THE ENTOMOLOGIST 



Vol. XXIX.] OCTOBER, 1896. [No. 401. 



SHOULD THE FORMATION AND ARRANGEMENT OF A 

 COLLECTION OF INSECTS BE MADE SUBSERVIENT 

 TO THE ELUCIDATION OF SCIENTIFIC PROBLEMS? 



By W. Harcourt-Bath. 



Our worthy Editor (antey p. 287) invites correspondence on 

 this subject in connection with the communication by the Rev. 

 W. Claxton {antey pp. 286, 287), which affords me an appropriate 

 opportunity for airing my opinions respecting a theme which 

 has for some time past interested me considerably, and provided 

 me with much food for contemplation. First of all permit me 

 to dissent from the views expressed by Mr. South, to the effect 

 that a collector must necessarily be an entomologist because he 

 is compelled to learn something about the habits and economy 

 of the insects for which he seeks. He may be no more an ento- 

 mologist than a mere postage-stamp enthusiast can claim to be 

 a geographer, although the latter, in the course of compiling his 

 collection, in a similar manner manages to acquire a little know- 

 ledge about the various countries which issue those articles. 

 Both find it to their advantage to learn as much as possible 

 about the objects of their affections, but only of such a nature 

 as shall assist them directly in their acquisition ; and in many 

 cases the information so obtained, as a necessary consequence, 

 is not appreciated for its scientific interest at all. 



It is, however, I must admit, a difficult matter to decide what 

 is the real distinction between an entomologist and a " mere 

 collector" ; there are as many grades merging one into the other 

 as is the case in many species of Lepidoptera and their varieties. 

 An entomologist is almost as difficult to define as is a species. 

 Anyhow, if a person desires to consider himself as belonging to 



ENTOM. OCT. 1896. 2 A 



