116 Benj. P. Walsh on Prof. Dana 



PROF. DANA AND HIS ENTOMOLOGICAL SPECULATIONS. 

 BY BENJ. D. WALSH, M. A. 



In the Proceedings, etc., for Sept. 1864, (Vol. III. pp. 236-249), I 

 published some remarks upon Prof. J. D. Dana's new Classification of 

 Insects, to which he partly replies in the American Journal of Science 

 and Arts for March, 1866. (Vol. XLI. pp. 163-174.) 



It is not my desire further to discuss the points at issue between us. 

 ►So far as I am correctly quoted, I am quite willing to stand or fall by the 

 printed record. All I now wish is, to call attention to the fact, that in 

 the above Article Prof. Dana has, in three several instances as recited 

 below, misquoted me, and based arguments upon the misquoted 

 language, which, if that language had been correctly quoted, would 

 have fallen to the ground. 



1st. In my Paper (p. 238) I had said that" As originally expounded 

 by him [Mr. Dana] in Crustacea, Cephalization consists in ' the trans- 

 fer of the anterior members of the thorax to the cephalic series,' 

 (Sill. Journ. Vol. XXXVI. p. 66.) or in other words in legs being 

 converted into head organs." 



The passage here quoted from Prof. Dana is from an Article which 

 was published iu Jan. 1863, ten months before the first of the series 

 of four Articles on Cephalization, of which the one now under view 

 forms the fourth, and asserts expressly that "the transfer of the an- 

 terior members of the thorax to the cephalic series is the foundation 

 of rank among the Orders of Crustaceans." (p. 66.) Now, in saying 

 that " as originally expounded by him [Mr. Dana] in Crustacea, Ce- 

 phalization consists" in such a transfer, I frankly confess that I was 

 guilty of two errors, 1st. in quoting from a Paper published in 1863 as 

 conveying Prof. Dana's " original" views on the Classification of Crus- 

 tacea, for it appears that he had published on the subject as long ago as 

 1852 and 1856; and 2ndly,in implying that the " transfer" referred to 

 in the Article of Jan. 1863 forms, according to his views, the only 

 mode in which what he calls Cephalization is exhibited in Crustacea; 

 for he mentions in that very Article one or two subordinate characters 

 in addition iu Crustacea, which he considers as forms of Cephalization. 

 But Prof. Dana is not satisfied with proving me thus far iu the wrong. 

 He makes bad ten times worse, and causes it to appear that the passage 

 which he quotes from my Paper refers to the views on Cephalization 





