•' NOTICE. 231 



ments of the perfect insect. To such men the term "scientific" is often 

 denied. They are called "mere collectors," or perhaps "raw recruits/' by 

 the wiser and more learned members of the entomological community. 



Secondly — Those who study the anatomy and affinities of insects, men 

 learned in many languages, who examine and compare specimens from all 

 parts of the world, and are great in synonymic lore. There are two men 

 who are considered, and justly, to walk in the higher paths of science, for 

 powers of abstraction and generalization are the requisite accomplishments 

 for such a position. They write much Latin in defining the characters 

 of insects, and indite long papers upon abstract points of difference in the 

 Entomological economy. They are the men to whom the rewards of fame 

 fall due. With all these perfections they have one fault; they are apt to 

 look down with something akin to contempt upon the hard-working 

 Naturalist of the woods and fields. 



With due deference, however, we are inclined to think such a division 

 of classes is not normal. It does not in reality exist, and when we find 

 that the distinction is anywhere prominently insisted upon, we may be 

 quite sure that pedantry or affectation is the spring by which the move- 

 ment is made. The practical Entomologist works quite as hard, if not 

 more so, than the man who collects facts in his study. Linnaeus, Kirby, 

 J. F. Stephens, Curtis, and a host of others, have earned their well-deserved 

 reputation as much in the field as the closet. The "Fauna Suecica," the 

 "Systema Naturae," the "Introduction to Entomology," the "British Ento- 

 mology," and the "Illustrations," are the splendid legacies of men who 

 sought Nature as she exists in her own garments of exquisite beauty. 



It is to the men, therefore, comprised in our first category, the "mere 

 collectors" of some, the "practical Entomologists" of others, to whom we 

 look principally for support in this our new venture in the cause of scientific 

 truth. We do not in the slightest degree wish to enter into the field of 

 opposition with any existing journal, we would not, if we could, touch the 

 well-earned prosperity of our Natural History periodicals, but we wish to 

 be supported by those who look upon Entomology as a pure mine of 

 science, to be worked by men who will do so for the love of that science 

 alone. We wish also to see the tone in connection with one very interesting 

 and important branch of Entomology, the most popular, perhaps, of all, 

 raised far above that which obtains at the present moment; and this can 

 only be done by the determined union of men of high and honourable 

 feeling, who will never permit the temple of science to be profaned. We 

 need not make further allusion to a subject well known to the collectors 

 of Lepidoptera, but which we trust we may now banish from these columns 

 for ever. 



Brighter far is the thought which now for a moment directs our attention 



