00 



THE CANADIAN SPORTSMAN AND NATURALIST. 



of North America, when he is aware that there 

 is not a man outside of his peculiar school who 

 agrees with him. Not satisfied with altering 

 the genera of Lepidoptera, to suit his 

 fancy, he now issues a book wherein the great- 

 er portion of our butterflies are introduced 

 under newly invented common names. The 

 Canadian Entomologist says: "It were far j 

 better, in our opinion (with few exceptions), to 

 use the specific name of the insect for this pur- ' 

 pose, which is as easily learnt and conveys a 

 more definite idea than is possible with such ■ 

 common names as those given by this author." 

 W. H. Edwards, author of : < The Butter- 

 flies of North America," says : " Throughout 

 this book Archippus is ostentatiously called ; 

 The Monarch, I apprehend in right of its '■ 

 amazing history. If it lives as long for a 

 butterfly as Methusaleh lived among men, it 

 may be entitled to some sort of distinctive j 

 appellation, and if it Las so changed the habits 

 of its kind as to breed like a mammal, laying 

 eggs at intervals in the closing half of its long i 

 life and gathering its progeny about its tibiae, i 

 perhaps it ought to have some superlative 

 title. We read that Methusaleh lived, after he j 

 begat Larnech, seven hundred and eighty-two 

 years, and begat sons and daughters, but his 

 long life appears to have been that venerable j 

 man's claim to distinction. We do not read 

 that he attained regal honours, or even the 

 chieftainship of a tribe. In view, therefore, of 

 this high precedent, I suggest' that the correct 

 thing wculd have been to designate this long- 

 lived phenomenal butterfly not The Monarch, 

 but ' The Patriarch.' " 



Then, again, there are compilers of Ento- 

 mological Catalogues, who, without giving any 

 distinct reason for so doing, take upon them- 

 selves to alter well-established genera for 

 seemingly no other purpose than the honour 

 of having their names attached. So much for 

 the piratical way in which these alterations are 

 made, and in order to show how some of them 

 are accomplished, we will instance one or two 

 cases : — 



Mr. S. H. Scudder, in his researches, dis- 

 covered that our common butterfly, the Cam- 

 berwell Beauty, everywhere known to entomo- 

 logists as Vanessa antiopa, Linn., should not 

 be placed under the genus Vanessa. By T a 

 resurrection of old documents- lie has managed 

 in a miserable way r to transfer this butterfly 

 from the latter genus to that of Papilio, 

 calling it Papilio antiopa, Scudder. This is 

 one of the many innovations which this author 

 places before the Entomologists of America. 

 The same attempt has been made in regard to 

 the Coleoptera (Beetles) of this country, and 

 unless the subject is strictly dealt with by the 

 Entomological Section of the Association, 

 the nomenclature of North American insects 

 will be such that ten generations of students 

 will pass away before it is properly understood. 



In Botany also, attempts have been made in 

 a similar manner. Suffice to say that a 

 botanist discovered a new species of California 

 Convolvolus which he described and felt satis- 

 fied that it was placed under the correct genus. 

 It did not belong to the climbing, but to the 

 creeping genera. Some time ago the describer 

 of the plant was horrified to find his sj^ecies 

 re-described under another genus with the 

 name Gray appended to it. Now, we do not 

 wish to see any more of this mode of obtaining 

 material, but possibly Mr. Gray, who is a 

 celebrated botanist, may account for his name 

 being there. Mistakes of this nature will 

 sometimes occur, and one of them was made 

 by the Bev. Mr. Provancher, of Cap Bouge, Q., 

 who attached, in his work on Canadian Cole- 

 optera, the name of Fabricius to a species 

 discovered and described by the writer of this 

 article. We claim that when any one de- 

 scribes a new animal, mineral or plant, that the 

 species (if properly and morally named) is 

 legitimately his to the end of time, and he who 

 takes the name from him to place his own to 

 it robs another man of his intelligence and 

 labour, discouraging and deterring him from 

 going on with his work of doing good to man- 

 kind. 



