The Lancaster Farmer. 



Dr. S. S. RATEVON, Editor. 



LANCASTER, PA., MARCH, ^880. 



Vol. ZU. No. 3. 



Editorial. 



"TOO SCIENTIFIC." 

 Perhaps no object is more frequently and 

 more persistently urged ajjainsl Ijooks, lec- 

 tures and essays on natural history than 

 that which is embraced in the title of this 

 paper, namely : that they are "too scientilic" 

 to be understood by the unlearned, or those 

 who have only received a common school ed- 

 ucation, and hence there is entertained a 

 decided, and sometimes a bigoted aversion to 

 them. Now this may not be the fault of 

 scientists themselves, as a class, but may be 

 owing to a defective system of common school 

 education, or to the prejudice of the students. 

 Doubtless there may be instances in which 

 scientilic names are introduced or multiplied, 

 in order to make the scientists appear learned, 

 or to mystify and darken the subject instead 

 of shedding light upon it, but it is doubtful 

 if honest men, who are entitled to the name 

 of scientists, ever resort to such means based 

 upon such motives. It is presumed that those 

 who speak or write on any subject desire to be 

 understood, and if they employ scientific 

 names in natural histoiy it is possible that 

 they have no choice if they name the animals 

 about which they are writing at .all; for, many 

 thousands of species have never received a 

 common name, and probably never will. For 

 instance, a contemporary recently published 

 an article on an analysis of the water supply 

 of a western city, in which he stated that 

 water drinkers .are in the habit of swallowing, 

 perhaps, millions of such monsters as the fol- 

 lowing : NiUschia curuula, Cyniatopleiira soles, 

 Cyniatopleura elHplka, Slansoneis inmctata, 

 Plenrosigna speticerii and Jihizolenia eriensis. 

 Now it is not at all likely that these little an- 

 imals will ever receive specific common 

 names, because they are not visible to the 

 naked eye, and hardly one man in a hundred 

 thousand will ever get a sight of them, for 

 they are only brought to view through a pow- 

 erful microscope. Still they may be of sufli- 

 cient general interest to the public to become 

 the subject of essays, lectures, pamphlets and 

 books, and if so, they must be called by their 

 proper names. It is true that in many in- 

 stances scientific names may be enclosed in 

 parenthesis and skipped by the general reader 

 without interrupting the general thread of the 

 discourse, but to omit them entirely would 

 mutilate the subject. Because common 

 names are often very loc.il in their signifi- 

 cance, and often relate to very different ani- 

 mals in one locality from what they do in 

 another. The subjects of the insect world, 

 for instance, are specifically so numerous 

 that one common appellation often includes a 

 large and indefinite number of species. So 

 much so, indeed, that it is rarely we can 

 safely use the definite article the in alluding 

 to them. Of what specific value arc such 

 common names as "Pinchbui^," "Dung- 

 beetle," "H.ammerbug," "Woodborer," 

 "Plantlouse," "Grasshopper," "Butterfly " 

 "Moth," "Bumblebee," "Blowfly," or even 

 "Potato-beetle," "Curculio" and "Phylloxe- 

 ra—the last two being popularized scientific 

 terms— since some of these names may cover 

 hundreds, or even thousands of distinct species. 

 Even in such classes as quadrupeds and birds 

 the systematic common names are becoming 

 almost as complicated as their scientific 

 names, comparatively limited .as their num- 

 bers are. Again, take the class which includes 

 the marine .and fresh w.ater shells, hundreds 

 of which, to a common observer, look .alike 

 and yet .are specifically diflerent, and contem- 

 plate the difficulty of giving them all common 

 names. Those who object to scientific names 

 are also sometimes unsparing in their criti- 



cisms of scientific men because they do not 

 give them an unfailing remedy for the extinc- 

 tion of each particular species of noxious in- 

 sects. Tills may to a great extent be the 

 truth of the matter, but farmers, gardeners, 

 fruit growers arid florists seem to forget that 

 the discovery and application of remedies for 

 the arrest or extinction of noxious insects is 

 an experimental work, a work too that comes 

 directly within the sphere of their own daily 

 occupations and pr.actical ob.servations, and 

 immediately atfeots their own material inter- 

 ests, and therefore ought to elicit their special 

 attention. Their opportunities, as a general 

 thing, are for superior to those of most ento- 

 mologists in making the necessary observa- 

 tions upon insect life and h.abit. If they 

 were as observant .as their own interests 

 would seem to require, they might become co- 

 workers with entomologists, and be not only 

 mutually beneficial to e.ach other, but also to 

 the whole community of earth's cultivators. 

 The functions of the entomologist arc two- 

 fold—scientific and practical— or they may 

 be three-fold, when he adds the discovery 

 and apijlication of remedies for the destruc- 

 tion of insects, to his already formidable la- 

 bors. The purely scientific entomologist will 

 find his hands full for a lifetime, in dissections, 

 analysis of structures, determinations of gen- 

 era and species, nomenclature, and classifica- 

 tion, including a multitude of contingencies 

 relating thereto. 



The practical entomologist will be as inces- 

 santly and laboriously occupied in observing 

 and recording the histories and habits of in- 

 sects, .as well as their noxious, neutral and 

 innoxious qualities and economies— their pe- 

 riods of "ingress, egress and regress"— their 

 transformations and transitions — as well as 

 their food, (whether animal or vegetable) 

 their local domiciliations, their forms, sizes, 

 .and colors, in their various stages of develop- 

 ment and m<aiiy other things contingent there- 

 to. Here is where the intelligent farmer, 

 gardener and fruit grower's work begins, and 

 if he is assiduous, he will find a great help in 

 the labors of both the scientific entomologist 

 and his practical co-laborer. It is true, that 

 essays and addresses intended for ,tlie peojilc 

 should not be lumbered too much with tech- 

 nicalities, but the English language is so 

 meagre, and the subjects of the animal king- 

 dom are so immense in number, that the dif- 

 ficulty of linding a suitable common name is 

 much greater than framing a scientific one. If 

 the study of natural science was made a part of 

 the instruction of our common schools the difli- 

 culty ill technology would soon be overcome. 

 School boys of ten years of age will learn to 

 repeat from their toy books such names as 

 Aramaraparagaramoos, Crononhotontliologos, 

 and Aldibormitifoski/ornioslccus, as easily as 

 they can the word huckleberry, and it would 

 be .the same in regard to scientific names. 

 Where, for instance, is the consistency of 

 a German persisting in calling a little 

 species of Lady-bird, Kugelkaferocoulich- 

 cr Heckenbl'iitkrefer, instead of Chrysomela 

 coccinelloides, merely because the latter is a 

 scientific name? Curculio and Phylloxera, 

 as we have said before, have become in a 

 great measure popularized, and are now quite 

 as often used as Plum-weevil and Grapelcaf 

 gall louse. Moreover, Plum-weevil can hard- 

 ly be regarded now as a s))ecific common 

 name, because we have bred it not only from 

 the plum, but also from the apple, the quince, 

 the peach, the apricot, and the cherry, and it 

 is also known to have been bred from soft 

 plum and cherry "knots," .although it is not 

 claimed that they caused them. But, let those 

 who complain about scientific technology take 

 courage, for scientific writers are doing what 



they can to simplify and popularize the natu- 

 ral sciences, although it seems manifest that 

 science never will, and perhaps never can 

 entirely abandon her technology, there may 

 be a descent to a lower mental plane, in ac- 

 coiumod.ation to an intelligent mediocrity, but 

 the persistently illiterate masses must become 

 educated up to that plane if they value the 

 benefits of scientific teaching. It is all folly 

 to assume that the reasonably intelligent 

 among the human family cannot become edu- 

 cated up to a general comprehension of scien- 

 tific liturature, for scientfic technology is not 

 peculiar to natural history alone. There is 

 scarcely a mechanical professional or commer- 

 cial occui)atioii that has not its peculiar tech- 

 nology. Place in the hands of a man of ac- 

 knowledged intelligence, ou other subjects, a 

 list of the different garments, and the fabrics 

 which compose them, whic4i enter into a 

 lady's toilet of the present day, and see how 

 much he will understand about the names, 

 qualities and materials; and yet a little miss 

 scarcely in her teens, may know all about 

 them, and may be able to repeat their names 

 as glibly as her A B Cs; .and a boy; ten or a 

 dozen years old. may be able to lay his hand 

 immediately upon a thousand articles in a 

 drug store, all of which bear Latin names. 



Why, the very cut-throats, burglars, pick- 

 pockets, pugilists and habitues of the cockpit 

 have a sort of flash technology that is per- 

 fectly intelligible to them, but "all (freek" to 

 the honest and unsophisticated. It seems 

 impossible that all the brain should have been 

 monopolized by tliese and others to whom we 

 luave alluded, and none accorded to farmers, 

 gardeners and fruitists. We must confess 

 that, personally, we have often wished that 

 scientific descriptions had been couched in 

 .somewhat plainer language, but at the same 

 time we are compelled to acknowledge its 

 impracticability. We never feel quite sure that 

 we perfectly understand what the animal or 

 plant is that an author is describing who 

 entirely discards or ignores scientific nomen- 

 clature. AVe feel like a mariner at sea with- 

 out a compass; although he may not fully 

 understand the minute details of the instru- 

 ment, yet so far as he rhcs understand,it is to 

 him an infallible guide. We must educate 

 ourselves up to an intelligent standard ont his 

 subject as well as on others, and meet the 

 efforts that are being made to popularize 

 science, at least halt way, and to do this 

 there needs to be provision made for it in our 

 systems of public instruction. The currimdum 

 of the school need not be lumbered unneces- 

 sarily with scientific technology bnt still 

 suUicient to guide the student in any occupa- 

 pation he may afterwards select as his busi- 

 ness of hfe. Under any circumstances all 

 elementary education is only rudiment.al, and 

 only becomes useful when it is reduced to 

 practice, and especially so when it becomes a 

 part and parcel of our daily calling, and is 

 interwoven with our pecuniarv interests. 

 The name, the, n.ature, the habits and the 

 forms ot the animals existing in the districts 

 we have cho.sen for our inheritance, becomes, 

 as it were, a part of our stock in trade, and a 

 knowledge of them is as essential to the suc- 

 cessful farmer as a knowledge of composts 

 and fertilizers, or as agricultural implements 

 and how to use them. And the longer we 

 live, the more we iraprove|and cultivate the 

 Land, the more attention will have to be paid 

 to the incidental checks and drawbacks to 

 agricultural progress. 



The next "boom" in the .agricultural 

 world will likely be the production of beet- 

 sug.ar, at least there is a perceptible current 

 now running in that direction. 



