Caniutian yiitam(ilo0i$t. 



VOL. XXIV. LONDON, NOVEMBER, 1892. No. 11. 



MEETINCx OF THE ENTOMOLOGICAL CLUB OF THE 

 AMERICAN ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT 



OF SCIENCE, 1892. 



( Contimied frovi page 26 j.) 



Mr. Osborn followed with a paper upon 



HONEY-BEE OR HOUSE-FLY. 



BY HERBERT OSBORN, 



Ever since entomologists have classified insects and attempted to 

 assign a relative rank to different members of the class, the honey-bee has 

 had the distinction of standing at the head of the list, has been the 

 crowning point, the apex of an immense pyramid of inferior forms. 



That so useful a member of the insect class should occupy this exalted 

 position has seemed most appropriate, and that the reign of the honey-bee 

 has had universal sanction is proven by the fact that it has so long held 

 undisputed possession of the throne. 



In recent times, however, ruthless hands are raised in treasonable at- 

 tacks upon Queen Apis ; and whom do they propose to crown instead ? 

 No less an arrant disturber than the ubiquitous, omnipresent, insolent fly. 

 Down with (^ueen Apis ! ! Up with King Musca I ! How does that 

 sound ? 



All this is proposed by a young man. Prof. Aldrich, who makes flies 

 his especial pets, and he backs hmiself up with such authority as Prof. 

 Hyatt and Miss Arms, and is seconded by Prof. Townsend. The worst 

 of it is that these revolutionists seem to have the logic of the situation. 

 To be sure, it is suggested that the sheep-tick may, in the ultimate analysis 

 of the scheme, be the enthroned insect, but we fear that all other claim- 

 ants will be downed by the house-fly. What a travesty on beneficent 

 evolution, to produce this pestiferous plague — the most unmanageable 

 rascal afloat — as its most finished piece of insect handiwork. Can nothing 

 be done to avert such a calamity ? Have we no talented evolutionist 

 who can discover some series of relationship to prove that Musca lacks 



