330 Mr. W. Arnold Lewis on 
us as a transition, the Hrastrides, Catocalides, Brephos, 
and all the family of the Thermesides ; the Pyrales present 
to us a crowd of species with large and slender wings, 
which the old authors have confounded with the Geome- 
tre ; the Deltoides approach them still more; lastly the 
Bombyces include, in nearly all their principal sections, 
families which border upon them ””—naming with others, 
Euchelia, Platypteryx, Saturnia, Lithosia. Thus M. 
Guenée in 1857. 
The first volume of Stainton’s Manual was completed 
in the same year; and the order there observed is, every- 
one knows, the Linnzan order. A writer in the “ Natu- 
ral History Review,” attacked Mr. Stainton on the subject 
of his arrangement, and in particular for departing, for- 
sooth, from that introduced in Mr. Doubleday’s list of 
synonyms. The “ Substitute,” in a later article (Sub- 
stitute, 1856-1857; p. 14, Art. ‘“ Change of names”’’) 
took occasion to correct the first-named writer, and 
inform him that a list without descriptions or characters 
was “no authority at all for quotation,” a dictum in 
which I venture to express my strong concurrence. 
In the year 1858-59, Mr. Doubleday was getting ready 
a new catalogue, and the authors of the then shortly 
forthcoming ‘‘ Accentuated List”? were favoured, we 
were told, with a sight of it. They straightway copied 
the new list out of hand, and the first knowledge ento- 
mologists in general had of the mercies in store for 
them, was obtained on the appearance of the “‘ Accen- 
tuated List.” The “ Intelligencer” of that date published 
some comments on the new arrangement, and, in parti- 
cular, protested against the Geometre ‘‘bemg placed 
sandwich-like in the midst of the Bombyces.” (Intel. 
vol. v. p. 169, Art. “ Practicability.”) The arrangement 
of the new list was, however, almost universally followed, 
notwithstanding the discouraging fact that there was no 
descriptive work which followed that order, and the 
actual nomenclature differed, in numerous cases, from all 
the existing English descriptive works in use. This 
great change was completely unsupported by any state- 
ment of the reasons supposed to render it advisable. 
The cause of the silence was not that the reasons were 
obvious, or that the changes explained themselves. How 
many owners of large collections would, if sitting down 
to-day to arrange them “out of their heads,” hit upon 
