46 MANUAL OF THE APIARY. 



though he did not discover that our bees, in the production 

 of drones, illustrate the same doctrine. Though the author 

 of no system, he gave much aid to Reaumur in his systematic 

 labors. 



At this same period systematic entomology received great 

 aid from Lyonnet's valuable work. This author dissected 

 and explained the development of a caterpillar. His descrip- 

 tions and illustrations are wonderful, and will proclaim his 

 ability as long as entomology is studied, and they, to quote 

 Bonnet, " demonstrate the existence of God." 



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

 student of Linnseus — who published his works from 1775 to 

 1798, and thus was revolutionizing systematic entomology at 

 the same time that we of America were revolutionizing gov- 

 ernment. He made the mouth organs the basis of his classi- 

 fication, and thus followed in the path which DeGreer had 

 marked out, though it was scarcely beaten by the latter ; 

 while Fabricious left it wide and deep. His classes and or- 

 ders are no improvement on, in fact, are not nearly as correct, 

 as were his old master's. In his description of genera — where 

 he pretended to follow nature — he has rendered valuable 

 service In leading scientists to study parts, before little re- 

 garded, and thus to better establish affinities, he did a most 

 valuable work. His work is a standard, and should be thor- 

 oughly 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 classification 

 of the honey-bee. His is called the Elective System, as he 

 used wings, mouth-parts, transformations, in fact, all the or- 

 gans — 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 extensive 

 researches and remarkable talents. Lamark, of this time, ex- 

 cept that he could see no God in nature, 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, 



