BLOW-FLIES. 



417 



ever, chiefly for the purpose of refuting an erroneous 

 popular accusation against it, which is supported by the 

 high authorities of Eay and Reaumur. Our great Eng- 

 lish naturalist calls it the deadliest enemy of the flowers 



Transformations of Bibio Jiortuhwvs, Mf.k; k x. a, the egg magnified ; b, the same when 

 hatched ; c, d, tlie maggot and pupa uiagnitied ; e, /, the same, natural size ; g, the fiy . 



in spring, and accuses it of despoiling the gardens and 

 fields of every blossom.*. Iieaumur is less decided in his 

 opinion ; for though he perceived that, not being furnished 

 with mandibles, they could not, as is supposed, gnaw the 

 buds of fruit-trees ; yet, from their being found crowded 

 upon flowers and buds, he thinks they may suck the juices 

 of these, and thus cause them to wither. f We are satisfied, 

 by repeated observation, that the fly only uses its sucker 

 (haustdlani) for sipping the honey of flowers, or the gum 

 with which the opening bud is usually covered. The 

 damage of which it is accused is more probably done by 

 caterpillars, snails, or other night-feeding insects, which, 

 not being seen by day, the fly is blamed for what it is 

 entirely innocent of. (J. E.) 



In the case of the blow-flies Linnaeus tells us that the 

 larvse of three females of Musca vomitoria will devour the 

 carcase of a horse as quickly as would a lion ; and we are 

 not indisposed to take this literally, when we know that 



* Rail Hist. Insect. Pref. 



p. XI. 



t Reaumur, v. 56. 

 2 E 



