1889.] 



THE YOUNG NATURALIST. 



fixed in their memories, and they object to the trouble which a change 

 of name which would entail on them. This may in some measure 

 account for the remark made a few days ago by an eminent lepi- 

 dopterist in writing on Hufnagel's types, he refers incidentally to 

 " those whose knowledge did not extend beyond the limits of our ordinary 

 Exchange lists." That there are many such persons whose knowledge 

 is thus limited, doubtless is true enough ; yet the probable reason for 

 this may be found in the complexity and confusion consequent on a 

 multiplicity of lists. At the same time we must bear in mind that in 

 the study of coleoptera synonomy is of the utmost importance, owing 

 to our habitual intercourse with continental authorities, and this 

 necessitates an uniformity of nomenclature in order to arrive at a proper 

 understanding in the determination of any insect, on which we may 

 desire their opinion. In deciding on the name by which a certain 

 insect shall be hereafter known, it is always understood that the name 

 given by the person who first described that insect shall have the 

 priority over all others. Sometimes it happens that an insect has 

 again been described by a second person as a new species and the 

 second name has passed current for a period ; when this is discovered 

 a change of names is considered to be necessary. But this system of 

 changing the nomenclature according to the "Laws of Priority" may 

 sometimes be carried too far, as clearly demonstrated by Canon Fowler 

 in the preface to his excellent work on " The Coleoptera of the British 

 Islands," the volumes of which are now in course of issue from the 

 press. As the passage I refer to strikes at the root of the system, I 

 cannot do better than quote it at length : — " The question of nomen- 

 clature is at present in such a confused and transitory position that I 

 have preferred to follow the old and well-known system rather than 

 adopt the changes that have been so largely introduced into the 

 European catalogue : I have, therefore, altered very few names, but 

 have in most cases appended the newly revived names as synonyms, 

 and referred to them in the index, so that few mistakes can arise. It 

 appears to me that nothing but utter confusion can result from the 

 present passion for the law of absolute priority, and in this I am 

 borne out by Dr. Sharp's recent paper "On some Proposed Transfers 

 of Names of Genera" (Transactions Ent. Soc. London, 1886, p. ii., 

 181), which was written in answer to a pamphlet by M. des Gozis, 

 entitled "Recherche de TEspece typique de quelques anciens genres." 

 Under the new system Necrophorus becomes Silpha, and Silpha 

 Necrophorus ; Pracrustes becomes Carabus, Carabus is changed to 

 Tachypus, and Tachypus, requiring a new name, is called Asaphidion ; 



