COLLECTORS. 249 



for I do not suppose for a moment that any very deep study has as yet 

 been possible of the huge family of the " Emeralds" both in life and 

 after death. 



(To be con eluded.) 



" Collectors." 



By JOHN BULL. 



Mr. Bell's reference to the " Record's editorial mind " on the subject 

 of "collectors" {anted, p. 227) is surely a matter that requires definition. 

 If by " collector " Mr. Bell means a person who hunts, kills, pins, 

 sets, and stores away large numbers of the most beautiful inhabitants 

 of our wild places, without noting, or desiring to note, any facts about 

 their distribution, lives, or habits, then there can only be one opinion 

 which the Editor and his coadjutors, no doubt, share in common with 

 all thoughtful educated men, entomological and otherwise. 



But of the Editor's personal opinion of the real "collector" it were 

 better perhaps to quote his own words: "There is no need to urge that 

 collectors and collecting have a very definite and legitimate position in 

 relation to science .... The legitimate position of the collector 

 ily stated. He obtains material on which scientific observations 

 are based ; he should himself make observations on the living indi- 

 viduals he collects ; he should preserve well the insects he captures ; 

 he should note exactly the date of capture, and the locality where 

 captured, of each specimen ; he should record carefully, and with 

 clearness, the observations he makes. He should also be prepared to 

 make deductions from his observations, for true science correlates facts, 

 and suggests logical deductions from the observations made. Only the 

 collector in the field can know the relationship of an organism to its 

 environment, the fundamental basis of much of the modern science of 

 natural history, and, hence, from the men who have started as 'mere' 

 collectors, attracted first of all by the beaut}' of some striking 

 butterfly or moth, have risen all our foremost scientific lepidopterists, 

 both of the present and of the past days, the only difference between 

 these and those who, starting with them, have lagged behind, being 

 the difference in the power to observe, or to record their observa- 

 tions, or to draw obvious conclusions from their observations. 

 Without the collector no really scientific work in certain branches of 

 lepidopterological study can be written, and the man who collects his 

 own insects, makes observations, and records such, is a most valuable 

 addition to the ranks of those who study lepidopterology. For the 

 mercenary collector, who merely collects insects like a man collects old 

 ' pots,' in an auction room, one can only feel the heartiest contempts" 



Surely then (if this be the personal opinion of the Editor, and I 

 take this very definite quotation from Practical Hint* for the Field 

 Lepidopterist, pt. hi., p. 1, more fully amplified by the author 

 some 17i years ago in this Magazine, vol. i., p. 99) the collector, 

 per se, has received full justification at the Editorial hands, and 

 can hardly be as Mr. Bell says, " abhorrent to the Record's editorial 

 mind." Other names than "collectors" may he found for those 

 who purposelessly exterminate our insect fauna, and all those 

 who know Mr. Hell know that these individuals are as abhorrent to 

 Mr. Bell as to the writer. For the remainder, Mr. Bell seems 



