46 SYSTEMS OF £iN tOMOLOG'i'. 



that the stiuleiil should coiifine himself to that system, but merely to 

 introduce him to a knowledge of the Families, for in this term tJie 

 genera of Linne may certainly be applied in most cases, and which 

 every entomologist will readily admit. Mr. Spence has observed, in 

 his excellent Monograph of the Genus Choleva in the Xlth vol. of the 

 Trayisudions of the Lbuucan Socictj/ : " It is contrary both to analogy 

 and experience to suppose the Creator has formed fewer of those 

 groupes into which we divide the vast tribes of nature by the name of 

 genera in one department than in another. Now in Botany, in which 

 not more than about 20,000 species have been described,we have upwards 

 of 2000 genera. In Entomology at least as many species are already de- 

 scribed; and when we combine the circmnstances, that in Britain not 

 fewer than SOOO species of insects are to be found, while we have about 

 3000 plants; and these are probably not one half of the European insects, 

 while we know that every other quarter of the globe is still more pro- 

 litic in species wholly different; and lastly, that every kind of plant 

 probaljly affords nutriraent on the average to three or four species of 

 insects, there can be little doubt that the insect is vastly more popu- 

 lous than the vegetable world. Is it likely then that the number of 

 genera should be much fewer than in botany; or at any rate that ir 

 shoidd not very greatly exceed its present amount? We need not 

 fear that the science will be rendered more difficult by an augmen- 

 tation of its genera. This cannot happen, if a proper system be adopt- 

 ed. If two or three insects, or even a single one, be strikingly charac- 

 terized by peculiaritj' of habit, they certainly pught in any system to 

 be distinguished at least as sections of the genera under which they are 

 placed. And will it increase the difficulty of investigation if they be 

 established as genera upon the same characters, and tUstinguished by a 

 name ? Clearly not. On the contrary, the science can be effectually 

 promoted in no other way; for names have an important iniluenct-. 

 upon the clearness of our ideas, and it will be impossible for us eve? 

 to gain correct views of the philosophy of our science while genera es- 

 sentially distinct are jumbled together under one title. 



" Entomology, therefore, is under the greatest obligations to Illigcr 

 in Germany, Latreille in France," (Kirbv, Leach, and Spence in En- 

 gland) ; " who ha\ing had the good sense to reject the useless while they 

 retain the valuable parts of the Fabrician system, are laljouring, liy the 

 institution of new genera built upon firm and intelligible characters, to 

 extricate the science from the chaos into which that author has un- 

 wittingly reduced it. Fabricius's system has now had a fair trial of 

 upwards of thirty years, and it was at one time universally followed on 

 the continent; yet so fiir is experience from having confirmed the as- 

 sertion of its author, that the Linna'an system is only calculated to 

 introduce confusion into the science, that the very system professing 

 to dissipate that confusion is c\en now fast sinking into oblivion, while 



