DEFINITION OF THE TERM INSECT. 87 
to, which may be repeated here, and which seems to 
‘ prove that the types of form.in one natural group or 
class are reproduced in another; this appears to result 
from the following parallel series : 
oe Aptera. Arachnida. Crustacea. 
Bapcue Bete at Hexapoda. vccssosesees Galeodes...... Larunda. 
Myrmeleon............ Phalangium ... Aranea...... ontieng per 
Octopoda Ce een ma- 
ATION UC -ee cacitenecoes Chelifer.......-. Scorpio ...- hen oa 
t especially. 
Ephemera...... Myriapoda ............ BOO RR iicagest Isopoda. 
No type representing the Myriapoda has yet been 
discovered in the Arachnida class; but I have little 
doubt of its existence. You will observe that the ana- 
logies between the larvee of the winged orders and the 
Aptera were first noticed by Mr. W. MacLeay?. It is 
probable that these parallel series of representatives of 
each other might be increased, as well as the numbers in 
the respective columns. 
What I have said will, I trust, sufficiently justify me | 
for making at present no more material alterations in the 
classification I long since proposed to you>; I shall, 
therefore, now proceed to define the objects I consider as 
Insecta ; but I shall first observe—that as Latreille con- 
siders the branchiopod Crustacea or Entomostraca of 
Muller as entitled to the denomination of Crustaceo- 
Arachnida* ; so his Trachean Arachnida might be called 
Arachnido-Insecta, and his Myriapoda, Crustaceo-Insecta. 
2 Hor. Entomolog. 422—. 
> See above, Vot. I. 4th Ed. p. 66. Note *. 
¢ Surely the denomination ought to have been Arachnido-Crus- 
tacea, since the learned author considers them as belonging to the 
Crustacea class, 
