June, 1914.] Walton: Work of Daniel W. Coquillett. 159 



they sat up, very erect, their white underparts toward me, and re- 

 mained quite motionless for several seconds. Apparently satisfied 

 with conditions, they turned and disappeared into the bushes, only to 

 appear again in a moment with one — two — three others ; whereupon 

 all five in single file, set out on their deliberate return to the bank 

 where the two had first appeared. To see such wild creatures in such 

 numbers, and at such leisure, was a new experience for me, and a very 

 delightful climax to my afternoon on the brook. 



ON THE WORK OF THE LATE DANIEL W. 

 COQUILLETT AND OTHERS. 



By W. R. Walton, 

 Hyattsville, Md. 



Mr. C. H. T. Townsend has made a recent publication^ the occa- 

 sion for some critical remarks concerning the work of contemporary 

 workers in the Muscoidean flies. The greater part of this comment 

 is distinctly favorable in character. In fact, an odor of flattery is 

 quite perceptible throughout most of the paper. This complimentary 

 attitude is suddenly discarded at the conclusion of his remarks with 

 the following statement : " Practically all of the work reviewed above 

 is constructive, and as such it is to be emulated. . . . Contrasted 

 with this work is that performed by the late Mr. Coquillett, which 

 was destructive in that it attempted to sink into the synonymy valid 

 generic and specific names. Such work is a pulling down which 

 leaves us worse off than before." 



Thus according to Mr. Townsend our work is constructive, but 

 strange to say, he fails to perceive the fact that it is based almost 

 wholly upon that of the late Mr. Coquillett, which is denounced as 

 " destructive." Behold a paradox. The permanent based upon the 

 ephemeral, which is absurd, as brother Euclid is fond of remarking. 



Now what are the facts concerning this cataclysmic work of the 

 late Daniel W. Coquillett as viewed by an earnest, if humble, student 

 of the same? 



1 Jour. N. Y. Ent. Soc, Vol. 21, p. 301. 



