166 
THE ENTOMOLOGIST’S WEEKLY INTELLIGENCEE. 
necessary it is to examine personally the 
books cited. The erroneous idea that 
such works can be produced by a careful 
compilation has hitherto prevented the 
appearance of a serviceable bibliography. 
For example, as a laughable instance of 
the mistakes which may be made by a 
compilation, without personal reference, 
I may mention the following ; — 
Percheron * found in a book catalogue 
the following title of a work, “ Corre- 
spondence Entomologique, par J. K. 
Broch.” From this he constructs an 
author of the name of Broch, with J. K. 
as the initials of his Christian name. In 
Agassiz’s ‘ Bibliographia ’ we find Per- 
cheron’s notice copied correctly, and thus 
it wanders through the world from one 
work to another. The absurdity is that 
the author Broch never existed ; the 
‘ Correspondence Entomologique ’ is by 
J. K. (J. Koechlin), and the “Broch” 
after the name signifies merely that the 
copy was not bound, but only stitched 
(“ brochirt ”). It need not be imagined 
that this instance has been carefully 
sought out; it occurred to me quite acci- 
dentally, and he who has a knowledge of 
the subject can, without much trouble, 
find in Agassiz a multitude of similar 
errors. 
In order to exterminate all fictitious 
books and writers of this sort, and to ob- 
tain a certain foundation, I deemed it 
necessary, as far as is in any w'ay pos- 
sible, to examine for myself, and to 
indicate in my work by an asterisk (*) 
all those references which I have myself 
compared. In all the instances where I 
have been unable to make a personal 
reference I have in each case indicated 
the source whence my information was 
* Or perhaps this was found by some 
author from whom Percheron compiled. 
derived, in all older works preferring to 
quote that excellent model of such a work, 
viz. Dryander’s ‘ Catalogue of Banks’ 
Libraiy.’ 
The European renown of the ento- 
mological libraries of Westwood and 
Hope made it especially desirable to 
examine them thoroughly, and I con- 
sidered it a special recognition and ap- 
proval of the projected plan of my under- 
taking that Professor Westwood, with 
inexhaustible patience, devoted a whole 
week of his time, so precious for Science, 
in order to facilitate my ransacking these 
libraries in so coinparatively short a 
time. 
I should be carrying owls to Athens 
(coals to Newcastle) were I to commend 
in England the beauty and peculiarity 
of Oxford. The mighty influence of 
this ancient University on Science is 
known throughout the world ; wherever 
the eye glances it takes in intellectual 
food, whilst the enthralled gazer seems 
to breathe Science! On the summit of 
the Radcliflfe Library one seems carried, 
in the spirit, into a new world. The 
colossal repose of the magnificent old 
buildings, which are so regularly adapted 
to each other, all intended solely for the 
cultivation and progress of Science, forms 
a coup d’oeil which is only to be compared 
with Memphis, the most ancient temple 
of Science ! Hence, according to my 
views, the architect of the new Museum 
acted quite correctly in proposing the 
plan of a building totally different from 
the ordinary style of museums. At Ox- 
ford, of all places, a barrack-like gallery, 
window after window, like most of the 
museums of the present day, would have 
been thoroughly discordant. It redounds 
to the honour of the architect that he 
has created a work so peculiar ~so 
magical, I might say, — worthy ' N 
