~ 
Groups of the Lepidoptera. 351 
Respect for the quarter of its origin does not prevent 
my deriding it as fanciful, and stigmatising its changes 
of the order as unmeaning; but am I quite sure it has 
not as good authority as the Cabinet List, “printed 
on one side only”? I do not follow the order of 
arrangement given in this dealer’s list, because he shows 
me no reason why I should do so, What reason, pray, 
is offered me for following Mr. Doubleday’s? 
Surely I need not press further the imperative urgency 
there is for entomological writers to absolve their work 
from all appearance of chicanery. Next, it is (as I have 
already urged) an entomological writer’s duty to furnish 
his readers with the materials for forming an independent 
judgment. For upon this, in great measure, depends 
whether or not his performance is worth our study. The 
English lists, as now published, afford no materials at 
all for estimating the writers’ trustworthiness, and it is 
impossible, without doing the author’s work over again 
for ourselves, to determine whether or not we shall avail 
ourselves of his labours. Indeed, a list of species, such 
as the English list-makers offer, is an absurd composition 
in every view—a list of names merely, with abbreviations 
of the nomenclators’ names appended. No quotations, 
no references even, are supplied, much less foot-notes 
explaining the causes of this or that alteration in name 
or position. 
An aim which I had in this paper was, that by asking 
the attention of scientific men to the method of intro- 
ducing changes in arrangement, I might draw from them 
some expressions of disapproval of the existing fashion, 
such as may, perhaps, have the effect of establishing a 
better practice. The promulgation of important changes, 
by mere lists as barren as those I have slightly noticed, 
seems likely to become the rule, unless the opinion of 
entomologists is very decidedly expressed. The bewil- 
derment continually felt (outside the publishing céterie) 
as to the reasons for the frequent changes is just now 
very general. Any understanding now arrived at would 
be most opportune, and have a good effect in removing 
feelings even of annoyance, which I think are not con- 
fined toa few. It is high time something were done. 
I challenge any Lepidopterist to say, that he can look 
with complacency upon the development of entomolo- 
gical science in England for the last twelve years, in 
BB2 
