[ 7 ] 



a third may be found useful for cataloguing. Diamond type 

 will be found the most satisfactory for this purpose, while a 

 small and simple press, which permits easy and rapid alteration 

 of type, is the most convenient. 



Mr. Platxauer asked if anj-thing could be done to the pin to 

 render it more difficult for the predaceous intruder to climb it. He 

 also questioned the wisdom of putting labels, and especially the 

 original or collectors label, on the pin under the insect. Not 

 only did it make the collection more unsightly, but it exposed 

 the label to the risk of sharing the fate of the specimen. He 

 would suggest that the specimen bear a number only, and that 

 this number refer to a catalogue which could contain full references, 

 and into which the original label could be pasted. In this case, 

 ever}-thing would not be lost at one blow ; even if the specimen 

 were destroyed, the reference would remain. 



Dr. Petrie asked whether labels or pins could not be treated 

 with protective substances such as white arsenic or corrosive sub- 

 Hmate and glycerine. 



Mr. Poultox said that the labels under the pin formed an 

 excellent barrier against intruders. The use of strong antiseptic 

 or protective substances, such as arsenic and corrosive sublimate, 

 was objectionable on account of their tendency to make the pin 

 brittle. The question of pins was important enough to constitute 

 a separate subject for consideration ; he himself knew of no satis- 

 factor}' substitute for the pins ordinarily used by entomologists, 

 although some authorities favoured platinmn. some silver, and 

 some steel pins. The best way to presene Lepidoptera was to 

 keep the drawers containing them thoroughly disinfected wth 

 a good antiseptic. Nothing was better adapted for this purpose 

 than naphthalene. As to putting labels into a catalogue, the objection 

 seemed to him that this e.xposed the collection to the risk of total 

 loss of all references by one mishap. If the catalogue were lost 

 or destroyed, all information with regard to the specimens would 

 be gone, whereas, with separate labels on the specimens, there 

 was not nearly the same chance of an extensive loss. He instanced 

 the Burchell collection of South American Lepidoptera which was 

 almost useless in consequence of the loss of its catalogue. [Since 

 the above was written this catalogue has been recovered, but it is 

 impossible at present to decide whether it is complete. — E. B. P.. 

 1898.1 



