I believe that, if analogies were more carefully studied in the lower departments of the animal kingdom, we should be less inclined to deny some sort of uniformity to the action of elements and conditions which, by a law of Nature, must at times operate equally upon the various and dissimilar members of the organic creation. Amongst the Insecta, where the individuals exist in such multitudes that accuracy in generalizations concerning them, becomes, as it were, peculiarly within our reach, this doctrine cannot be too rigidly insisted upon; and it is not difficult to foresee that, should the principle of external disturbing influences ever be admitted by entomologists to the extent which it has been accepted by the students of the Vertebrata, our so-called "species" will have to submit to a process of elimination and inquiry, which at present would be well nigh incredible. The time for such a step is yet far off: perhaps indeed, considering the innovations of nomenclature which it would necessitate, it will never arrive at all; yet the fact remains the same, that, _if_ analogy with creatures of a more perfect development be not altogether disallowed us, during our researches into the insect tribes, or _if_ similar causes may be presumed to have somewhat similar effects in opposite sections of the animate world, an enlargement of our prescribed limits, for specific variation, ought in reality to follow (sooner or later) as an inevitable consequence. In whichever light, therefore, insect aberration is viewed by us,--whether as a matter of experience (which, being self-evident, will satisfy the practical observer), or as probable from analogy (which will hardly be denied, at any rate to a certain extent, by even the most theoretical),--we affirm that _it does, ipso facto, exist_. "There is no similitude in Nature that owneth not _also to a difference_;" let this be constantly borne in mind, for it is a truism almost beyond controversy, and one which, to a reflective mind, will scarcely admit of a doubt.