GO Mr. Westvvood on Siagonium quadricorne, S;c. 



duabus segmento longioribus, tripartitis quoad formam coriiua 

 ccrvina a?qu;ui(ibus armatum." 



It is somewhat remarkable that DeGeer has figured no Staphy- 

 linidous larva;, nor am I aware of any author who has done so. 



I also add a description and figure of a third Larva, which for 

 the reasons after mentioned, I had conceived to be that of Aleo- 

 chara fuscipes ; but the receipt of the following communication 

 from Mr. Kirby has considerably shaken such opinion — " I sus- 

 pect," he says, " that tiic Larva fig. 3, is not the Larva of any of 

 the Ikachelytra — From its habitat it may belong to one of the 

 ]\^itiiiiili(Uc, w hicli are very common in bones, (Comp. Introd. to 

 Ent. iii. 168) — My Larva; of that form are too large to belong to 

 an Jleochara, and I find them in carcases, with Silphidce of the 

 larger kinds." 



Larva Fig. 3. A. aucta. 



E. Larva Philonthi politi, pra?clpue magnitudine differt et sta- 

 turS, latiori subconvexa ; ca[)ite nutanti latiorique, corporis seg- 

 mentis lalioribus. 1""' 2"' 3', marginibus lateralibas rotundalis. 

 Segmcnta alia in spinam lateralem, brevem ad marginem postcrio- 

 rem producta. Tubus caudalis brevior, processus laterales lon- 

 giores, tenuioresque sunt (B) — C. Antenna aucta. 



Habitat in ossibus siccis tempore ojstivo. 



I shall now state my reasons for having considered these last 

 as the Larva; of Aleochar a fuscipes. They were 1st, from finding 

 them together with the Aleocharee, and also the cast-off exuviae of 

 the pupae in the same dry rotten bone, the Larvae running about 

 as quickly as the perfect insects, and apparently of the full si/e, 

 and the exuvias partly sticking out of the different small crevices 

 in the bone, and not larger than the Larvse ; no other insect pre- 

 senting itself except a small IHster : and 2°*'^ from their perfectly 

 agreeing (except in their ovate form, and a few other minor 

 differences) with the general characters of the other Larvae above 

 described, and more particularly in the essential structure of the 

 the description of Latrcillc of the Larvae of the Ni(/diili(lce, in the 

 antennae and anal appendages, which latter entirely disagree'with 

 Hist. Nat. &c. quoted below, and it is also confirmatory of my 



