44 HALF-AN-HOUR 



Goss., Vol. I, p. 278) a figure is given showing the spinous fringe 

 on the underside of the head and on the pro-thorax, which 

 agrees with my own observations of this species. In the ' Micro- 

 graphic Dictionary/ article ' Pulex/ the Dog-flea is described as 

 the possessor of these appendages, and the head of the Catflea 

 is referred to as ' naked.' The figures on PI. 28 correspond 

 to the letterpress. I shall be glad if some ' gossiper ' can 

 enlighten us on this discrepancy." Keeping neither Cat nor Dog, 

 1 am at present equally puzzled with the above writer, and hope 

 some member will answer the question by sending round the 

 gejiuine article " warranted." 



Have both Dog- and Cat-fleas the same frontal and pro- 

 thoracic fringes ? and if so, how can they be distinguished ? My 

 own belief is that the figure in the " Micrographic Dictionary " 

 (9, PL 28) — which was copied from a drawing supplied tome; 

 not from a specimen, and therefore I disclaim all responsibility in 

 connection with it — represents the human flea. If so, does the 

 latter tickle Cats ? as well as vice versa. I feel sure that if the 

 species (/*. canis and P. felis) be distinct, that there will be 

 characters recognisable, on sufficiently careful examination, 

 whereby they may be discriminated. The relative lengths of the 

 posterior tarsal joints are given in Micro. Die. {sub. P. felis) ^ as i, 

 5, 2, 3, 4 {sub. P. canis), as i, 2, 5, 3, 4. My own belief is that 

 the parts of the mouth will furnish important characters, but they do 

 not appear to have been sufficiently studied. Don't let us say, with 

 an exquisite of the " Lord Dundreary" type, to a lady on his arm 

 at one of the Royal Microscopical Society's Soire'es, that " it 

 wasn't pleasant to have so many examples of such nasty things " 

 (as fleas, bugs, lice) "shown when we (!) come to these soirees." 

 That is not the scientific spirit I desire to see cultivated by our 

 members. All things have been pronounced by Him who made 

 them "good." All are the work of His fingers, "for whose 

 pleasure they are and were created." All are wonderful, and 

 deserve our most thoughtful study. Let the motto, ^^ Natures 

 opera maxime in minimis,'^ be habitually in our minds. 



Saws of the Saw-Fly. — This unnamed specimen, of which I 

 have given a drawing (PI. 21, Figs. 7, 8, 9), furnishes a good 

 example of the parts found in some of the Tenthrcdinidie — true 

 " Saw-Flies " — but of these 341 species are mentioned by 

 Westwood (Intro, to Modern Classification of Insects, Vol. 2, 

 Appendix, p. 55), distributed into 45 genera!! 



The habits of some species of Allantus are mentioned by this 

 author (Ibid, p. 100). 



The Sting of Sand- Wasp (PI. 23, Figs, i & 2) is both interesting 

 and novel, and furnishes a good example of the kind of work I 



I 



