94 THE entomologist's reoord. 



students have sometimes to plead guilt3^ Herein, therefore, lies the 

 danger of placing too much faith in records. A. (an incipient) sends 

 to his favourite organ a long list of nice captures. B. (the bogus 

 amateur aforesaid) spots A.'s interesting notes and, on the strength of 

 them, tickets his miscellaneous department according!}^ ; he may, as I 

 said before, even go so far as to publish a supplementarj'^ notice on his 

 own account corroborating the all-unconscious A. And so the evil 

 continues, encouraged by the sublime indifference manifested b}'' those 

 collectors who are (piite satisfied witli the purchase or exchange of 

 rarities " on simple note of hand " (Cf. any numlier of insects in the 

 Burney collection). 



How is this kind of thing to l)e stamped out ? I can only suggest 

 one way, and perhaps that will only " scotch the snake, not kill it." 

 .We cannot have entomological Ins})ectors, like a college of heralds, 

 making "a view " of the counties and overhauling the store boxes of 

 the young gentlemen who send lists to the magazines. But we have 

 energetic entomological societies in many j^arts of the country, as well 

 as field clubs which in some degree turn their attention to this par- 

 ticular branch of natural history. Perhaps it would not be too much 

 to ask that, in addition to the official note taken of the exhibits of the 

 members of these societies and clubs and duly recorded in their 

 Transactions, each such society or club should undertake the dut_v of 

 requesting from correspondents to the magazines, who are not members, 

 further ])articulars relative to any capti;res recorded within the area 

 covered by the institution, and the transmission of any important 

 specimens to the society for exhibition. It would only be necessary to 

 adopt this course when any very striking announcement was made. 

 and, while it would be entirely satisfactory to a houa-fide captor to 

 have his record thus substantiated, the bogus collector Avould have 

 some difficulty in maintaining his claim. A whole crop of theoretical 

 objections may be raised to such a proposition, but I think that, in 

 actual practice, the plan Avould, in discreet hands, be found to answer 

 to some extent the purpose for which it is intended. The great 

 majority of collectors are known to some at least of their fellow- 

 entomologists ; a ver}' large proportion are themselves members of 

 some society interested in science, or are known to some of its mem- 

 bers ; only a very few are so far isolated as to stand apart from all 

 entomological intercourse, and the names and achievements of many of 

 these are a sufficient guarantee of their good faith. Among this last 

 class, however, the black sheep are unquestionably included, and in the 

 best interests of tlie entomological fraternity tliey sliould be singled 

 out for judgment. 



The system suggested above would chiefly operate in respect of 

 contemporary records ; the difficulty still remains Avith regard to the 

 cabinet and other labels of professedly old standing, which set out, 

 often circumstantially, the reputed time and place at which the specimen 

 was taken, with very often a series of names of previous possessors, 

 which still further lend an air of veracity to the guarantee. How are 

 we to discover the truth or otherwise of these statenients ? There is 

 no test sav(! that of documentary evidence, and this must be sub- 

 stantiated, as being in the hand^Titing of tjiose whose signatures or 

 names are attached to it, by men who were acquainted with them. 

 But even in the earlier days of "the Aurelians " (the golden days of 



