tion, they were accompanied by reference to ^ previously and effectively 



A 



published descriptions and illustrations . Two, if this form of general 

 reference is deemed insuff icient a the plate numbers accompany them, 



which constitute precise and definite references , These 

 satisfy, in every respect, the requirement for valid publication by such 

 reference (Seattle Code Art. 32), 



I cannot accept arguments based on Linnaeus f supposed intention or 

 iack of intention to publish these names . He did effectively and validly 

 publish them, They are new names in the Code sense. being post star.ting- 

 date, . : 



Merrill, in his monumental Interpretation of Rumphius x Herbarium 

 Amboinense (1917), thcugh he presumably regarded these names as nomin a 

 nuda. accepted the references to their earlier effective pubiication 

 through the plate numbers as establishing the Rumphian plates and text as 

 the tvpes of such of these names as came into use later, 



The one further objection to these names that remains to be dealt 

 with Is tfiat they are sometimes said to have been published in a work. 



