observations on Ani])lyopinus Jansoni, &c. 87 



exist iu the individual which he has examined, that they are 

 present iu the type specimen in ]Mr. Janson's collection I am 

 well aware ; and this at least is clear, that INI. Pauvel has com- 

 mitted a gross logical error in deducing an universal conclusion 

 from particular premises. 



There is yet one observation I would make on this subject, 

 and one which I desu-e strongly to impress on the notice of 

 those who make objections to the length of abdomen in my 

 figures of Staphi/ltnidce, it is this, that if they will take the 

 trouble of looking at the figures of the StaphylinuJce in Dr. 

 Erichson's great work on that family, they will find the length 

 of abdomen, which he has there given, at least equal to, if not 

 exceeding, the comparative length of the same part in any of 

 my own figures. 



I have in my ornithological collection the first specimen of 

 the Glossy Ibis ever killed iu Britain, the original example re- 

 corded in Pennant's Natural History, and preserved in the style 

 of more than a century ago. Yet a portrait of this bird in its 

 present hideous condition would quite as much resemble the life 

 f(U-m of Ibis falcinellus, as many figures of Staphylinidcv do the 

 insects which they are intended to represent. 



Since the publication of M. Fauvel's remarks, I have care- 

 fully compared my figure of A. Jansoni Avith the type specimen, 

 and find that I have made the head rather too long in proportion 

 to its breadth, and that in each segment of the abdomen, which 

 has tAvo or three erect seta?, the posterior setaj should have been 

 placed nearer to the posterior angle ; the other details of the 

 figure are accurately rendered. The head and thorax are in no 

 way transverse, their dimensions, by careful measurement, are 

 these, viz.: head -^-^ lin. long, and -j*\j- lin. broad; tliorax -/^- lin. 

 long, and y^,y lin. broad, or respectively about equal to 'Ik) mm. 

 by -75 mm. and 'H? mm. by "87 mm. 



It is true that this species must be separated from Amblyo- 

 j)invs\ but .«ince the name proposed by M. Fauvel, "i/yof///>/i/H^," 

 Anglice, " a blind mouse," does not seem peculiarly applicable 

 to a Coleopterous insect with distinct and serviceable eyes, and 

 since no genus at nil has ever yet been characterized, I shall 



