THE GENITALIA OF THE BRITISH NOCTUID^, 89 



Pierce prefaces his book with an apology in the form of a page devoted 

 to the aphorism that " He who never makes a mistake, never makes 

 anything." This seems to us wholly unnecessary, the mistakes of 

 commission are trivial and venial, those of omission are, of course, 

 as large and numerous as we choose to make them, since no matter 

 how much is given us, we are always ready to ask for more. Probably 

 Mr. Pierce's real meaning would be better expressed by a sentence 

 with which Mr. D. Christie-Murray closes his liecollections — " Every- 

 body has failed, or half failed, who ever tried to do anything," it is 

 only mistakes or failures that can be classed under this philosophical 

 view of human efforts with which we can credit him. 



The figures, so far as we have compared them with actual specimens, are 

 very accurate, and appear in all cases to present details abundantly 

 enough to distinguish similar forms from each other very easily. How it 

 might be if we had to deal with the thousands of known species of 

 Xoctmdac, and not merely the 300 or so British, may perhaps bedoubted, 

 but this does not now concern us, since it is as a Avork concerning British 

 species that we attach such high value to the volume before us. 

 Placing the name on the plate against each species is a useful arrange- 

 ment, though why some of them should be misspelt is not obvious. 

 Mr. Pierce regrets that he did not include the penis in his figures ; if 

 it had been possible to exhibit perfect figures of the whole penis, ?'.c., 

 not only of the aedceagus, but of the eversible membrane with its so 

 remarkably varied spinous and other armature, his contribution to our 

 admiration of these marvellous structures, and to scientific knowledge, 

 would, indeed, have been immense; it would, however, have necessitated 

 decidedly more than doubling the labour involved in what he does 

 present to us. Figures of the ;edwagus alone, are not of anything like 

 commensurate value, and even these involve in many cases much 

 trouble to obtain precisely identical angles of view. 



The first use of the male appendages as an important, and indeed 

 indispensable, factor in classification and specific classification throughout 

 a whole suborder, was by McLachlan, in the Monoiji-aph of the Knropean 

 TricJiojitera, begun in 1874. He describes, and usually figures, them in all 

 species, and uses them in his tables and definitions both of families and 

 genera. In the Trichoptera, these organs can be seen and examined in the 

 dry specimens usually without further preparation, so that there is much 

 less difficulty in using them, for all descriptive purposes, than in the 

 lepidoptera, where a specimen has to be more or less damaged, and a 

 somewhat tedious process of preparation carried out, before the parts 

 are available for any useful result. This is true, although Mr. Pierce 

 tells us how a view, adequate for some purposes, may be obtained in a 

 more simple manner. 



The complications of these structures in the Soctnidae have 

 forced the author to give names to many of the detailed parts that 

 have hitherto received no designation. When making so complete 

 and elaborate a terminology (for the Noctnidae), it is much to 

 be regretted that, for parts already named, Mr. Pierce did not succeed 

 in ascertaining what names (by priority) were already fixed. Buchanan- 

 White and Gosse seem to have been the first to give aiiy fixity to the 

 names of the principal organs, and these ought to be retained. 

 McLachlan's names are hardly applicable to the lepidoptera, where he 

 recognises three pairs of lateral appendages, whilst, in the lepidoptera. 



