54 



work has lost much interest. Among the waste of public money for scientific purposes I 

 may mention the fact that the volume in the Natural History of New York, published by 

 the State, contains actual copies (and poor ones) of Drury's old figures, without acknowledg- 

 ment and this while the originals were flying about in the country all round the capital 

 at Albany. While Drury was publishing his work in England, on the continent 

 Fabricius, who followed very closely in Linnseus's footsteps, issued several descriptional 

 works on insects and in them are the descriptions of a number of our North American 

 moths. Naturally our larger and gaudier species were the ones to be first described. 

 Linne had named our " American Moon Moth " or " Queen of the Night," Actias Luna 

 (Fig. 26), as also the "American Emperor" on " Cecropia Moth," Platysamia Cecropia 



A 



K 



M 



u^^ r 





• 



Fig. 27. 



(Fig. 27). So far as the titles themselves are concerned, their choice depends on the 

 fancy of the describer, and while Latin adjectives expressive of some characteristic marking 

 or designating the country or the food plant were generally used, names out of Homer 

 and the Classics were brought into fashion by Linneeus's example. Dr. Harris introduced 

 a new feature into our nomenclature, by using the names of Indian chiefs for our 

 Hesperida*. The name used for a species soon loses its signification apart from the object 

 it designates. Respecting the name Cecropia. Dr. Harris says, on page 279 of the first 

 edition of his book on the Insects of Massachusetts, that this was the ancient name of 

 the city of Athens, and thinks it here inappropriately applied to a moth. But the late Dr. 

 Pitch has written in his copy of Dr. Harris's work, now in my library, " Cecrops was the 

 first king of Athens — Cecropia is the feminine of Cecrops — and thus implies the first 

 queen of the most polished or fairest people, so a more appropriate and beautiful designa- 

 tion could not have been found for this most gaudy sumptuous moth." So far Dr. Fitch. 

 It may be said that the multitude of species renders it difficult to find different and oppo- 

 site names. I may close these remarks on the names of insects by referring to a very 

 valuable paper on " Entomological Nomenclature," by the late Dr. Leconte, and published 

 in the sixth volume of the Canadian Entomologist, pp. 201 and following. For his 



