HALIDAY AND LOEW 
55 
tific point of view. My often reiterated thesis that “ beginnings 
are generally symptomatic of the beginner ” has seldom been more 
strikingly illustrated than by Haliday. His first publication on 
Diptera was that on Orphnephila (1831), perhaps the most refrac¬ 
tory genus of the Order. Haliday gave a description of it (with 
figures) which, in its completeness, is far in advance of most of the 
generic descriptions in the same Order before his time. With his 
characteristic indifference for notoriety, he seems to have acquired, 
some time afterwards, many new facts on the same subject without 
publishing them immediately. This appears from his paper, 
“ Notes on Irish Diptera,” published a quarter of a century later 
(Natural History Revieiv , Proceedings, Yol. Ill, 1856, p. 73, 
Plate II), in which he submits to the Dublin University Zoological 
and Botanical Association “ some notes and sketches of the internal 
anatomy of both sexes of Orq)hnephila , made many years since." 
A long time previous to this publication, in the letter quoted 
above (September 27, 1847), Haliday had communicated to Loew 
the drawing of a plate containing twenty-six figures of the internal 
and external anatomy of Orphnephila , only a portion of which 
were published in the plate of 1856, and the rest are unpub¬ 
lished to this day (I cannot make a detailed comparison, because 
I have before me only a manuscript extract of the paper of 1856, 
and no plate). This laborious piece of work is introduced in Hali- 
day’s letter to Loew in the following modest manner: “ I send 
also tracings of some of the details of Orphnephila , which may 
enable your practised eye to pronounce on its affinities. Rondani, 
after seeing the insect, continued to be of opinion that it should 
form a distinct family ; but this gives no information as to its true 
place, nor does he seem to me to be particular as to the series of 
his families, contenting himself with the definition of them,” etc. 
I find that Loew, fifteen years later, in the “ Monographs,” 
Yol. I, p. 6 (1862), placed Orphnephila at the end of the Chiro- 
nomiclae , and added: “It differs from all other Chironomidae by 
the veins of the wings running without attenuation to, and the 
costal vein being continued round, the posterior border. If we do 
not establish a separate family for it, its proper place will be here, 
but as an anomalous genus.” If Loew had offered the same solu- 
