a 
On the Classification of North-American Coleoptera. 16% 
I. Cycloid scales imbedded in the skin. 
A. Hyes distinct or concealed under the 
skin. 
1. Two series of teeth in the lower 
jaw. 
a. Squamosal and parietal bones in 
contact. 
Tentacle conical, exsertile ................ 1. Ichthyophas, Fitz. 
Tentacle flap-like, below the nostril........ 4. Ceeiha, L. 
Tentacle flap-like, posterior to the nostril .. 5. Hypogeophis, Ptrs. 
Memeo elobular |i ity. WsieebG'se «oe AG 6. Dermophis, Ptrs. 
6. Squamosals separated from parie- 
tals. 
Tentacle flap-like, close to the eye ........ 2, Epicrionops, Ble. 
Tentacle conical, exsertile, below the nostril. 3. Ureotyphlus, Ptrs. 
2. A single series of teeth in the lower 
jaw. iN 
PECL LO DIAL, (sii. wine » mua 5.0.0 \e)p, 2.0 20 diel. 7. Cryptopsophis, Blgv. 
B. Eyes below the cranial bones. 
Tentacle globular, nearer the commissure of 
the jaws than the nostril ............ 8. Gymnopis, Ptrs. 
Tentacle globular, nearer the nostril than the 
commissure of the jaw ...0-.e0cssee> 9, Herpele, Ptrs. 
II. No scales. 
A. Eyes below the cranial bones. 
1. Two series of teeth in the lower 
jaw; squamosals in contact with 
parietals ; tentacle globular .... 10. Gegenophis, Ptrs. 
2. A single series of mandibular teeth ; 
squamosals separated from parie- 
tals; tentacle globular ....... . 11. Scolecomorphus, Bler. 
B. Eyes distinct or concealed under the 
skin, 
1. A single series of teeth in the lower 
jaw ; squamosals in contact with 
parietals ; tentacle flap-like ..., 12. Siphonops, Wag]. 
2, Two series of teeth in the lower 
jaw ; tentacle flap-like. 
Parietals and squamosals in contact ...... 3. Typhlonectes, Ptrs. 
Parietals separated from squamosals ...... 14, Chthonerpeton, Ptrs. 
XXIW.—On the ‘Classification of the Coleoptera of North 
America, by Dr. J. L. LeConte and Dr. G. H. [orn 
(Washington: 1883). By the Rev. A. MATrHews. 
EvRroprraNn entomologists are often impressed with the idea 
that their scientific brethren on the other side of the Atlantic 
are so embarrassed with the riches of their own fauna that 
they are comparatively unacquainted with the productions of 
the eastern hemisphere. But such a notion indicates a very 
imperfect comprehension of American intellect and American 
resources. No reason can be given to prove that a species 
