FULGORA LATERNARIA, 
281 
affirming that they never witnessed this phenomenon 
in any other insects except certain species of Lam- 
pyris and Elater. Certain writers of older date, 
however, affirm that they have, and it is difficult to 
determine the fact amidst such conflicting evidence. 
Still, however, when we consider Madam Merian's 
circumstantial statement, and how improbable it is, 
notwithstanding the grave errors into which she occa- 
sionally falls, that she could be mistaken in a matter 
so obvious, while, at the same time, she could have 
no motive intentionally to mislead — that the natives 
affirm they have sometimes seen it luminous — and 
that the names given to the insect, both by the 
colonists and natives, such as Lantarendrager, Porte- 
Lanterne, mouche a feu, all bear allusion to this 
property — it may be concluded, that the opinion 
generally received is nearest the truth. It should be 
kept in mind that all the negative evidence merely 
proves that the light is seldom exhibited, while the 
testimony of a single trustworthy observer affirming 
that he has witnessed it, is conclusive. All luminous 
insects are capricious in displaying their radiance; 
and, in many instances, it is only under a certain 
combination of circumstances that they can do it at all. 
In the present case, it fiiny be that only one of the 
sexes is luminous, and even in the sex so endowed, 
the property may depend on the age of the indivi- 
dual, the season of the year, and even the state of 
the atmosphere. 
The narrow- snouted Fulgoree have likewise ob- 
tained credit for being luminous, but there is a stiL 
