FLIES 47 



of previous writers. We are not sufficiently 

 able, as accurate ' entomologists/ to distin- 

 guish all the innumerable shades, dressings, 

 and fancy names applied to the earlier and 

 later hatches-off of the four ( up-winged ' flies 

 of Foster. Nor can we attempt to reconcile 

 all those fancy flies with their natural con- 

 geners. We were never good at nomenclature 

 even in its purely zoological aspects, and we 

 would be content to follow the lead of ' the 

 latest authority ' in such matters. But who 

 is ? Is it Foster, Theakstone, or Pritt? Even 

 in their own country they don't appear 

 to use the same nomenclature. It would 

 prove a serviceable piece of work if some 

 entomologist and experienced angler would 

 take this question of nomenclature in hand 

 and settle it, and reconcile all the different 

 local names under the true insects' names. 

 None of the many angling books which we 

 have seen and possess do so in a simple, 

 easily-referred- to way. Foster's, we think, 

 is the best, and next Theakstone and Pritt, 

 but they don't agree in their nomenclature. 

 Then, besides authors, there are other con- 

 fusions, worse confounded, introduced by fly- 



