436 FALLACY OF THE SEPTENARY SYSTEM 



nothing of his first division of his Arachnides into antennistes 

 and jidlpistes. These divisions appear to me to be all of 

 equal value, at least to those of Haustellata and Mandihulata, 

 which MacLeay puts as two separate circles, whilst he places 

 the Crustacea all in one. Proceeding lower down in the 

 scale of divisions, we find excellent dichotomies in Coleoptera 

 and Dermaptera, Hemiptera and Homoptera, Trichoptera 

 and Neiiroptera ; but Mr. Newman, very conveniently for his 

 theory, says that these six orders are but three. To descend 

 still lower, let us take MacLeay's group Adephaga, and we 

 find it will divide as follows : — 



r Hydradephaga .... Legs inserted in large pectoral plates. 



1 ( Gyrinid^ Fore legs long, antennae short. 



1 ( Dytiscid.;e Fore legs not long, antenna; not short. 



^ Geodephaga. 



r Fore legs not notched. 



' S CiciNDELAD/E . . . Jaws, wlth the claw jointed. 



^ I Carabid^ Jaws, with the claw not jointed. 



^ ■ Fore legs notched. 



y ScARiTEsiD^ . . . Abdomen pedunculate. 



\ . . . Abdomen not pedunculate. 



( Brachinid/E . . Elytra truncate. 

 f Harpalid.e . . Elytra not truncate. 

 These last divided into 

 ^ Harpalini . . Palpi not pointed. 

 i Bembidiina . Palpi pointed. 



If here is not enough to prove to any one the conclusive nature 

 of the Dichotomous system, his intellects must be most obtuse 

 or most strangely bewildered by some favourite theory. Let 

 any one who with an unprejudiced mind has compared the 

 long tedious characters of genera or families, given by the 

 modern schools, with the clear, simple, and intelligible defini- 

 tions resulting from the dichotomous method, — let such a person 

 say how infinitely superior the latter method is. I defy Mr. 

 Newman to point out any arrangement of the group which I 

 have explained above, which equals, for clearness, truth, and 

 utility, the one which I have given. As to circular systems, 

 have we not already had three different numbers proposed by 

 different writers, each of whom maintains the cause of his 

 favourite number as the only true one? First stepped for- 

 ward Mr. MacLeay (and I much regret that the first of these 



