288 
ZOOLOGICAL LITERATURE. 
'wliat clastic limits^ or, by striving after a confessedly unattain- 
able accuracy of definition, to get an enormous mass of generic 
names, many of which represent only single species. From the 
authoFs theoretical stand-point as to the non-existence of genera 
in nature, it is evident that this is the chief question at issue, 
not whether the genera proposed are differentiated by charac- 
ters of primary or secondary value. To the writer it seems that 
a small number of genera is more convenient in every respect 
than a large one, even though some of them may contain a few 
somewhat incongruous or questionable species ; on the other 
hand, in order to obtain these minute divisions, the characters 
given to the genera are drawn so tight that newly discovered 
forms can hardly find a resting-place ready prepared for them, 
and thus each new genus proposed may be regarded as almost 
necessarily the direct parent of more. When Pascoe maintains, 
in opposition to certain objectors, that it is unnecessary that every 
genus should be defined or family broken up by means of charac- 
ters of equal structural importance, we fully agree with him ; in- 
deed the maxim is as old as the time of Linnajus, who, however, 
arrived at it from the opposite belief of the actuality of genera. 
But, on the other hand, during the prevalence of the analytical 
mode of thought and treatment which at present pervades nearly 
every department of zoology, we find, unfortunately, that while 
an author is led by this notion of what we may call the semi- 
naturalness of genera to admit certain groups of species to that 
rank, perhaps justly, upon very slight characters, he will be 
only too prone, in other cases, to accept characters of the same 
small importance as grounds of division when in point of fact 
no such process is called for. To these causes in operation on 
every side, and especially to that analytical habit of mind which 
is at present almost universal among naturalists, leading them 
to rejoice rather in the detection of a difference, however 
minute, than in the far more philosophical recognition of an 
agreement, is due the excessive multiplication of genera, and, as 
a consequence of this, of other subordinate groups (subfamilies, 
&c.), which is rapidly bringing nearly every department of zoo- 
logy into a chaotic state. 
Perris, Edouard. Descriptions dc quelques Insectes nouveaux. 
Annales Soc. Ent. France, 4® ser. tome vi. pp. 181-190 : 
October 24, 1866. 
-. Descriptions de quelques nouvelles especes de Coleopteres, 
Bectifications et Notes. Ann. Soc. Ent. de France, 4“ ser. 
tome V. pp. 505-512 : May 26, 1866. 
Philippi, B. A. See Insecta. 
Power, J. A. Bediscovered or new British Coleoptera : Nemo- 
soma elongatuiUj Helophorus nanuSy Phytohius 4i-nodosus, 
Ilybias subceneiiSj %cq. Entomologist, vol. iii. pp. 77-80.> 
