148 THE entomologist's record 



thoughtlessly, stated his intention of doing publicly, and which he 

 carried through nobly for the sake of his prestige. But it was a forlorn 

 hope, and Mr. Eobson's attack on moisture only shows, that it has nearly 

 drowned him, that he has a lot of meteorological and biological books 

 to read, and that the modern critic sometimes has a tendency to criticise 

 what he does not understand, and, as a result, has to find fault with the 

 aberrant intellect of the writer. 



But if this criticism be not a personal attack, I would ask Mr. Kobson 

 for a few facts, which any article meant to be a contribution to science 

 would have contained, and which it was Mr. Eobson's duty to have 

 found out by experiment. (1) What percentage of the sun's rays are ab- 

 sorbed or intercepted on the West coast of Ireland, East coast of Ireland, 

 Isle of Man, Scotland (West and East), Shetland, Yorkshire, Derbyshire, 

 and other areas given to producing melanism ? (2) What percentage 

 of these rays are distinctly chemical in their tendency ? (3) What ex- 

 periments has Mr, Eobson conducted to show, that the areas where 

 melanism prevails, do have a large percentage of the sun's rays inter- 

 cepted ? and will he give us one experiment that he has conducted to a 

 successful issue, which bears out his views ? If he has done none, where 

 is the science in his paper ? Is it not rather an essay, based on imagi- 

 nation, rather than a theory, based on facts ? All these assumptions that 

 things are so, are not science. The New Forest, where black obscurata 

 occur ; the coast of Kincardine, where black lucernea are found ; the 

 Welsh parks, where dark crepuscularia occur ; Delamere Forest, where 

 black hetularia is common ; Lewes, where black Agrotis cinerca occm- ; 

 Deal, where black Agrotis corticea occvir, have deficient sunlight (teste 

 Mr, Eobson). Where are the experiments that warrant such assump- 

 tions? No, Mr. Eobson ! it will not do ! " Natural selection" is not 

 dead yet, and your paper has not proved that we have anyone to replace 

 Darwin. — May 1st, 1893, 



SCIENTIFIC NOTES. 



Specific Nomenclature. — Dr. Buckell's paper on " Specific Nomen- 

 clature " contains interesting information, and is very clearly written. 

 The proposition to make Hlibner the criterion for disputed specific titles 

 will, however, make more difficulties than now exist. The course to 

 be pursued seems to me that, upon each trivial name now in dispute, 

 an opinion be drawn up by a Committee, with a statement of the facts, 

 and a recommendation as to the adoption of one of the trivial names. 

 Unless the facts are successfully disputed, it will eventuate that such 

 recommendation will end by being generally accepted. The case of 

 the disputed title of an American butterfly, Liminitis eras, having 

 been brought before the N. York Ent. Club, a decision was reached 

 which, so far as I am aware, has been since respected. The disputed 

 titles of European species are not so many but that they might soon 

 be settled in this way under the constructions of the " law of priority." 

 — A. E. Gkote, Bremen, Germany, 



Secretion by emerging imago of Cucullia verbasci, — I noticed 

 a curious fact relative to the emergence of C. verbasci. I had cut off 

 the end of one cocoon to see how the pupa was progressing, and while 

 looking at it, the skin cracked, and the moth forced its way partly out 



