1911] Composition of Taxonomic Papers 217 



■contained nothing else but names of furniture — no illustrations 

 of the same, no measurements, no prices quoted; — imagine the 

 action of the man receiving it! Certainly no other place than 

 the paper-basket would be accorded it. And certainly many of 

 the articles of our journals are little better as far as usable 

 information is concerned than the furniture catalogue just 

 referred to. Is it with reverence that we remember such names 

 as Smith and Walker of British Museum fame? And yet some 

 systematists appear to have chosen them as patrons and models 

 for imitation. They succeed only too well in imitating them, 

 and occasionally outdistance them. 



One may say, these are all minor matters. That is true. 

 But their aggregate forms an imposing array. One drop in a 

 ■cup will not make it acrid; but a number of drops will change 

 it into a cup of bitterness. So with entomology. One little 

 carelessness does not amount to much; but many will fill even 

 the most ardent student with feeling akin to disgust. 



Science is no longer in its infancy and we have a right to 

 demand advanced methods of work. The desire for improvement 

 is innate to all men. I have never heard of a writer (at least 

 in science) who was well satisfied with what he had written. 

 Literary critics say, "An author is his favorite reader"; but 

 self-satisfaction is short-lived, more so in science than else- 

 where. Hence the attitude of scientific workers toward their 

 work may be defined as "a minimum of self-conceit with a max- 

 imum of scruples. " Writers do not confess these qualms of the 

 intellectual conscience to the public, but reserve them for some 

 private interchange of confidences. Unfortunately, the ratio 

 of these qualms decreases, not inversely, but in the same ratio 

 that the system and methodical effort of the worker decreases; 

 so that the most conscientious workers are usually most diffi- 

 dent as regards their own work (all the more, as those contri- 

 butions requiring the greatest amount of labor and time gen- 

 erally show the least for it), while the careless workers have few 

 misgivings of their efforts. I have an inkling that some day to 

 come a contribution will have to be passed upon by a commis- 

 sion of scientists (like so many examination papers) before they 

 are declared acceptable to science. 



Cooperation and centralization (to a certain extent) are 

 desirable. There ought, in fact, to be a scientific clearing house 

 somewhere in this beautiful world, and I hope that it will be 

 achieved some day. 



