32 



most rigor in the scientific world. Hence scientific phraseology is in 

 a perpetual state of flux, chopping and changing about from year to 

 year, as often as some obscure writer, whose writings perhaps are not 

 worth one cent, but who had the good fortune to be born before his 

 betters, is discovered to have named a genus or a species before the 

 author of the current name publislied that name in the scientific world. 

 The inevitable consequence is, that a great deal of valuable time, that 

 might be usefully expended in studying out scientific facts, is frit- 

 tered away in studying out scientific phrases; and an entomologist, 

 who would keep up with the age, has to be perpetually altering the 

 names in his cabinet, without himself gaining thereby one single new 

 idea, or adding one iota to the general fund of scientific knowledge. 

 To my mind, the naturalist who rakes up out of the dust of old libra- 

 ries some long-forgotten name, and demands that it shall take the 

 place of a name of universal acceptance, ought to be indicted before 

 the High Court of Science as a public nuisance, and on conviction 

 sent to a Scientific Penitentiary, and fed there for the whole remain- 

 ing term of his scientific life upon a diet of chinch bugs and formic 

 acid.* 



All underground insects are peculiarly difficult to combat, 1st, 

 because the mischief done by them is generally discovered too late for 

 any remedy to be applied, and 2nd, because entomologists know less of 

 the Natural History of this group of insects than of that of almost 

 any other group, owing to their being so secluded from observation 

 and experiment within the bowels of the earth. In the case of this 

 Grape-root Borer the only direct remedies that Science can at present 

 indicate are, to dig up all the roots of vines known or suspected to 

 be infested by it, destroying carefully all the larvse and cocoons found 

 thereon, and to catch and destroy all the winged moths noticed round 

 the vines, so as to check the farther multiplication of the species. 

 There is a preventive remedy, however, which, in the event of this 



*0n this vexed question Dr. Schaum has the following excellent remarks: 

 — "I am much opposed to the adoption of these obsolete names, which Mr. 

 Dawson has substituted for the well-known and generally adopted appella- 

 tions, in right of priority. * * If we cultivate Entomology- for the sake 

 of knowledge, and not for the sake of nomenclature, I can see no benefit aris- 

 ing from an enquiry into the data of the synonyms compiled (and very often 

 erroneously compiled) by Schtenherr, but on the contrary a waste of time 

 which can be better employed in exact observations. What we want for the 

 sake of knowledge is stability and uniformity of nomenclature, not an upset- 

 ting of it by the substitution of old forgotten and very doubtful names, pub- 

 lished in works without, or with but little, scientific merit." Stainton's 

 Ent. Ann., 1860, pp. 121—2, 



