572 NATURAL SCIENCE. ^cr.. 



strange ignorance of previous work is patent ; and this is not to be 

 wondered at, for did not Sir William Flower, in his recent book on the 

 horse, tell us that more than two thousand papers had been written on 

 that animal alone ? We are not surprised, therefore, that authors 

 avoid, or ignore, such masses of literature — life is not long enough as 

 it is, and we cannot spend the whole of it in finding out whether a 

 previous author has counted the spots on a beetle's wing-case, or 

 labelled the hairs on a caterpillar. The suggestion made by one of 

 the correspondents in our contemporary, that there should be a central 

 agency — a Romeike, in fact, for Natural History — is an excellent one; 

 but who is to carry the project into execution ? For such an agency 

 must be complete and perfect, else one is no better off than before. 

 There are too many attempts at indexes and bibliographies ; what is 

 wanted are not attempts, but completed efforts. Such works should 

 be undertaken by the larger institutions, and undertaken on the distinct 

 knowledge that they will be a financial loss. The lamentable indif- 

 ference of the scientific public, and even of the institutions themselves, 

 is always felt by the compiler or the publisher of one of these time- 

 saving books of reference. The Naturalist will not buy a book ; rather 

 than spend his few shillings, he will suffer any amount of inconvenience, 

 and " wait till he goes to the library next time " to see it. The 

 societies grant small financial help to bibliographic work, and when 

 they actually undertake the publication of records, these are often 

 done in such a careless manner as to be almost useless. W^e have in 

 mind several dreary examples of works which should be of infinite 

 value, but which are so imperfect or unreliable as to be more trouble 

 than relief. In short, the question of providing records for the use of 

 working naturalists has yet to be solved, and the sooner the leading 

 academies of the world take counsel together and arrive at a mutual 

 understanding, the better will philosophy be advanced; 



The Nomenclature of Insects. 



From the general question of recording, we may turn to the 

 difficulties in the nomenclature of insects. The number of brief notes 

 and papers in which " new species " of insects are described is 

 appalling. We place " new species" in inverted commas advisedly, 

 for an intimate acquaintance with entomological literature impresses 

 us with the belief that it is absolutely impossible for the authors who 

 write on many of the groups to have read a tithe of the papers pre- 

 viously published on the subject. Of men we know, their very years 

 make it impossible, even had they read from their cradles onwards. 

 Moreover, a large majority of these so-called " new species " are 

 shortly described, but nut figured. Now, it is not reasonable to 

 imagine that any specialist can read, say, one hundred descriptions 

 of butterflies, closely allied, and keep a clear idea from mere text of 

 the minute differences insisted upon. It ought not to be allowable to 



