At the end of the second hour from the commencement of the last charge the operation was closed, giving an average product for each charge of 1470 cubic feet of gas, or a yield of 7.35 cubic feet for each pound of the mixture employed. As by former trials I had determined the value of the Westmoreland coal alone, by the Hydro-carbon Process, to be 6.27 cubic feet of gas, it follows that the increase of 1.08 cubic feet of gas is due to the average addition of 73 per cent of the wol

longongite.

The yield of gas per one ton (2240 lbs.) of such a mixture would therefore be 16,464 cubic feet.

The illuminating Power of the Gas.-The illuminating power of the gas in these experiments was determined by the Bunsen Photometer in the usual manner.

From the two first charges of 5 per cent of wollongongite and 95 per cent of Westmoreland coal the corrected result of 15 observations gave an illuminating power of 18.79 candles.

From the charges containing 10 per cent of wollongongite the illuminating power was

Average power for whole quantity containing an average of 71⁄2 p. c. of wollongongite,

26.98

22.88

66

These results are given for the usual standard of 5 cubic feet of gas burned in one hour in an Argand standard burner.

The total economical effect of a mixture containing ten per cent of wollongongite is best stated in the quantity of spermaceti, equivalent to one ton (2240 lbs.) of such a material which in this case is found to be

The Westmoreland coal alone when treated by the same process yields a total economical effect, Gain of total economical effect due to the use of 10 per cent of Wollongongite,

Equivalent to 221 per cent gain.

As the yield of gas per ton of this mixture is

1774.9 lbs.

797 6

977-3

16464 c. f.

And Westmoreland coal alone by same treatment, 14057 " It is evident that 7 per cent of wollongongite (or 168-2 lbs.) have yielded gas,

2407 "

This quantity (2407÷168-8) corresponds to 14:31 cubic feet of gas to the pound of material. When treated alone by the common process the wollongongite yields as already stated in the former part of this paper, 611 cubic feet per pound. There is an increase therefore of 2325 per cent in the volume of the gas obtained from the wollongongite under the influence of the hydro-carbon process. It is evident therefore that

under the influence of this process the extremely dense and rich gas which the ordinary process returns from this coal is broken up into a much larger volume of gas of a less density and lower illuminating power. Wollongongite has therefore the power to raise the illuminating intensity of gas from common caking coals when treated by the hydro-carbon process, even when so small a quantity as five per cent is employed, much above the average of illuminating gas in common use; while at the same time the volume of the gas produced exceeds 16,400 cubic feet per ton against about 10,000 cubic feet by the common process, of a much lower illuminating power.

ART. XI.-The Rules of Zoological Nomenclature. From the Report of a Committee "appointed to report on the changes which they may consider desirable to make, if any, in the Rules of Zoloogical Nomenclature, drawn up by Mr. H. E. STRICKLAND, at the instance of the British Association, at their meeting in Manchester in 1842." With notes by A. E. VERRILL.

THAT the value and utility of the binomial system of nomenclature, established by Linné and at once adopted by nearly all scientific zoologists and botanists, depends directly upon the uniformity and universality of the rules regulating its application is so evident as to require no demonstration; yet very many writers, both in this country and abroad, constantly ignore, either ignorantly or carelessly, if not wilfully, many of the most essential laws proposed by the author of the system, and confirmed and made sacred by the usage of the best naturalists of the past century. The advance of zoological and botanical sciences has, it is true, made necessary certain restrictions to and extensions of the rules established by Linnæus, but later codes of laws regulating this matter are based upon and, in all the principal points, are essentially identical with those originally proposed."

To secure greater uniformity and bring about certain reforms in this matter, the British Association in 1842 appointed a committee, consisting of Mr. C. Darwin, Professor Henslow, Rev. L. Jenyns, Mr. W. Ogilby, Mr. J. Phillips, Dr. Richardson,

* An excellent exposition of the Linnæan canons, as elaborated in the Philosophia Botanica, has been given by Prof. Agassiz in the preface to his Nomenclator Zoologicus, 1846, together with a review of those of the British Association. See also A. Gray's review of the work, this Journal, 2d Series, vol. iii, p. 302, 1847.-V.

Mr. H. C. Strickland, Mr. J. O. Westwood, to draw up and report a code of rules" by which the nomenclature of zoology may be established on a uniform and permanent basis." To this committee were afterward added W. J. Broderip, Professor Owen, W. E. Shuckard, G. R. Waterhouse and W. Yarrel. This committee in 1842 submitted to the Association a "series of propositions," which were adopted and printed in the Report for that year. They were also published separately for private distribution.

A committee was afterward appointed by the Association of American Geologists and Naturalists to consider this subject. The committee reported at the sixth meeting, 1845, in favor of adopting the British Association's Rules, with slight modifications, the principal objection being to the writing of proper names of species without an initial capital, a change since introduced also by the British Association. The report was accepted and the amended rules adopted.† Although the reformatory influence of these rules, thus brought so prominently to the notice of zoologists, has doubtless been very great, yet their success was but partial, even in England, for a considerable number of English authors have either ignored them or adopted them only in part, often violating the most obvious and important rules. In the department of conchology, especially, the violations of such laws have been lamentably numerous and disastrous. This result may, perhaps, have been due in part to a few propositions, which, though of but secondary importance, were regarded as objectionable, in practice, by some of the best writers, and have now been modified. In 1863, a new committee of sixteen was appointed by the British Association to consider the "changes, if any, which they may consider it desirable to make in the Rules." At the Birmingham meeting in 1865, a Report was submitted and adopted by the Association, recommending the following:I. That Botany should not be introduced into the Strickland rules and recommendations.

II. That the permanency of names and convenience of practical application being the two chief requisites in any code of rules for scientific nomenclature, it is not advisable to disturb

* Report of the twelfth meeting, 1842, p. 106,-also reprinted in Annals of Natural History; Philosophical Magazine; translated into French, in the Journal of 'L'Institut'; and translated into Italian and approved by the Scientific Congress at Padua, in 1843. See also reviews in this Journal, vol. xlv, p. 1, 1842; and 2d series, vol. iii, p. 302, 1847.

1846.

These amended rules were printed in this Journal, 2d series, vol. ii, p. 423,

Report of the British Association for the Advancement of Science, Birmingham, 1865, p. 28.

by any material alterations the rules of zoological nomenclature which were authorized by Section D at the Meeting of the British Association at Manchester in 1842.

III. The Committee are of opinion, after much deliberation, that the XIIth edition of the Systema Nature' is that to which the limit of time should apply, viz., 1766. But as the works of Artedi and Scopoli have already been extensively used by ichthyologists and entomologists, it is recommended that the names contained in or used from these authors should not be affected by this provision. This is particularly requisite as regards the generic names of Artedi, afterward used by Linnæus himself.*

In Mr. H. E. Strickland's original draft of these Rules and Recommendations the edition of Linnæus was left blank, and the XIIth was inserted by the Manchester Committee. This was done not as being the first in which the Binomial nomenclature had been used, as it commenced with the Xth, but as being the last and most complete edition of Linné's works, and containing many species the Xth did not. For these reasons it is now confirmed by this Committee, and also because these rules having been used and acted upon for twenty-three years, if the date were altered now, many changes of names would be required, and in consequence much confusion introduced.

IV. In Rule 13th, "Specific names, when adopted as generic, must be changed." The committee agree that it is exceedingly injudicious to adopt a specific name as a generic name, but they are of opinion that where this has been done, it is the generic name which must be thrown aside, not the old specific name, and that this rule should be so altered as to meet this.

V. The recommendations under "Classes of objectionable names," as already pointed out, cannot be too carefully attended to. Specific names from persons have already been sufficiently prostituted, and personal generic names have increased to a large and undeserving extent. The handing down the name of a naturalist by a genus has always been considered as the highest honor that could be given, and should never be bestowed lightly.

*If the XIIth edition is to be adopted as the limit of priority, it will be neces sary to make additional exceptions. Thus the excellent and important work of Pallas, Elenchus Zoophytorum, was published nearly two years before the last volume of the Systema Naturæ, ed. XII, and contains a much greater number of species than were included in the latter work, while the descriptions of genera and species are far superior and the system purely binomial. To reject the earlier names of Pallas would be doing gross injustice to an able naturalist, who was among the first to adopt the binomial system after its appearance in the Xth edition. The more logical and just course would be to limit the law of priority to the Xth edition, thus applying the law to its author. This course is also sanctioned by the usage of many of the best zoological writers. But in several other depart ments of zoology it will make no difference whether the Xth or XIIth edition be regarded as the limit.-v.

VI. The recommendation, "Specific names to be written with a small initial." The Committee propose that this recommendation should be omitted. It is not of great importance, and may be safely left to naturalists to deal with as they think fit.

These are the chief alterations and modifications the Committee have to suggest. It is scarcely possible to make any code of rules for a subject so extensive as zoology either perfect in itself or such as will meet the opinions of every one. It must be a matter of compromise, and as working by no rules is creating great confusion and an immense increase in synonymy, the Committee would ask this Section to approve their present report or finding, and to give their sanction to these Rules and Recommendations as now proposed to be modified.

Signed on the part of the members of Committee present at Birmingham by WM. JARDINE, Reporter.

On the preceding Report being read to Section D, upon Tuesday, 19th September, the following motion was made and carried unanimously :

Moved by Mr. Gwyn Jeffreys, seconded by Dr. Sclater,That the Report now read be approved of and adopted by the Section, and that the Rules or propositions, as thereby altered and amended, be printed in the Reports of the British Association and recommended for the general use of zoologists.

PART I.

RULES FOR RECTIFYING THE PRESENT ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE.

[Limitation of the Plan to Systematic Nomenclature.]-In proposing a measure for the establishment of a permanent and universal zoological nomenclature, it must be premised that we refer solely to the Latin or systematic language of zoology. We have nothing to do with vernacular appellations. One great cause of the neglect and corruption which prevails in the scientific nomenclature of zoology, has been the frequent and often exclusive use of vernacular names in lieu of the Latin binomial designations, which form the only legitimate language of systematic zoology. Let us then endeavor to render perfect the Latin or Linnæan method of nomenclature, which, being far removed from the scope of national vanities and modern antipathies, holds out the only hope of introducing into zoölogy that grand desideratum, an universal language.

[Law of Priority the only effectual and just one.]—It being admitted on all hands that words are only the conventional signs of ideas, it is evident that language can only attain its end effectually by being permanently established and generally recognized. This consideration ought, it would seem, to have checked those who are continually attempting to subvert the established lan

The members of the Committee present at Birmingham were A. R. Wallace, Professor Babington, Dr. Francis, Dr. Sclater, C. Spence Bate, P. P. Carpenter, Professor Balfour, H. T. Stainton, J. Gwyn Jeffreys, A. Newton, G. Bentham, and Sir W. Jardine, Bart. (Reporter).