60 Mr. Westwood on Siagonium quadricorne^ 8fc. 



duabus segmento loiigioribus, tripartitis quoad formam cornua 

 cervina aequautibus armatum." 



It is somewhat remarkable that DeGeer has figured no Staphj- 

 linidous larvae, nor am I aware of any author who has done so. 



I also add a description and figure of a third Larva, which for 

 the reasons after mentioned, I had conceived to be that of Aleo- 

 chara fuscipes ; but the receipt of the following communication 

 from Mr. Kirby has considerably shaken such opinion — " I sus- 

 pect," he says, " that the Larva fig. 3, is not the Larva of any of 

 the Brachelytra — From its habitat it may belong to one of the 

 Niiidulidce^ which are very common in bones, (Comp. Introd. to 

 Eot. iii. 168) — My Larvae of that form are too large to belong to 

 an Aleochara^ and I find them in carcases, with Silphidce of the 

 larger kinds." 



Larva Fig. 3. A. aucta. 



E. Larva Philonthi politi, praecipue magnitudine differt et sta- 

 tura latiori subconvexa ; capite nutanti latiorique, corporis seg- 

 mentis latioribus. 1"' 2**' 3', marginibus lateralibus rotundatis. 

 Segmenta alia in spinam lateralem, brevem ad marginem posterio- 

 rem producta. Tubus caudalis brevior, processus laterales lon- 

 giores, tenuioresque sunt (B) — C. Antenna aucta. 



Habitat in ossibus siccis tempore oestivo. 



I shall now state my reasons for having considered these last 

 as the Larvaj of Aleochar a fuscipes. They were Ist, from finding 

 them together with the Aleocharce^ and also the cast-ofF exuviae of 

 the pupae in the same dry rotten bone, the Larvas running about 

 as quickly as the perfect insects, and apparently of the full size, 

 and the exuviae partly sticking out of the different small crevices 

 in the bone, and not larger than the Larvae ; no other insect pre- 

 senting itself except a small Hister : and 2"*'^ from their perfectly 

 agreeing (except in their ovate form, and a few other minor 

 differences) with the general characters of the other Larvae above 

 described, and more particularly in the essential structure of the 

 the description of Latreille of the Larvae of the NitidulidcB^ in the 

 antennae and anal appendages, which latter entirely disagree with 

 Hist. Nat. &c. quoted below, and it is also confirmatory of my 



