22 THE entomologist's record. 



orders should be chosen in some sort of rough proportion to the 

 number of Fellows studying the various branches, but whoever the 

 men selected they should be the best available, men who are known to 

 their fellow- workers at home and abroad, men who have done all in 

 their power to forward the interests of the Society (1) by increasing its 

 membership, (2) by reading papers, (3) by making exhibitions of inter- 

 esting material, (4) by joining in discussions and preventing the 

 monthly or bi-monthly meetings becoming rather less than the 

 dreary funerals they often would degenerate into were it not for a 

 few individuals who are prepared to prevent it. To select these 

 men is imperative. Social standing, personal friendships, personal 

 pique, and other weak humanities must be swept aside, and the most 

 active, energetic entomologists, who possess the good opinion and 

 confidence of the Fellows throughout the whole country, must be 

 chosen, irrespective of wealth, position, age, personal friendships, 

 anything — except their standing as entomologists. 



Now what underlies the dissatisfaction that at present undoubtedly 

 exists in the mode of selection of the Council of the Society ? Is it 

 due to the fact that the Fellows recommended are not all in the first 

 rank of active, eager, and capable entomologists, who have raised, are 

 raising, and are still able to raise entomology as a scientific pursuit in 

 the eyes of the entomologists of the world ? Is it that these active 

 entomologists (some old, others young), do not feel themselves 

 adequately represented by the method hitherto relied upon for the 

 election of the Council ? Is it that there are Fellows, who, being 

 elected on the Council, care so little for the success of the Society that 

 they attend the Council meetings badly, and the ordinary meetings not 

 at all ? Is it that there are members of recent Councils who never 

 make an exhibition of entomological specimens themselves, and never 

 offer a word of information, or criticism on the exhibits made by 

 others ? Is it that Fellows may be elected who have no exhibits to 

 make, and are entirely incapable of making any useful observations, 

 or giving any useful information on any branch of entomology? These 

 are some of the questions that any observant Fellow naturally asks 

 himself Avhen he hears dissatisfaction openly expressed. 



Are our meetings a success ? Look at the Proceedimis for the last 

 few years and note their gradual deterioration. These are the official 

 reports of the meetings, and on their success must largely depend the 

 ability of metropolitan Fellows to attract their friends. Scan the 

 names of the exhibitors and compare with the names of the members 

 on the Council. A very short study of the Prdcet'dint/s may give a 

 hint that will answer some one or other of the above queries in the 

 negative or affirmative. We have heard of a Fellow resigning his 

 membership of the Society because the President elected was not the 

 candidate whom he favoured, and who returned after the elected Presi- 

 dent's term of office was over ? We have heard of members, who, from 

 ill-health, could not attend the ordinary meetings, although retaining a 

 seat continuously for years on the Council ? Do such push the Society 

 forward ? Could not such be spared for more effective men ? Purely 

 entomological experts are not necessary to the success of a Council 

 for the more technical papers are now given to specialists to judge 

 and decide upon as to whether they shall be printed quite apart from 

 the arbiter having a seat on the Council. What is wanted is a 



