COCCINELLID^E AND NOTES 249 



On page 8, Mr. Leng states that my adoption of type of coloration 

 as a primary taxonomic character, led me through an assumed 

 paucity of material into many "confessed errors," which must 

 deprive my conclusions of full authority. Disregarding for the 

 moment Mr. Leng's misapprehension of the term type of coloration 

 or maculation, it is uncertain to me whether or not he means that 

 by my having openly confessed error, my investigations are thereby 

 deprived of authoritative weight. If this be the sense intended, 

 we can say with sincere conviction that it is only those who are 

 primarily interested in truth for its own sake, as the single goal for 

 which we should aim in scientific study, who deem it essential to 

 reverse their judgment publicly upon the appearance of the welcome 

 light of additional evidence, more particularly in a field that none 

 of us really understands or could more than partially comprehend 

 in the longest human lifetime. Such occasional confessed reversals 

 of judgment may damage one's reputation among a certain element, 

 who do not care to take the trouble to weigh the evidence themselves, 

 as evincing vacillation and consequent unreliability, for to be 

 held in high authority by the multitude in science as well as in 

 politics, one must never admit anything that he may have said or 

 done to be really wrong; but, among those wise enough or sufficiently 

 experienced to appreciate how little we do really know, such a course 

 should but increase their confidence. 



Furthermore Mr. Leng may have no fear of belittling any modi- 

 cum of value my works may possess; it is quite beyond his power 

 to belittle the grains of truth, and I should be grateful to anyone who 

 may discover and eliminate the chaff: that is the real chaff, for, 

 some being real and some opinionative, the latter may still be the 

 subject of legitimate disputation. 



And now a few words as to the recent work of Mr. Roswell H. 

 Johnson, alluded to at some length by Mr. Leng. It must be 

 remembered that this author has attacked the subject purely from 

 the standpoint of the experimental biologist, dealing with variability 

 of spots and dashes of ornamentation and leaving almost wholly 

 out of consideration all those elements shown by experience to have 

 intrinsic weight in systematic taxonomy, such as structural fea- 

 tures both general and special, sexual characters, form, sculpture 

 and many other available and important criteria in defining species, 



