Early History of Entomology. 49 



occurs among the Aphides, or plant lice, though he did not 

 discover that our bees, in the production of drones, illus- 

 trate the same doctrine. Tb«ragh the author of no system, 

 he gave much aid to Reaumur in his systematic labor. 



At this same period systematic entomology received great 

 aid from Lyonnet's valuable work. This author dissected 

 and explamed the development of a caterpillar. His de- 

 criptions and illustrations are v^^onderful, and will proclaim 

 his ability as long as entomology is studied. 



We have next to speak of the great Dane, Fabricius — a 

 student of Linnaeus — who published his works from 1775 

 to 1798, and thus was revolutionizing systematic entomol- 

 ogy at the same time that we of America were revolution- 

 izing government. He made the mouth organs the basis 

 of his classification, and thus followed in the path which 

 DeGeer had marked out; though it was scarcely beaten by 

 the latter, while Fabricius left it wide and deep. His 

 classes and orders ai'e no improvement on, in fact, are not 

 nearly as correct as his old master's. In his description of 

 genera — where he pretended to follow nature — he has ren- 

 dered valuable service. In leading scientists to study parts, 

 before little regarded, and thus to better establish affinities, 

 he did a most valuable work. His work is a standard, and 

 should be thoroughly studied by all entomologists. 



Just at the close of the last century appeared the "great- 

 est Roman of them all," the great Latreille, of France, 

 whose name we have so frequently used in the classifica- 

 tion of the honey bee. His is called the Elective System, 

 as he used wings, mouth-parts, transformations, in fact, all 

 the organs, the entire structure. He gave us our Family 

 Apidae, our Genus Apis, and, as will be remembered, he 

 described several of the species of this genus. In our study 

 of this great man's work we constantly marvel at his exten- 

 sive researches and remarkable talents. Lamarck, of this 

 time did very admirable work. So, too, did Cuvier, of 

 Napoleon's time, and the learned Dr. Leach, of England. 

 Since then we have had hosts of workers in this field, and 

 many worthy of not only mention but praise; yet the 

 work has been to rub up and garnish rather than to create. 

 Of late Mr. E. T. Cresson, of Philadelphia, has given a 



