THE ENTOMOLOGIST’S WEEKLY INTELLIGENCER. 
151 
common, or rather the one is included in 
the other. 
But the mode generally adopted is 
that of urging objections against the 
theory ; and here indeed there is no end 
of what may be said, but what generally 
seems to escape notice is, that arguing in 
this way is acknowledging the existence 
of the theory, and therewith its right to 
be looked at on both sides. A theory in 
Natural Science is a mode of connecting 
together and (as we may say) explaining 
certain observed facts by the bond of a 
general law ; and it is evident that it 
must be judged by the extent to which 
it fulfils this end : every fact that can be 
justly urged against it detracts from its 
perfection, but every one to which it ex- 
tends the bond of union is an addition to 
its completeness, and it is the balance of 
the two which constitutes the value of 
one theory over another. The theory of 
special creation (and unless we allow that 
the Bible was given to teach men Natural 
History, it is a theory) with which that 
of Mr. Darwin is generally compared is 
liable to few objections, but the reason is 
simply because it ignores them; it is in 
this respect like the old quarryman’s idea 
of Geology — the shells were in the rocks, 
because when God made the rocks He 
made the shells. With the one excep- 
tion of adaptation, the theory of special 
creation explains nothing, not even 
geographical distribution, for it does 
not necessarily imply single centres of 
creation. 
There is one other thought which has 
much struck me while studying this sub- 
ject, and that is the circle that lies con- 
cealed in many of the arguments used : 
for instance, one species cannot be 
changed into another, because each has 
certain definite marks which separate it 
from all others. But what is a species? 
Why, it is something which possesses 
certain definite marks which separate it 
from all others ! The species is first made 
from certain observed differences, and 
then it is argued that it is a species 
because it has them. And so again the 
symmetry of Nature is first deduced from 
what we find in Nature, and then used 
as a reason why we should find it there. 
Other instances will, I doubt not, occur 
to the minds of your readers, and it is 
well that they should be noticed, for 
without doubt it will be long ere we hear 
the last of this subject. 
Yours, & c., 
Thomas Boyd. 
FEN INSECTS. 
To the Editor of the ‘ Intelligencer.' 
Sir, — I am requested by several of my 
last year’s subscribers to again announce 
that I will collect insects during the 
coming season in the fens, which are well 
calculated to repay those gentlemen who 
wish to contribute a share towards the 
expenses of working them, particularly 
to gentlemen who have only small col- 
lections. I propose to take subscribers 
for shares of the insects to be captured ; 
each share to be one guinea, and a box 
to be found by myself, or the subscribers 
to find their own, as they please, the cost 
being three shillings. A list and number 
of all captures to be sent to each 
subscriber before the distribution takes 
place. 
I propose to collect Lepidoptera for 
sixteen subscribers; for Coleoptera, He- 
miptera, Diptera and Phryganidee only 
five subscribers will be taken. 
My time is not wholly devoted to 
Entomology, as I am otherwise engaged 
from 9 a. m. to 4 p. m. 
Any gentlemen wishing to subscribe to 
the above will please send their names, 
