2 The Field Naturalist's Quarterly Feb. 



Specially are our thanks due to many secretaries of field 

 clubs in various parts of the kingdom. Wherever possible 

 we have fallen in with suggestions offered, and shall be glad 

 to consider any in the future. Our sole aim is to provide 

 our readers with the best matter we can obtain from their 

 own particular point of view. From many letters received 

 it would appear that the ' F. N. Q.' is supplying a want, and 

 with increasing support it will be our endeavour to supply 

 that want still more satisfactorily. 



As regards the volume now commencing, it will differ in 

 some respects from volume i., though the main lines will re- 

 main unaltered. As before, a certain proportion of articles 

 will bear on the season of issue, a feature which has been 

 generally approved. Of regular contributors, F. G. Aflalo con- 

 tinues his Fish articles, Mr Bird his on the various aspects of 

 Broadland Fauna, the editor his Reptile Studies, Mr Minos 

 his Archaeology series, Mr Westell his Seasonal subjects, Mr 

 Morley his Entomology; whilst the Library, Correspondence, 

 and Field Club columns will be on the same lines as hitherto. 

 Of new features, one is initiated in the present issue — namely, 

 the first instalment of our " Record of Species observed," the 

 objects of which were explained in our last. It is hoped that 

 this column will prove valuable to both writers and readers. 

 A more important venture is the series of articles on " British 

 Field Zoology," the introduction to which appears with this 

 number. This venture is the direct result of the editorial 

 which appeared in our last. It was there pointed out that 

 general scientific principles did not receive sufficient atten- 

 tion in field club work. Correspondence since received from 

 both secretaries and members of such societies proves that 

 our contention is recognised to be true, and that any assist- 

 ance in that direction will be cordially welcomed. The fault 

 is that field naturalists are shown and taught mainly details of 

 species ; the want is a continuous picture of the whole of a 

 subject. Text-books are too exclusively morphological for 

 the average member of a field club, and most of them assume 

 too great a knowledge to begin with. We have already en- 

 deavoured to overcome this difficulty in Archaeology, Mr 

 Minos in his articles having begun with a general description 

 of Norman work before going on — as he does in this issue 



