I 
ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE. 19 
XXI. Is it advisable to fix a limit of time, beyond which a name which 
has been received without objection during that time shall be 
held to have become valid, and no longer liable to change 
from the resuscitation of obsolete or uncurrent but actually 
prior names? No, 28. Doubtful, 1. Yes, 13. No answer, 3. 
XXII. If so, what shall this period be? No answer, 35. The others 
range from 10 to 100 years. 
XXIII. Should it be permitted to alter, or replace by other and different 
appellations, class, ordinal and family names, which owing to 
the advance of Science and consequent fluctuation of their 
supposed limits have become uncharacteristic? Yes, 30. Or 
should these also be rigidly subject to such rules of priority 
A as might be determined on for generic or specific names? No 
answer, 4. Yes, 11. 
XXIY. Should or should not absolute certainty of identification be 
required before it be permissible to reject a modern and 
generally adopted name in favor of a prior but uncurrent 
designation? Yes, 38. Doubtful, 2. No answer, 5. 
Note. Many of the old descriptions of species sufficient for 
identification when few species were known, are entirely in- 
sufficient at the present day to distinguish between allied 
species. Should, therefore, a modern specific name with a re- 
cognizable description be made to yield to an older name 
unless the identification can be made beyond any cavil? 
XXY. Is it desirable to adopt any classification of periodical literature 
by which certain exclusive channels for publication of descrip- 
tive papers in Natural History shall be designated for use by 
authors who desire to secure the rights of priority for new 
names proposed by them? No, 26. Desirable but impracti- 
cable, 9. Yes, 8. No answer, 2. 
Note. An affirmative answer will imply that names which 
may be proposed through other than the designated channels, 
after the latter shall have been decided upon, shall not be 
entitled to recognition in questions of priority. 
XXYI. Is it desirable to adopt any analogous rule in relation to the 
character or extent of distribution of any independent publi- 
cation or pamphlet to which it must conform, on pain of 
losing its right to recognition? No, 21. Desirable but im- 
practicable, 10. Yes, 14. 
Note. If the answer to either or both of the two preceding 
questions be affirmative, a note specifying the nature of the 
proposed classification or restrictions may be appended to this 
list. 
XXYII. Should a series of rules be recommended for adoption by the 
Association, would you be guided by these recommendations 
in cases where they might not agree with your own prefer- 
ences? Yes, 29. Yes, with reservations, 15. No, 1, 
