74 Mr. D. Sharp on some 



(jualifications as a systematic writer are unfortunately 

 not substantiated by the work I am alhiding to. Indeed 

 so grave are the defects of the work in question that 

 I feel sure all entomologists who, like myself, have given 

 some attention to it, will share with me a feeling of 

 regret that it should have been published in its present 

 form. While expressing great satisfaction that the 

 Colonial Museum Department of New Zealand should be 

 able and willing to devote a small portion of the public 

 funds to the promotion of a knowledge of the more 

 obscure and neglected branches of Natural History, we 

 must at the same time urge that some discretion should 

 be used in its employment, and care should be taken as 

 to the nature of the work produced. Dr. Hector, in a 

 few words of preface, speaks of the work in question as 

 " a monument of the zeal and industry of an ardent 

 naturalist," and in so doing he expresses, I believe, a 

 genuine feeling in which all will agree with him ; but 

 the zeal and industry of two or three years of human 

 life are quite insufficient for the accomplishment of a 

 large and arduous task in scientific research ; while the 

 results of encouraging any one to pursue a task whose 

 accomplishment is beyond the means, the time and the 

 material at his disposal, are sure to be unfortunate. 

 Most haste less speed is an admirable saying, when a 

 number of workers are engaged in a common task, and 

 where the haste and confusion of one of the number 

 may cause great delay in the progress of the whole band. 

 This is eminently the case with the Manual of New 

 Zealand Coleoj^tera : it is premature, it is totally use- 

 less to the uninitiated or unskilled entomologist, while to 

 workers like myself, instead of being an assistance, it is 

 an obstacle to the promotion of knowledge. The s^'ste- 

 matic portions of the work are abbreviated translations 

 from Lacordaire's ' Genera of Coleoptera,' and they are 

 useless for the purpose to which they are applied for two 

 reasons : first, because they are extremely fragmentary, 

 and are unaccompanied by the tables, which are a most 

 useful and indispensable concomitant of Lacordaire's 

 admittedly and necessarilj^ artificial or imperfect classi- 

 eation ; and second, because scarcely any New Zealand 

 insects were known to Lacordaire, and had the}^ been 

 they would necessarily have modified his system ; while, 

 as matters stand, the New Zealand student will imbibe 

 the unfortunate idea that there is something wrong about 



