140 [June, 



the soundness of Dr. Buir's scheme of classification that, based as it is on the 

 extei'nal features of both sexes, it corresponds in the main with Zacher's scheme, 

 which is based entirely on the male genitalia. When two systematists working 

 along independent lines arrive at mvich the same conclusions, there is every 

 r-eason to believe that their system of classification is, to a considerable degree, 

 pei'manent and natural. It may be remarked en passant that the author 

 aniznadverts strongly on Zacher's practice of basing new genera on male sexual 

 characters alone ; it is consequently rather a shock to find that Dr. Burr's own 

 definition of the genus Apterygida is : — " Resembles Forficula in every respect 

 except the forceps of the S , which are remote and slender." 



Our author divides the Dermaptera into three sub-orders, the Arixeniina, 

 the Hemimerina, and the Forficulina. The first includes the remarkable insect 

 which has recently been found in the axillary pouches of the hairless Malayan 

 bat, Cheiromelcs torquatus ; the second, the well-known parasite of the African 

 rat, Cricetomys gamhiensis ; the third, the earwigs proper. The Arixeniina should 

 be placed next the Forficulina, for their affinities are quite undoubted. 

 Hemimerus occupies a far more isolated position, and, in the reviewer's opinion, 

 deserves to have equal rank with the Arixeniina and Forficulina combined. Its 

 affinity to the Blattidse, though remote, is perhaps as close as its affinity to the 

 earwigs ; the deflexed head and viviparous habit are all Blattid characters. 

 The Forficulina ave divided by Dr. Burr into three super-families, six families, 

 and 28 sub-families ; admirable synoptical keys to these and the genera guide the 

 student through a maze of difficulties, and the descriptions of the genera them- 

 selves leave little to be desired. It only remains for Dr. Burr to put the crown 

 on his protracted labours by issuing a monograph describing all the known 

 species of Dermaptera, and it is good news to learn that this monograph is 

 actually being written. 



It is an ungrateful task to point out the faults in this memoir, but we 

 cannot refrain from observing that misprints occiu- in irritating profusion and 

 the index is not very reliable. However, these are minor blemishes in one of 

 the most valuable contributions to our knowledge of insect taxonomy that has 

 appeared in recent years. — R. S. 



Lancashire and Cheshire Entomological Society : Meeting held in 

 the Royal Institution, Colquit Street, Liverpool, Monday, March 18th, 1912. — 

 Dr. P. F. Tinne, Vice-President, in the Chair. 



Mr. H. S. Leigh read a paper dealing with a few points connected with the 

 life-history and habits of the leaf-insect, Pulchriphyllium crurifolium, Serv., and 

 the pi-aying insect, Sphodromajitis guttata, Thunb. After remarking that the 

 metamorphosis of the leaf-insect and praying insect is slight — young individuals 

 being very similar to the adults in general appearance — some of the results of 

 breeding experiments with these insects were briefly described. The wonderful 

 similarity, both in form and habits, of the leaf-insect to various plant struc- 



