60 THE entomologist's record. 



During this latter period, the old manner of studying entomology 

 has to a great extent died out. Entomologists, in the exact meaning of 

 the term, may be said hardly to exist now. The subject has become so 

 wide and comprehensive, the material collected so vast, the impossilnlity 

 of any one student ever grasping the details of the whole subject so 

 evident, tliat entomologists have long since given place to dipterists, 

 coleopterists, etc. But, even though a man may become a jiroficient 

 systematic dipterist or lepidopterist if he have leisure and ability, yet, 

 as a rule, the study of an entire Order, if the study is to be really worthy 

 of the name and to be something more than the mere naming of speci- 

 mens, is soon recognised as impossible. Accordingly, we frequently find 

 men who restrict their attention to one small family of the larger 

 Orders, and all their energies are needed to deal with even this small 

 part of the siibject. 



Almost every scientific entomologist, however renowned he may 

 afterwards become, began his career as a collector either of butterflies 

 and moths, or of beetles. Darwin was a keen collector of British Co- 

 leoptera, as a lad ; McLachlan, the great authority on dragonflies, 

 revelled in Initterflies and moths, and I believe that the Lepido})tera 

 were Sir John Lubbock's first love. It is from collectors of this kind 

 that our scientific naturalists are made — men who understand the living 

 creatures they study, and who are not misled so easily as are those to whom 

 the dried bodies alone are of interest. It must be borne in mind, that 

 on the younger generation of naturalists — lads now actively pursuing 

 Ked Admirals and Clouded Yellows — will devolve the carrying on of 

 the work which we of the present generation are now doing our best to 

 further and to consolidate. It is the duty of our Societies and of their 

 individual members to foster a love of natural objects, and to direct it, 

 if possiVde, into channels where it will bring forth good fruit. 



It has long been a popular opinion that an entomologist is a person 

 who collects insects, rather than one who studies them. That this concep- 

 tion is based, even now, not so much on prejudice as on real observation 

 of the ways and customs of so-called entomologists, is only too sadly 

 evident. How many of our lepidopterists know anything of the ana- 

 tomy of insects ? How many know anything of the wonderful organs 

 by which the small insect, which they ruthlessly pinch and thrust out 

 of the net because it is not sufficiently fine for the cabinet, sees, tastes, 

 smells and probably hears ; or of the way in which the honied drops, 

 distilled in Flora's daint}^ recesses, are converted into the blood, muscles 

 and other parts of insect structure ; or, how the crawling cater2)illar 

 becomes metamorphosed into the charming fly, beetle or moth, which 

 so interests us ? 



The collector of insects in times gone by appears to have supposed 

 that the science of entomology consisted in systematic arrangement ; 

 but since that time a vast field has been opened up to thoughtful 

 entomologists, a field unknown and unthought of by the old school 

 of collectors and collection- makers. The systematising stage in the 

 evolution of our science was, however, a very necessary one, for until 

 we have approximately correct and complete lists of the insects of 

 different countries, their comparison is impossible. Only when this 

 work had been done, could the more philosophical side of the study be 

 taken up with any advantage. Collections of insects are, indeed, the 

 storehouses of the facts on which philosoi)hical naturalists can build up 



