results no one can attempt to predict; but it is clearly the duty, as it must be the desire, of all zoologists and well-wishers to Zoology to aid this rapid advance. I would, therefore, with the utmost respect to my supporters, earnestly request them in every case to consider beforehand whether the contributions they may be intending to forward to this journal are such as will promote the progress of the study, and to satisfy themselves that this is so ere they despatch their communications.
It does not follow because a certain incident deserved publication once, that a similar incident is not worthy of record now. It is ob'ious that there are many occurrences which it is not only allowable but even highly desirable to communicate time after time, although beyond the mere occasional differences of place and date there may be little or no novelty in the notice.
Of such a kind are communications regarding the appearance of really uncommon species, or of common species at unusual seasons or in new localities. The use of these lies in their multitude, for it is only by collecting such records extending over a long period that any law may be deduced from them—a law which perhaps may bear upon some more general question: or the fact may be rendered apparent that the species is extending its geographical range. And it seems fitting that 'The Zoologist,' which has always been the great storehouse of notices of this land, should still maintain the same character. Hereby the progress of science may be unquestionably aided.
Then there is another matter, and one which I am well aware requires delicate handling on the part of an Editor. Yet it is so important that I cannot refrain from directing attention to it, and trust I may do so without giving offence to any. There exists amongst all contributors to Natural-History journals an unconscious but more or less strong tendency (sometimes most strongly shown in the best writers) to make the local and personal part of their communications of greater importance than it deserves.
