4448 Notices of New Books. 



It will be seen that five of these definitions have reference to colour, 

 three to magnitude, and four to form ; five of them are, moreover, 

 comparative, the reader in most instances being unacquainted with 

 the name of the insect with which the author compares them : thus 

 the name of Anchomenus laevis, which, by the way, is equivalent to 

 the more familiar Agonum parum-punctatum, does not we believe 

 exist in any prior work, or in any cabinet whatever, British or Foreign ; 

 so that we have a second problem added to the first ; — we have to find 

 out what Anchomenus laevis is, and what are its dimensions, before we 

 can contrast it with Anchomenus viduus ; and so on with the rest. 

 In connexion with this subject, we take the liberty of observing that 

 each of the long paragraphs comprising these English definitions 

 should have been broken into four, and arranged thus : — 



[Head f black, smooth and shining, with an oblong impression on 

 each side between the antennae, which, with the palpi, are 

 black, &c. 



Thorax, greenish black or olivaceous or entirely black, the breadth 

 in the middle greater than the length, sides rounded and deeply 

 margined, and the margins broadly reflexed, especially at the 

 hinder angles, &c. 



Elytra, greenish brass, ovate, much broader than the thorax, shoul- 

 ders rounded and sometimes elevated, sides widest behind the 

 middle, apex obliquely sinuated, &c. 



Obs. — Larger than Icevis, but resembling it in form]. 



A second observation we venture to make, is that the author some- 

 times guesses, when he might have readily ascertained the truth. 

 Example : — 



" Helobia impressa. I have not seen this insect : it probably 

 belongs to Nebria nivalis," Prel. Obs. viii. 



Who would not have preferred to have read as follows: — 



" I have carefully examined the series of specimens of this insect, 

 and without hesitation refer them to Nebria nivalis." 



Again, sticklers as we are for priority in nomenclature, we conceive 

 that the love of change may perhaps carry the principle too far : at 

 page 167 we find the name of " Tiechus rubens" substituted for that 

 of "Bembidium paludosum." Mr. Dawson thinks that our familiar in- 

 sect may be the Carabus rubens of Fabricius, but this conclusion 

 does not result from an examination of the original specimen or 

 the original description. 



From Mr. Dawson's changes of orthography we must express un- 

 qualified dissent: thus, in "Aepus," altered to " Aepys," we think 



