OF WASHINGTON. 23 



small size of the posterior ocelli in A 7 ", pruinosa is a character of 

 specific value only, as in the very nearly related A", verbesince they 

 are all large and of equal size. In Philcremulus they are also 

 of the same size. Of the clypeus in Neolarra, which Mr. Ash- 

 mead describes as " not separated," Mr. Fox says u seems to be 

 divided into three lobes, the middle one being by far the largest, 

 most prominent, and extends up between the insertion of the 

 antennae." It is separated, however, its form being very strongly 

 outlined in undenuded specimens by the manner of growth of 

 the pubescence of the face. By the use of a high-power lens 

 the sutures can be distinguished in the denuded specimen. This 

 sclerite is subtrapezoidal in form, wider than long, the base 

 truncate, and the sides sloping. It falls far short of reaching 

 the antennae. The median swollen portion of the face between 

 the antennas, Mr. Fox had mistaken for part of the clypeus. 



The female of Neolarra pruinosa, which has never been 

 described, differs from the male as follows : Length 4.5 mm. 

 Abdomen brighter rufous, the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th segments not 

 basally darkened. Last dorsal segment not strongly narrowed 

 and produced as in the male ; but slightly narrowed to a blunt 

 tip, shallowly concave above, the lateral margins raised, tip on 

 either side with a strong, blunt, erect tooth. 



It seems possible from the description that Cresson's Phile- 

 remusfulviventrts may also be a Neolarra. 



The genera and species discussed above may be listed as fol 

 lows : 



PHILEREMULUS. 



VIGILANS Ckll. 



NANA Ckll. 



NEOLARRA. 



PRUINOSA Ash. 



VERBESIN^E Ckll. 



{Phileremus verbesince}. 

 PHILEREMUS. 



Mr. Ashmead discussed this paper and said that Mr. Baker 

 was perfectly correct in his conclusions. He himself in his 

 original description of Neolarra, on account of the poor condi 

 tion of the type, had mistaken its position. It is not a Bembecid, 

 as he had supposed, but a bee, as claimed by Mr. Baker. Mr. 

 Ashmead exhibited his type, to show by its poor condition that 

 the mistake had not been so serious as might be supposed. He 



