166 THE CANADIAN ENTOMOLOGIST. 



morphology which by their nature are little likely to receive help from this 

 source. Let me mention three : 



The first concerns the structure of the organs of flight. The very 

 nomenclature of the veins shows the disgraceful condition of our philoso- 

 phy of these parts ; the same terminology is not employed in any two of 

 of the larger sub-orders of insects ; names without number have been pro- 

 posed, rarely however by any author with a view to their applicability to 

 any group outside that which formed his special study ; and a tabular 

 view which should illustrate them all would be a curious sight. A careful 

 study of the main and subordinate veins, their relations to each other, to 

 the different regions of the wing, to the supporting parts of the thorax and 

 to the alar muscles, should be carried through the entire order of insects ; 

 by no means, either, neglecting their development in time, and possibly 

 deriving some assistance in working our homologies by the study of their 

 hypodermic development. 



The second concerns the mouth parts. The general homologies of 

 these organs were clearly and accurately enough stated by Savigny, though 

 one may perhaps have a right to consider the last word not yet said when 

 one recalls Saussure's recent claim to have found in Hemimerus a second 

 labium. What I refer to, however, is another point : it relates to the 

 appendages of the maxillae and the labium. Considering the labium as a 

 soldered pair of secondary maxillae we have at the most, on either pair of 

 maxillae, three appendages upon either side. These appendages, as you 

 know, are very variously developed in different sub-orders of insects, or 

 even in the same sub-order ; and it has at least not been shown, and I 

 question if it can be done, that the parts bearing similar names in different 

 sub-orders are always homologous organs. Here is a study as broad and 

 perhaps as difficult as the last. 



The third is the morphological significance of monstrosities, especially 

 of such as are termed monstrosities by excess. The literature of the sub- 

 ject is very scattered, and the material much more extensive than many of 

 you may think. At present this subject is, so to speak, only one of the 

 curiosities of entomology, but we may be confident that It will one day 

 show important relations to the story of life. 



After all the labors of Herold, Treviranus, Lyonet, Dufour, and 

 dozens of other such industrious and illustrious workers, is there anything 

 important remaining to be done in the gross anatomy of insects ? some of 

 you would perhaps ask. Let the recent work of some of our own number 



