Groups of the Lepidoptera. 327 
rather takes away one’s breath to be told this strange 
looking arrangement is ‘‘the most simple,” but as it is 
not accompanied by a word of reason, we may suppose 
Mr. Newman really thought it was. It is unfortunate 
that this particular ‘‘ effort” was not so successful as to 
prevent its being abandoned by its author ; for it seems 
to be the case that, neither he nor any other entomologist 
ever followed the scheme. 
One remarks in this arrangement that, though the 
Sphinges are cut up and separated widely, the Bombyces, 
Noctuce, and Geometre are all kept together, and, while 
the arrangement is chiefly noticeable for its eccentric treat- 
ment of the Sphinges, it is im other respects nearly the 
Linnean arrangement read backwards. In particular, Mr. 
Newman, like Denis and Schiffermiller, Hibner, and Hors- 
field, connects Noctua with Geometra by means of Plusia 
and its allies; and lke Hiibner, he places Notodonta as 
far away from Geometra as it could well be. No one, so 
far, has connected Geometra with Noctua by means of 
Notodonta, the great feat of the new arrangement. 
Also in 1840, was published Professor Westwood’s 
* Introduction to the Modern Classification of Insects,” 
a work (if I may be allowed to say so) characterized by 
wide learning and very close study. The author pro- 
fesses his inability to offer a satisfactory classification of 
the Lepidoptera in main tribes or groups, but, using 
only large family divisions, he adopts exactly the Lin- 
newan order, following Latreille and Stephens in making 
Inthosia the connecting link between Bombyx and Noctua. 
Mr. Westwood’s book supplies numerous expressions 
of opinion, and various reasons, in favour of the Linnzwan 
arrangement, of which I will reproduce a few in his own 
words. He speaks of “the transition from the Noctuide 
to the Geometride, so beautifully effected by Catocala, 
Plusia, and other half-loopers, as their larvee are termed, 
and Ophiusa, Hrastria, &c.” (Westw. Introd. ii. p. 363.) 
Again (p. 370), ‘ there appears to be but little relation in 
the imago state (between A/geria and Zenzera), either in 
respect of their habits or structure, so that it may be ques- 
tioned how far the relation is more than one of analogy ; 
at all events, I hesitate as to the propriety of placing the 
Aigerie in the same natural group with Hepialus and 
Cossus.” I need hardly remind Lepidopterists that one 
