REVIEWS OF NEW PUBLICATIONS. 
389 
consequently placed the suctorial Lice ( Bediculidce ) in the order Hemiptera , and 
the mandibulated Lice ( Nirmidce ) and Spring-tailed insects ( Lepismidce ) in 
Neuroptera ! Mr. Westwood justly objects to this unwarrantable innovation. 
He is of opinion that Dr. Burmeister 44 has been led to adopt this arrangement 
by giving too slight a weight to the organs of flight;” and in the proofs cited in 
favour of his system, Mr. Westwood “can see but exceptions to a general rule, 
for which allowances ought to be made, and, consequently, as not warranting the 
introduction of entire groups of apterous animals into the class.”—p. 6. 
We now arrive at Mr. Westwood’s classification. He considers that insects 
may be defined to be 
“ Annulose animals breathing by tracheae; having the head distinct; and provided in the adult 
state with six articulated legs; subject also to a series of moultings, previous to attaining perfec¬ 
tion, whereby wings are ordinarily developed.”—p. 1. 
He thus excludes the entire Arnetabola , Auct. ( Myriapoda , Thysanura ,• and 
Parasita of Latr., &c.), which he considers, with Mac Leay, as constituting a 
distinct class, u having no metamorphosis, in the usual sense of the word, or only 
that kind of it the tendency of which is confined to an increase in the number of 
feet.” In thus adopting Mac Leay’s classification, he wishes to be understood as 
having done so 
“Because it leaves the true winged metamorphotic insects as distinct from the other groups, 
and without expressing any opinion upon the quinarian views of Mr. Mac Leay, or upon the 
introduction of the Vermes amongst the Arnetabola.' 1 '' —p. 4. 
After having determined (and we think justly) the limits of the class Annulosa , 
he proceeds to the structure of insects. The chapter devoted to this subject 
contains much interesting and well-condensed matter. We have not space to 
discuss the questions touched upon in his remarks on the 44 Distribution of Insects 
into Orders,” but consider them well worthy of attention, although by no means 
convinced of their correctness in every respect. Then follows a list of works 
devoted to Coleoptera , and remarks on that order. We can only give a very 
brief summary of this" part of the subject. Linnaeus divided Coleopterous insects 
into the three following sections:— Antennis clavatis extrorsum incrassatis; 
Antennis filiformibus; and Antennis setaceis. Olivier distinguishes the pri¬ 
mary sections of the order by the variations in the joints of the tarsi. The tarsal 
system was rejected by Mac Leay, who proposed divisions' founded upon the 
peculiarities of the larvae.. The application of this theory throughout the entire 
order, Mr. Westwood considers impossible. In this opinion he is supported by 
Kirby, who in the Fauna Boreali Americana considers that Mr. Mac Leay’s 
system cannot be adopted through the 44 mazy labyrinth” of Nature, and regards 
it as impossible 44 either to conceive or delineate it so as to maintain all its con¬ 
nexions undisturbed and unbroken. We must do it in a series, which can only 
3 F 
VOL. III.—NO. XXII. 
