17 
collector who regrets the decadence of the “ science of entomology ” 
as he knew it; in spite of the better-educated drone who, adding 
nothing to the sum total of knowledge himself, and always falling 
behind as the wave of science advances, groans to think that 
entomological literature is not composed of half-veiled advertisements 
of rarities for disposal; there can be no doubt that entomological 
science has progressed, and is progressing, and of this no better proof 
is needed than the history of our Society during the last few years. 
Even as recently as ten years ago, papers such as those read by our 
members, Messrs. Bacot, Hanbury, Prout and Dr. Buckell, would have 
been caviare to many ; now, as a matter of fact, our younger members 
are the active spirits, and the older ones have to steadily read and 
study in order to keep level with the progressive spirit which has 
happily overtaken them. 
Such generalisations as these, however, will not practically forward 
much the cause of science, and one little text that will set one thinking 
is better than all the platitudes which one may venture on. With the 
.idea, therefore, of turning your minds to a question which should be 
interesting to all entomologists, I will, with your permission, indulge 
in a few remarks about classification ; not the classification of insects 
generally, nor even of the classification of the Lepidoptera as a whole 
in detail, but just a few general remarks about the principles of 
modern classification. 
It was the earliest practice to base the classification of Lepidoptera 
on the general appearance and the wing-markings of the imagines. Then 
a general consideration of the larval structure became recognised, and 
lastly a few pupal characters (of the most general nature however) 
were sometimes used. As may be expected, the characters of 
the larva and pupa were scarcely at all recognised or understood, a 
natural result in the days when evolution was hidden in the dark mists 
of the future. Details of imaginal structure, such as those of the 
antennas, palpi, tongue, legs, wing-nervures, &c., were considered as time 
passed on, and, on the distinctions to be observed in these structures, 
tribal and generic divisions hace largely been founded. 
It is now’ generally recognised that all the characters to be obtained 
not only from each stage, but from the modification of every set of 
organs in each stage, should be considered in finally determining the 
position of an insect, and it is largely on this principle, and with this 
understanding that our specialists now work. They take some 
particular character in some particular stage, and v T ork it out as 
exhaustively as possible. If it gives general results in accordance 
with those derived from other characters (and it is almost sure to do 
this if the character is really structural), it may be assumed that the 
character is a useful one ; if not, the reason must be sought, and the 
character may have to be finally discarded. One thing is certain, viz ., 
that the results obtained from each set of characters will (if the right 
interpretation be given to them) in the main, give a general result 
agreeing wdth that derived from any other set of characters, and, if not, 
it must be concluded that something in the observation is at fault, or 
the interpretation of the facts observed has not been read aright. 
Our aim in classification is to bring into close proximity those 
