SUCKING INSECTS. 205 



dibles, it is impossible to refuse the name. Should 

 an objection be raised from their substance, I have 

 already said that they are horny, and although 

 hollow within, they are more solid than the mandibles 

 of certain beetles. Should their configuration be 

 objected to, the conical form which they affect, is 

 tliat of all mandibles ; they have one point and one 

 base distinct ; and as they are fringed on their 

 internal margin with numerous hairs, the mandibles 

 of many bees and beetles are similarly fringed. Should 

 we object to their mobility ; it is answered, that 

 though they are sometimes as it were glued (soudees) , 

 they are also sometimes articulated and distinctly 

 moveable. Is their minuteness objected to ? The 

 day-flies {Ejjhemeridoi) and water-flies (Phrygan- 

 idce) have mandibles smaller and more imperfect 

 still, and yet nobody doubts that the latter ought to be 

 placed among insects with jaws.'* 



From this extract our readers may learn the 

 general principles of this doctrine, which is carried 

 into minute details, derived from the very extensive 

 and profound knowledge of the author. Although 

 we may inchne to believe these opinions more 

 fanciful than just, and while we object to the hypo- 

 thetical names given by M. Savigny, we readily 

 acknowledge the very extraordinary accuracy of the 

 dissections and figures which he has supplied in illus- 

 tration. 



* Memoires sar les Anim. sans Vertebres, i, 5. 



VOL. XII. 18 



