iv PREFACE. 



posed, as the four suborders comprised in it differ in the 

 degrees of completeness of their metamorphoses, and are 

 all linked together by the structural features enumerated 

 on page 104. 



The classification of the ITymenoptera is original with the 

 author, the bees (Apiclae) being placed highest, and the saw- 

 flies and Urocericlae lowest. The succession of the families 

 of the Lepidoptera is that now generally agreed upon by en- 

 tomologists. Loew's classification of the Diptcra, published 

 in the "Miscellaneous Collections" of the Smithsonian 

 Institution, has been followed, with some modifications. 

 Ilaliday's suggestion that the Pulicidoe are allied to the 

 Mycetophilidne gives a clue to their position in nature 

 among the higher Diptera. Leconte's classification of the 

 Coleoptera is adopted as far as published by him, ?'. <?., to 

 the Bruchidye. For the succeeding families the arrangement 

 of Gerstaecker in Peters and Cams' "Handbuch der Zoo- 

 logic" has been followed, both being based on that of Lacor- 

 claire. The Hemiptera are arranged according to the author's 

 views of the succession of the families. The classification of 

 the Orthoptera is that proposed by Mr. S. H. Scudder. This 

 succession of families is the reverse of what has been given 

 hy recent authors, and is by far the most satisfactory yet 

 presented. The arrangement of the Neurpptera (in the Lin- 

 nrean sense) is that of Dr. Hagen, published in his "Synop- 

 sis," with the addition, however, of the Lepismatidoe, Cam- 

 podere and Poduridoe. 



The usual classification of the Arachnida is modified by 

 placing the Phalangidre as a family among the Pedipalpi, and 

 the succession of families of this suborder is suggested as be- 

 ing a more natural one than has been previously given. 



The arrangement of the Araneina, imperfect as authors 

 have left it, is that adopted by Gerstaecker in Peters and 



