28 ENTOMOLOGICAL SOCIETY 
In the writer's papers on the bibliography of the genera of the 
Hemipterain "The Entomologist" l he considered that Berytus 
and Neides were strictly homotypical and that clampes required 
a new generic name ; as follows : 
1. Neides L/atreille, 1802, type tipularius, 1804; 
Berytus Fabricius, 1803, type tipularius, 1803; 
2. Berytinus Kirkaldy, 1900, type clampes, 1900. 
There is, in the opinion of the writer, no doubt that in 1802 
to 1 804 only one genus would be recognized for these two forms, 
and indeed Latreille in 1804 so considered it. Clampes was not, 
he believes, treated as generically distinct till about 25 years 
later when the same author (Schilling) used Berytus for the one 
and Neides for the other. 
With rule No. i of Rothschild and Jordan, the writer cor- 
dially agrees and indeed has acted upon the principle from the 
commencement. of his studies. But No. 2 will, he hopes, not be 
recognized at all. It is at least contrary to the usual procedure 
of monographers of to-day. It must be noted, however, that 
certain of the older authors held to this rule; for example, 
Westwood, in 1839,2 writes: 
"The reader will observe that I do not here insist upon the 
necessity of placing a typical species at the head of the genus, 
because even our imperfect views of nature will enable us to see 
that such species ought often more naturally to be placed in 
company with others not arranged at the head of the genus, but 
I do insist that, where an author does not state the particular 
species which he regards as the type of his genus, we are bound 
to suppose that he would place it at the head of his genus." 
Though this statement in no way affects the types of other 
authors, the writer believes that in all Westwoodian genera 
dating from 1839, the first species must be taken as the type, 
if this be not otherwise specified. 
The paper evoked discussion from Messrs. Ashmead, Morris, 
Dyar, Piper and Schwarz, Dr. Dyar favoring the method which 
accepts the first species as type, while the others believed the 
method of elimination, although leading to unsatisfactory re- 
sults in certain cases, yet the one which is now most generally 
'Vol. xxxm, pp. 238-243, 1900; Vol. xxxvii, pp. 254-258, 1904. 
* Mag. Nat. Hist., i (2), p. 170. I was previously aware of this in a 
paper of Westwood' s dated 1841, but for the date 1839, I am indebted to 
Mr. Prout. 
