Groups of the Lepidoptera. 347 
by Dr. Knaggs will state, that it is ‘The Synonymy of 
the Lepidoptera of Great Britain and Ireland; expur- 
gated for the young collector.” 
Mr. Newman’s “ Natural History,” I venture to sug- 
gest, contains several passages, which are exceedingly 
objectionable to an independent mind. The passage 
which I mention is only quoted here, because it is neces- 
sary to take some instance in order to illustrate the views, 
which I respectfully urge in this paper. I take one in- 
stance and only one. 
After describing the Leucanie and Nonagrie and their 
allies, in whose names and order some changes are intro- 
duced, Mr. Newman prints an “observation ” as follows: 
** In concluding the family of Leucanide, it seems desirable 
to allude to the changes which it has been deemed right 
to make in the names:”—This commencement gave me 
great pleasure; it is very desirable indeed, I think, not 
only to allude to, but also to discuss and explain all 
changes, whether in names or inarrangement. ‘The pas- 
sage continues: ‘‘ But I believe I may state, that where 
I have departed from the names and arrangement of Mr. 
Doubleday’s List, it has been with the entire approval of 
that lepidopterist”” (Newm. Brit. Moths, p. 276). And 
so, it is enough, is it, to say that? An author is to chop 
and change the arrangement of the Macro-Lepidoptera, 
without a scratch of the pen for reason, and unblushingly 
present to us the results of the operation, stamped with 
someone else’s “entire approval!” After carefully 
spreading the cloth, this is the stale crust Mr. Newman 
flings us to stay our starving capacities! What ento- 
mologists want is, not that changes should come to 
them ‘‘approved of” by this or that leading man, but 
that each author who proposes an alteration in clas- 
sification or nomenclature for their adoption, should 
first state all his reasons, and then leave the ‘‘ approval ” 
to them. Haworth himself, whose follower Mr. Newman 
claims to be, tried to carry things through by other 
men’s ‘approbation,’ and had to abandon summarily 
the very plan which he presented with such a flourish. 
I refer to Haworth’s plan of uniform terminations for the 
names of all the Lepidoptera, which had, as he boasted, 
‘the full and individual approbation of all the members 
of the Aurelian Society” (Haw. Lep. Brit.; pref. xix. ; 
and pp. 139, 588). 
