30 JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC ENTOMOLOGY [Vol. 12 



dabbled in all science; today we have entomologists, tomorrow we will 

 have group specialists, who will not be afraid to say that there are 

 many other fields in entomology, to them unknown. 



A stream can rise no higher than its source. The future of entomo- 

 logical science depends upon its foundations and those foundations 

 depend upon the work of the present generation and the inspiration 

 transmitted to those to come. 



The Attitude Towards Truth 



The attitude of the society towards truth should always be recep- 

 tive — more than receptive, eager. We should, as an organization and 

 as individuals, welcome constructive criticism. We should go even 

 further than this, and provide the machinery of analysis and organiza- 

 tion that would encourage and even solicit criticism. The link which 

 binds the members of this society together is that we are all searching 

 after truth. There can be no legitimate place in such an organization 

 for the perpetuation of error. 



There has, however, grown up in this society, a tradition that any- 

 one who disturbed the peace and harmony of this continuous output 

 of error was a knocker and a trouble-maker. To such an extent has 

 the propaganda been carried, that the only form of criticism that is 

 now tolerated, is that of syntax and etymology, while entomology 

 suffers from the constant repetition of misinformation and ancient 

 error. 



We need criticism — constructive criticism if possible, but criticism — 

 honest criticism, in any form, should be welcomed and encouraged. 

 Many mistakes of observation or errors of deduction, known by many 

 workers to be such, are still current in our literature, and are being 

 reiterated and republished to this day, due to the attitude of this or- 

 ganization, towards the individual who would criticise. 



The demand for entomological information has been so great, and 

 the general informational bulletin so much in vogue, that many of us 

 have grown lax in the matter of giving proper credit for material used. 

 Even in scientific papers or technical journals, the material is appro- 

 priated and used without credit. Much of this material is antiquated 

 and too much of it erroneous. Anyone using such material cannot 

 plead previous publication by any one else, as justification. He be- 

 comes responsible for the error and should be held accountable. 



When entomology was a struggling science, when economic prob- 

 lems were many and the workers few, there may have been justifica- 

 tion for this laxity. There can be none now. Because Riley figured 

 grasshoppers laying eggs in an impossible position, fifty years ago, is 

 no justification for anyone claiming to have investigated the grass- 



