86 CONCLUDING REMARKS. 



posed, as for instance, at the limits of families, the arrange^ 

 ment ought to be viewed with suspicion, according as the 

 descriptions become precise. Let the family of Geotru- 

 pida be examined ; it is the only one of the ten foregoing 

 families which seems to have hitherto occurred to ento- 

 mologists. Olivier first made it a division of his Scarabai ; 

 Fabricius termed it a genus, and Latreille a family : it may 

 therefore be considered as peculiarly distinct, having so 

 early attracted the notice of such celebrated naturalists. 

 Let us, I repeat, take the most obvious characters that have 

 been proposed for this family, and examine whether they 

 will apply to all the insects which properly belong to it. 

 It may indeed be urged that if any insect does not conform 

 to the characters laid down for the family, it cannot with 

 accuracy be referred to it ; but little ingenuity is requi- 

 site to perceive that such an argument amounts to the 

 forcing of Nature to comply with the rules of an artificial 

 system. The general habit and appearance of a non- 

 descript species may leave not a shadow of doubt as to 

 its true place in the order of existence ; and nevertheless 

 it may not agree with all the characters given by systema- 

 tists to its real family. Those laid down by Latreille for 

 the Geotrupini are excellent, and so far natural as they 

 relate to the specimens which he had examined or even 

 seen ; but there are insects which belong to the family, and 

 which nevertheless prove that almost every one of these 

 characters ought to be considered as liable to exception. 

 If, however, Latreille's descriptions be looked upon only as 

 forming a type of construction to which these anomalous 

 insects approach in a greater or less degree, we shall then 

 be compelled to do honour to the ingenuity which could 

 elicit characters so marked from such endless varieties of 



