824 On the Classification of the Linnean Orders {| August, 
very large and square as well as high, the episterna and epimera 
being large and oblong and equally developed. The sternites 
are very large and broad. The coxe are sometimes (Blatta) very 
large; the hind legs in the Acrydii are much larger than the 
anterior pairs. The fore wings are narrower than the hinder 
pair, and show a slight tendency to become subelytriform; on 
the other hand the hind wings are very large and broad, dis- 
tinctly net-veined, with numerous longitudinal veins, and they 
fold up longitudinally. 
The abdomen has eleven uromeres, the eleventh forming a 
triangular tergite. The cercopoda are often (Blatta, Mantis, &c.) 
multiarticulate and well developed, while the ovipositor is often 
~ large and perfect. The metamorphosis is more incomplete than 
in the Pseudoneuroptera. 
With the exclusion of the Forficulariz, the Orthoptera, as here 
restricted, are a tolerably well circumscribed group; and thoug: 
there are great structural differences between the families, yet the 
connection or sequence of the families from the Blattarie through 
the Phasmide and Mantid and Acrydii to the Locustaria, and 
finally the highest family, the Gryllidz, is one which can be dis- 
tinctly perceived. There is no occasion for a subdivision of the 
order into groups higher than families, as the Blattariz are but a 
family removed from the Mantidz. 
Order 3. PsEUDONEUROPTERA Erichson. 
It is difficult, if not impossible, to satisfactorily characterize by 
a sharp-cut definition this very elastic order. As regards the 
thorax, there is no uniformity in the structure that we have been 
able to discover, nor is there in the structure of the wings, nor 
more than a general resemblance in the mouth-parts. -d 
The definition of the Pseudoneuroptera in Hagen’s Synopsis 
the Neuroptera of North America, as given in the analytical 
table, which is stated in a foot-note to have been prepared at the 
request of the Smithsonian Institution by Baron Osten Sacken, 
gives no fundamental characters based on a study of the trunk. 
Those mentioned are what we have called peripheral characte™ 
2. e., those drawn from the mouth-parts, wings and appen ae 
So far as we know, no satisfactory definition of the Pee 
roptera has ever been given. In Hagen’s Synopsis, wae 
other superficial characters given, are these: “ Lower lip ™ e 
cleft ;” “antennæ either subulate and thin, the tarsi three tonr 
