THE YOUNG NATURALIST. 



67 



the recent proposal to adopt the German nomenclature of Staudinger, in lieu 

 of the French nomenclature of Guenee which was introduced by Doubleday, 

 has brought all the difficulties home to us at last. 



It may be worth while to consider for a moment how it is that more than 

 one name has been given to one species, because a proper understanding of 

 that point leads us at once to the difficulties of a settlement. The beauty of 

 butterflies and moths, has doubtless been the chief cause of so many collectors 

 turning their attention to lepidoptera. Their small size places a collection 

 within the reach of every one, while this very minuteness, coupled wi'Ji their 

 wonderful variation, has rendered it exceedingly difficult to describe and figure 

 them with absolute exactness. Writers in different countries have figured 

 and described these beautiful creatures, sometimes carefully and correctly, 

 sometimes carelessly and incorrectly, sometimes from imperfect or abnormal 

 specimens, sometimes from a local form not occurring elsewhere. These 

 writers too, were working in more or less ignorance of what others were doing 

 or had done, naming species that had been named before, describing species 

 in different words to those used in descriptions already published, figuring 

 species with more or less variation, and altogether involving us in a maze of 

 doubt and difficulty to which we may never find the complete clue. From 

 time to time efforts have been made by one or another to explain some or all 

 of these puzzles, or remove them out of the way, but it has generally happened 

 that such well meant efforts have only served to make the matter more com- 

 plicated. Differences of opinion as to method are fruitful sources of difficulty. 

 One writer has more discrimination than another, or thinks he has, and 

 satisfies himself he has solved a problem that still remains dark to his co- 

 workers. Another is more easily satisfied and passes as correct, what 

 to everyone else seems wrong or very doubtful. Every attempt to produce a 

 perfect nomenclature of even a very limited fauna, has been more or less a 

 failure. Imperfect knowledge is one great cause of this, and genuine differen- 

 ces of opinion as to the principles that ought to be adopted. It is perhaps 

 presumptuous in one situated as I am to speak on such a subject. Possessing 

 but a limited library myself, and without access to any better than my own, 

 I have had but little opportunity for original investigation. But had I 

 access to every entomological work issued, I could only expect the labour 

 of years, to be received as the works of abler men have been received before. 

 My desire is much greater to see a nomenclature adopted by every one, than 

 to have any particular course followed, and I care little how it is done if 

 uniformity could be had. In pointing out errors and difficulties, 1 suggest a 

 course that others may think equally faulty, but if anything better can be 

 suggested I am ready to follow. 



