72 MODERN CLASSIFICATION OF INSECTS. 



thus Ozaena hitherto regarded as one of the Bipartiti of Latreille, is 

 now, from its explosive powers, proved to belong to the Bombardiers ; 

 whilst on the other side Mr. Curtis has suggested that a connection 

 between the Scaritides and Harpalides may be effected by means of 

 the genera Miscodera (Leiochiton Curt.) and Clivina ; but a more 

 beautiful connecting link between these two subfamilies exists in a 

 yet undescribed insect from New Holland in the collection of the 

 Rev. F. W. HopCj which strongly partakes of the characters of both 

 groups ; whilst between the Harpalides and Carabides the genus 

 Eurysoma (Brachygnathus Perty) having the appearance of Cychrus, 

 may be mentioned, as well as the genus TefBus, regarded by M. Brulle 

 as more nearly allied to Panagaeus than to Carabus. 



Latreille, indeed, was subsequently induced to adopt an arrange- 

 ment of these groups proposed by Dejean by commencing with the 

 Abdominales or Carabides, and in so doing has pointed out other 

 apparent transitions ; but in their more recent works, both authors 

 have abandoned the latter arrangement and adopted that given above, 

 with the exception that Dejean has raised these five groups, as well 

 as two others, separated from the Harpalida?, to an equal rank with the 

 Cicindelidae. Mr. MacLeay, also, in his Annulosa Javanica, has 

 elevated the sections of the Linnsean genus Carabus to an equal rank 

 with the last-mentioned family ; but from pursuing a quinarian ar- 

 rangement of the Geodephaga, he has been enabled only to admit 

 four divisions of the Carabidae. The group of Bembidiidae is there- 

 fore sunk, the structure of the palpi being considered insufficient for 

 its support : if this character were indeed the only distinctive mark of 

 the group, this step might still be questioned, as no other Carabidae 

 possess such a structure ; but the group is also characterised by the 

 minute size, great agility and subaquatic habits of the insects of which 

 it is composed ; moreover, in point of number of species, it is not an 

 inferior group. If even it were to be suppressed, its situation would 

 evidently be nearer to Elaphrus than to Harpalus, which would, of 

 course, interfere with Mr. MacLeay's distribution, which (notwith- 

 standing his remark upon the Latreillian distribution) is, with the 

 exception of the suppression of the Bembidiidae, identical with that 

 given above ; the progression being merely reversed, by which means 

 a passage is eftected between the Cicindelidte and Elaphrus amongst 

 the Carabidae*, which two families he considers as forming a normal 



* Mr. Curtis has adopted this view in his ohservations on Pelophila, although in 

 those upon Elaphrus, he regrets that Dejean should have removed that genus and 



