REVIEW. 103 



basis on which to establish a technological museum, which 

 may lead us to take greater interest in Economic Natural 

 History. Even this collection, were it only made complete 

 enough to clearly exhibit Technical Entomology (i.e., so to 

 arrange the life-history groups that they may be, in a sense, 

 self-explanatory, requiring neither guide nor curator to 

 connect the cause and effect), would do much to teach a 

 percentage, at least, of what Mr. Carlyle is pleased to call 

 the " thirty millions, mostly fools," to know and recognise 

 their insect friends or foes. 



To the general public these groups may, like many others, 

 please and possibly instruct whilst they are under inspection ; 

 but the impression is very fleeting. To obviate this it is 

 proposed to issue a series of handbooks on the various 

 subjects, so that the good engendered may result in lasting 

 benefit, if the interest is only excited sufficiently to ensure 

 perusal. They are prepared, by order of the Lords of the 

 Committee of Council on Education, by Mr. Andrew Murray, 

 and are to serve as guides to the different branches of the col- 

 lection, and as practical treatises on Economic Entomology. 



This volume, the first which has appeared, treats of the 

 Aptera. It is to be followed by the Hemiptera, the 

 Orihopiera, &c., as set forth in the advertisement. We can 

 but recommend this first part as treating of a class but 

 little understood by British entomologists. The next part 

 will probably give us a surer standard by which to gauge the 

 value of the series. 



The volume now under notice contains, after a brief 

 notice of the woodlice, a collected history of the centipedes, 

 scorpions, spiders, the various mites, ticks and lice, and the 

 spring-tails {Tliysanura and Collembola). These constitute 

 the order Aptera, or wingless insects, as understood by Mr. 

 Murray ; and heterogeneous it is indeed. The mites come in 

 lor by far the greatest amount of attention, and are fairly well 

 treated, thanks to the writings of Boisduval, Buckholz, 

 Claparede, Dufour, Duges, Dujardin, Frauenfeld, Fumouze, 

 Furstenberg, Gervais, Giebel, Hering, Hermann, Kirchner, 

 Koch, Kolenati, Laboulbene, Landois, Low, Megnin, 

 Miiller, Nicolet, Robin, Scheulen, Thomas, and some ievf 

 others. This is opportune, as these creatures seem to be 

 fast drawing into the field of general zoological research. 



