110 



SCIENCE. 



[N. S. Vol. XXI. Xo. 525. 



Jones led in a discussion of the subject, ' The 

 Training of Chemists,' reviewing a recent 

 paper by Sir William Ramsay. 



Dr. P. W. Rowland followed with a state- 

 ment of his views on the treatment of the 

 opium habit. According to his theory some- 

 thing is manufactured in the fluids of the 

 body of an opium eater which acts as an anti- 

 toxin — something positive is developed which 

 counteracts or antagonizes the morphine. 

 These opposing forces approximate a condition 

 of equilibrium, thus enabling the victim to 

 take ever-increasing doses. This partial 

 equilibrium is lost when the morphine is with- 

 held. It was considered possible to produce 

 an antitoxin, and it was suggested that the 

 club undertake an investigation to this end. 

 Dr. Rowland thought that some lower animal, 

 say the horse, could be rendered immune to 

 poisonous doses of opium or morphia by re- 

 lieated injections of the substance, and that 

 the serum thus obtained would probably con- 

 tain the antitoxin in the case of the habitue 

 of morphine or opium. 



1'he next meeting of the club was held 

 December 2. Dr. J. B. Bullitt, the leader for 

 the evening, after some introductory remarks 

 on immunity to drug influences, addressed 

 himself more particularly to the closely allied 

 subject ' Immunity from Disease.' Atten- 

 tion was called to the fact that the lower ani- 

 mals are immune to certain diseases to which 

 the human race is subject, and vice versa. It 

 was also noted that some divisions of the 

 race enjoy immunity where others show 

 peculiar susceptibility. Natural and arti- 

 ficial immunity were discussed. The history 

 of the various theories of immunity, Avith a 

 brief statement of each, was given, and special 

 emphasis was laid on the ' side-chain ' theory. 



Alfred Hume, 



Secretary. 



DISCUSSION AND CORRESPONDENCE. 



AN EX.\MPLE IN NOM KNCL.\TURE. 



Ml!. David White has published in the 

 ' Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections ' 

 (Quarterly Issue), Vol. XLVIL, Pt. III., pp. 



.322-331, pi. xlvii, xlviii, a paper on ' The 

 Seeds of Aneimites.' He shows that he has 

 specimens of the foliage of that genus with 

 seeds attached, also an abundance of detached 

 seeds. He names the species bearing these 

 seeds Aneimites fertilis n. sp. But he says 

 that he discovered the seeds before he could 

 be certain that they belonged to Aneimites, 

 and had contemplated giving them the name 

 ^Yardia, that he had even gone so far as to 

 give them that name in a manuscript in 

 preparation, but that he had postponed publi- 

 cation ' in the hope that further study * * * 

 would yield * * * evidence bearing either 

 on the internal organization of the fruits or 

 on the structure of the fronds.' Such evi- 

 dence he subsequently found and established 

 to his satisfaction that the ' fruits ' belong to 

 the genus Aneimites, a supposed fossil fern, 

 thus adding one more to the rapidly growing 

 list of Paleozoic seed plants. 



On page 323, where the species is described, 

 he calls it "Aneimites {Wardia) fertilis n. sp., 

 but in other places Aneimites fertilis. He, 

 however, constantly refers to the seeds as 

 'Wardia, and in at least one place (p. 329) he 

 calls them Wardia fertilis. He does not pre- 

 tend that they belong to a different genus from 

 Aneimites fertilis, and, indeed, proves that 

 they are the same, and the specific name is the 

 same for both combinations. What he has 

 done is to take a name from an unpublished 

 manuscript of his own and publish it for the 

 first time as an exact synonym of the name 

 that he gives to the species. The name ^Yardia 

 fertilis is, therefore, stillborn, or at least 

 strangled at its birth, and has no validity 

 whatever. 



Now why should he thus cumber an over- 

 burdened literature with another worthless 

 synonym? Such a proceeding in the present 

 state of science is a recognized crime. As Mr. 

 Bather said in discussing a similar case some 

 time ago, what does the scientific world care 

 for his private excogitations over material too 

 imperfect for publication? 



But the name Wardia was preoccupied 

 anyliow, for that name was given by 

 Harvey and Hooker in 1836 to a genus of 



