Mr. Sprncr’s Monograph of the Genus Choleva. 1?7 
for a tyro ever to make out a single insect by his works, | Fortu- 
nately the arduous labours of this undoubtedly excellent entomo- 
logist are not greatly vitiated by the unsoundness of the base on 
which they rest. Fabricius is an almost solitary instance of the 
founder of a system entirely neglecting his own peculiar prin- 
ciples, and acting in nearly every instance agreeably to those 
which he professes to supersede. He has not, perhaps, constructed 
any one of his genera upon its Instrumenta Cibaria. Habit 
alone has evidently in almost every case led to their separation, 
th echaracters of the Instrumenta Cibaria of one species of each 
genus being for form's sake placed at its head. It is only upon 
this supposition that we can account for the undeniable facts, 
that many of the genera into which Fabricius has split some na- 
tural families (as Scarabeus and Cerambyx Linn.), though differing 
essentially in habit, have little or no difference in their Instrumen- 
ta Cibaria ; and on the other hand, that all his large genera include 
insects which, having some affinity in point of habit, are yet 
toto celo at variance with their generic characters. From this in- 
consistency has resulted the good consequence, that the bulk of 
the Fabrician genera are natural, and, when designated by in- 
telligible and distinctive characters, may be adopted into any ` 
system. 
The generic subdivisions, however, for which Entomology has 
to thank Fabricius, are much fewer than even the present state 
of the science demands, and probably not one fourth that will 
hereafter be called for. It is contrary both to analogy and ex- 
perience to suppose that the Creator has formed fewer of those 
groupes into which we divide the vast tribes of nature by the - 
name of genera, in one department than in another. Now in 
Botany, in which not more than about 20,000 species have been, 
described, we have upwards of 2000 genera. In Entomology at 
least 
