British Bloodsi'ckers 233 



with my stick as I pass, and salve my scruples with 

 the thought that they are the deadly enemies of 

 the a<^ricultural interest. If there were no thistles, 

 there would he nothinjf in the shape of a large 

 and conspicuous liower whose head one could 

 knock off with a clear conscience. 



But at the very outset, 1 foresee a destruc- 

 tive criticism. " Tiie mosquito," you will say, "is 

 not a British hloodsucker." Pardon me ; there, 

 you labour under a misapprehension. Everybody 

 knows that there are gnats in England. Well, a 

 gnat is a mosquito and a mosquito is a gnat. Like 

 our old friend. Colonel Clay, they are the same 

 gentleman under two different aliases. Or, rather, 

 since it is only the female insect that bites, and 

 only the bite that much concerns humanity, I ought 

 perhaps to say the same lady. The difference of 

 name is a mere question of nomenclature, and also 

 (as with many other aliases) a question of where 

 we happen to meet them. When a mosquito is 

 seen in England, he or she is called a gnat ; when 

 a gnat is seen in Italy or Egypt, he or she is 

 called a mosquito. But, as this is a fundamental 

 point to our subject, I think we had better clear it 

 up once for all before we go any farther. It is 

 not much use talking about moscjuitoes unless we 

 really decide what particular creature it is that we 

 are talking about. 



There is not one kind of gnat, or one kind of 

 mosquito, but several kinds of them ; and both 

 names are looselv appHed ni C(^nversation to cover 

 A large variety of related >mall llies, almost all of 



