24 (Jamiary, 1907. 



T Iiave examined two specimens called cinxia, and one called 

 tesfaceipes. in the Cameron Coll. at S. Kensington. Of the former 

 one is carded, and its clypeus invisible. The other seems to me to 

 have a truncate clypeus and tibiae ringed at the base with white. 

 These are characters of cinxla, Klug ; but having no knowledge of 

 that species, except from descriptions, I do not venture either to 

 assert or deny that the S. Kensington specimens really belong to it. 

 I have thought it safer accordingly to omit them from my Table. As 

 to the festaceipes — specimen — which T suppose to be the author's 

 " type "—I am in still greater uncertainty. It appears to be an 

 Eriocnmpoides, though even as to that I dare not be quite positive ; 

 and it certainly differs from the species known to me in having entirely 

 yellowish hind tibiae, and in other points. But there is obviously 

 something abnormal and monstrous about this particular specimen. 

 The abdomen is thoroughly deformed (so that neither Mr. Waterhouse 

 nor T could make out whether it was a (^ or a $ ), and appears to 

 consist of at most five segments. Further, the specimen is "carded," 

 which ma,kes a thorough examination of it almost impossible. Ac- 

 cordingly, without further material, I prefer to express no opinion as 

 to the validity or otherwise of the supposed species. 



According to Thomson and Cameron the species with excised 

 cly|)eus have generally* "two middle cellules " {i. e., the cubital n. is 

 present) in the hind-wings, those with truncate clypeus " only one." 

 This may be true as a rule ; but I have thought it best not to include 

 in my Tables a character which is admittedly inconstant, especially as 

 specimens of Eriocanvpoides have not unfrequently occurred to me 

 having the cubital n. present in one hind-wing, and absent from the 

 other ! 



HopLOCAMPA, Hartig 



The species of this genus are more elongate in form, and brighter in 

 coloration than those of Eriocampoides. They are easily distinguished 

 also, both from that genus and from Phyllotoma, by the " contracted " 

 humeral area, and the filiform but 9-jointed antennae. Some of them 

 {e. g.^pectoralis and testudinea) might be hastily mistaken for Dineura 

 spp., but the medial nn. in their fore-wings are not, as in that genus, 

 " received in the same cell," nor is the humeral area " petiolate." I 

 tabulate such species only as I know for certain to be British. 



* Thomson says ";3lentnig«e." From the expressions used in the " Monograph," vol. i, p. 

 219, it seems that Mr. Cameron has found it so always ; but I certainly have not done so. 



