272 ENTOMOLOGICAL SOCIETY 



This large number itself proves a lack of knowledge of the 

 morphology of these animals, for in the limited area in which 

 they were observed there are, according to my judgment, not more 

 than six or eight species. The descriptions of this small number 

 of species by one author were so defective that his successors 

 were unable to recognize them and redescribed them as new 

 ones, for these descriptions are based on such points as the form 

 and size of the body, rotundity or flatness, the color and the 

 markings of the abdomen, etc., points which depend on the stage 

 of development or the condition of the life habits parasitic or 

 free-living. 



In only one instance I found a short treatment of the Ticks 

 in a more general way by an American naturalist, and this con 

 tained gross misstatements and inexcusable errors, so that I must 

 not only consider it as worthless, but as absolutely misleading to 

 the student. 



This is the more remarkable since long ago some of the Euro 

 pean arachnologists expressed their views in a generally correct 

 way, only deviating in details. . 



Thus Carl L. Koch, the father of arachnology, nearly fifty 

 years ago issued in a concise form a treatise on the Ixodidaa in 

 which he explains the main features of the morphology and gives 

 a standard classification of this group, while Pagenstecher, about 

 thirty years ago, published a very valuable work on the internal 

 and external anatomy of Ixodes. 



It is therefore inexcusable to find in a standard hand-book, re 

 issued in the eighth edition in 1883, such statements as the fol 

 lowing : "the maxillae of the Ixodidas are three or four jointed" 

 or " the thorax is very distinct from the head and the abdomen" 

 or " the males are distinguished from the females by their larger 

 cheliceres (maxillary palpi) and larger pair of clasping legs" or 

 " the legs in the young with a distinct membraneous foot pad." 



But as a kind of consolation 1 can quote also similar stupendous 

 errors from the publications of some European naturalists, as the 

 following : Kolenati informs us that the Ticks have four eyes, two 

 on the upper side and two on the under side. Prof. McAlister, 

 of Ireland, discovered two peculiar glandular sacks, opening on 

 the sides of a Tick, and considered this discovery of sufficient im 

 portance to base a new genus upon it, but by the description and 



