29 
[ 289 ] 
by what means it was thus suspended. Upon examining one of 
these pendant scales with a strong lens, I saw a fine hair-like fila¬ 
ment, attached by one end to the leaf, and by the other to the in¬ 
sect’s body, at that part of the breast from which the beak of Ho- 
mopterous insects appears to proceed. The idea at once occurred 
to me that this was nothing other than the long-sought-for probos¬ 
cis of the CoccidcB, and a little further inspection with the micro¬ 
scope proved the truth of the supposition. I immediately went 
into my garden and obtained some twigs infested by the Apple- 
tree Bark-louse, anxious to see if I could detect the corresponding 
organ in this species. It is astonishing how easy it is to find a 
thing when you know just where to look for it. I found that the 
proboscis of the Apple-tree louse exactly resembles that of the 
pine leal species, and is just as easily detected. Subsequently, 
upon looking over some of the back numbers of the Transactions 
of the American Entomological Society, which I had not before 
seen, I noticed the article upon the Bark-louse, by Dr. Shimer, of 
Idt. Carroll. From this, it appears that he detected this organ in 
the course of a series of microscopic observations upon this insect 
which he made in the summer of 1807; so that to him must be 
given the credit of first discovering the proboscis of the Apple- 
tree Bark-louse, which for so long a time has eluded our search. 
Fine as this organ is, it is found, when examined under the 
microscope, and under proper conditions of the organ itself, to be 
not the single hair-like sucker which it appears, but to be com¬ 
posed of several still finer pieces or filaments, which, though usu¬ 
ally lying together, are capable of separation. The number of 
the&e pieces in the proboscis of the (Joccidoa has been a subject of 
some diversity of opinion amongst European entomologists. ♦ M. 
Percheron, a French author who investigated these insects many 
years ago, stated the number to be three. Dr. Shimer also saw 
the proboscis of the common species separate into three pieces, 
tor a part ot its length, and I have seen it several times separate 
sometimes into apparently two and sometimes three parts. But 
Mr. "Westwood says, that in some species which he examined, he 
detected four, and M. Signoret, who has very recently submitted 
the whole family ot Coccidcs to a most rigid scrutiny, gives the 
normal number of pieces in the proboscis to be four. It is alto¬ 
gether probable therefore that the reason why we have not seen 
