292 Linnean Society. [April 4, 



more nearly allied to the Lamellicornes, With the view of showing 

 this to be the case, he contrasts the leading characters of the La- 

 mellicornes and Longicornes, and particularly compares the genus 

 Hypocephalus with those members of both families to which it offers 

 either affinity or analogy, and in particular with Cyrtognathus, with 

 which Mr. A. White had especially associated it. He admits that 

 there is a very considerable analogy between Hypocephalus and Cyr- 

 tognathus ; but observes that if we look to the antennae of the latter 

 having 12, instead of 11 joints, to their great length and relative 

 proportions, as well as to the situation, form, and magnitude of the 

 eyes, the size and figure of the thorax, the scutel, sternum, and 

 elytra ; having wings for flight ; to the long sprawling legs, neither 

 robust nor truly 5-jointed, to the long simple tibise, the dilated 

 and bilobed and spongiose tarsi, it is impossible to allow that there 

 is any affinity : Cyrtognathus is a Longicorn, Hypocephalus is not. 

 The author then gives a detailed description of Hypocephalus arma- 

 tus, Desm. ?, observing at the same time that there are so many 

 differences between M. Desmarest's figure and Mr. Turner's spe- 

 cimen, examined by him, that they are, in all probability, if not 

 distinct, of different sexes. From the peculiarities of its structure 

 Mr. Curtis proceeds to deduce the probable habits of the insect, of 

 which little is known from actual observation ; and concludes by 

 some further observations on its proper place in the system. In 

 the course of these remarks he maintains the great importance of 

 the tarsal system of Geoffrey, as adopted by Latreille, as a basis for 

 the primary divisions of the Coleoptera, and explains the nature of 

 the exceptions which occur in several groups to the general type of 

 development in this particular. He particularly alludes to the sup- 

 position that the so-called Tetramera are really pentamerous ; but 

 maintains that the portion considered as a fourth or extra joint, 

 even when articulated, is not the analogue of the fourth joint of the 

 Pentamera, but merely a head or fulcrum at the base of the terminal 

 joint, which is rendered necessary from the third joint being bilobed 

 and cushioned beneath. He does not, however, insist that Hypoce- 

 phalus is a Lamellicorn ; all his claims for it are based on its being 

 truly pentamerous, which draws it nearer to the Lucanidce than it 

 can possibly be attracted to the Cerambycidce by any less important 

 character. He begged, however, that he might not be misunder- 

 stood as wishing to detract from the value of the structure of the 

 mouth in the formation of systems, for although it may be subject 

 to great modifications, and depart from the typical forms like the 

 changes in the tarsi, such anomalies are perhaps confined to the 



