titles of his species, even when 
the latter are accidentally binomial in form. For instance, the 
Perdiaz rubra of Brisson is the T'etrao rufus of Linneeus ; therefore 
as we in this case retain the generic name of Brisson and the 
specific name of Linneus, the correct title of the species would be 
Perdiz rufa.] 
[Generic names not to be cancelled in subsequent subdivisions. ] 
As the number of known species which form the groundwork 
of zoological science is always increasing, and our knowledge of 
their structure becomes more complete, fresh generalisations con- 
tinually occur to the naturalist, and the number of genera and 
other groups requiring appellations is ever becoming more exten- 
sive. It thus becomes necessary to subdivide the contents of old 
groups, and to make their definitions continually more restricted. 
In carrying out this process, it is an act of justice to the original 
author that his generic name should never be lost sight of; and 
it is no less essential to the welfare of the science, that all which 
is sound in its nomenclature should remain unaltered amid the 
additions which are continually being made to it. On this 
ground we recommend the adoption of the following rule :— 
§ 3. A generic name, when once established, should never 
be cancelled in any subsequent subdivision of the group, 
but retained in a restricted sense for one of the constituent 
portions. 
[Generic names to be retained for the typical portion of the 
old genus, | 
When a genus is subdivided into other genera, the original 
* “ Quis longo evo recepta vocabula commutaret hodie cum patrum ?’’—Linneus, 
