IßO C. R. Osten Sacken: 



Palt, and tliat the latter is a synonym of Hapal., wliich Identification 

 he founded on the coniparison of Loevv's type oi Hapal.: „Die sehr 

 gelungene Abbildung (von C torrentium) beweist, dass die Gattung 

 identisch ist mit der von Schiner beschriebenen Gattung i^aZ^. aus 

 Bogota, mit der auch Loew's Gattung Hapal. nach Vergleich dos 

 Original-Exemplars zusammenfällt, obschon die Art letzterer 

 Gattung vom Monte Rosa stammt!" 



I have shown (1878, p. 411), after examining a Palt, in Turin, 

 that its bind tibiae are provided with a single, long spur, so that 

 on this ground at any rate, its Identification with Hapal. is impossible. 

 I have also shown in the present paper (§ VI) that Palt.., with its 

 long proboscis, cannot be the same as Curupira, which has a short 

 one. As to the typical specimen of Loew, which Brauer pretends 

 to have compared with Paltostoma and found generically identical, 

 all I can say is that B. must have never read the original description 

 of Hapal. by Loew (Berl. Ent. Z. 1876, p. 211) in which the 

 onumeration of the differences alone between this genus and Pa/^. 

 fills a whole page. What kind of typical specimen he has com- 

 pared I do not know, but certainly it was not a genuine one. 



To those who will continue the work on Liponeuridae I would 

 humbly recommend, as a result of many years of experience, not to 

 multiply the genera unnecessarily. It would have been easy for 

 Loew to form a new genus for his Lip. bilobata, or for me, to do 

 the same for IJp. yosemite, and especially for Blepliarocera ancilla. 

 Genera have been formed on much less iniportant characters than 

 those which distinguish these species from their congeners. But it 

 must be borne in mind that the Liponeuridae belong to one of 

 those groups which may be called decadent, groups that seem to 

 have seen better times, when the rows of their species were more 

 dense and the genera more converging. In such genera it often 

 happens that almost every species oflfers characters which, in more 

 flourishing groups, would have been considered as generic. Such is 

 the case with the above-quoted species of Liponeuridae. Such is 

 the case also in the section Ptychopterina, and especially the sub- 

 section Tanyderina(Tipulidae, comp. Berl. Ent. Z. 1887, p.226 — 230). 

 When in such decadent groups we multiply the genera too much 

 they, in the end, become all monotypical, and thus baffle the pur- 

 posc of Classification, as the survey of their mutual affinities becomes 

 more difficult. The true end of Classification is an easier survey 

 of affinities, a temporary aid to the memory. In space and time 

 all divisions become convergent and finally confluent. 



