84 
INTRODUCTION. 
in our estimation, than those afforded by the butter- 
fly; but generally these characters confirm each 
other, in other words, two caterpillars presenting 
the same characters produce flies which likewise 
partake of the same generic characters. It will no 
doubt be objected to us, that it is illogical to deduce 
characters except from the animals we are attempt- 
ing to classify. TV e reply, that by following any other 
plan we must despair of attaining to a natural 
method. Besides, it is not necessary to he acquaint- 
ed with the caterpillars of every species ; it is suf- 
ficient to study a caterpillar and chrysalis of Vanessa 
or Pieris to have an exact idea of those of the two 
genera. Even though it should he very difficult to 
verify the characters taken from the larva, this is 
no reason why we should abstain from employing 
them. It is not merely from the fruit that botanists 
obtain their characters, but likewise from the flower, 
and even from the first developement of the vege- 
table embryo. The flower is to the plant what the 
caterpillar is to the lepidopteron, and the different 
modes of metamorphosis have as much value as 
those of inflorescence. 
“ It appears to us that Latreille's three divisions, 
taken from Linnams — Diurnal, Crepuscular , and 
Nocturnal — are too inaccurate to be retained, espe- 
cially the crepuscular section. The denomination 
Diurnal not only applies to all the known kinds of 
day butterflies, but also to an almost infinite num- 
ber of others forming a part of the two other divi- 
sions, such as Macroglossa, Zygenides , Castniarice, 
