1903.] 



285 



Labia minor, L., at the end of September.— At the foot of the exit path from 

 the railway station here is a stable with the usual surroundings, including dung- 

 hill, &c. On passing this on one of the sultry afternoons that prevailed in the last 

 week in September, I saw quite a swarm of flying insects which at first I mistook 

 for winged ants, but on catching one of them in my hat, found they were Labia 

 minor. This small earwig is usually common enough about roadside dung-heaps 

 round London in summer, and ordinarily lasts only a short time on the wing, but 

 never before have T seen it so late as above stated. Possibly the absence of real 

 summer weather this year may have had something to do with its very late 

 appearance. — R. McLachlan, Lewisham, London : October 8th, 1903. 



Neuromus maculipennis. Gray, not an American apecies. — I have just received 

 through the courtesy of Dr. Felt, the State Entomologist for New York, a copy of 

 Bulletin 68 (Entomology 18) of the N. Y. State Museum, which treats especially on 

 the " Aquatic Insects in N. Y. State." Amongst other contributors, Dr. E.. C. Davis 

 deals with (Pt. 7) the Sialididie of N. and S. America. I have already found this 

 of considerable service, much as I disagree with some systematic points and some 

 formalities in the descriptions. There is an important error which should be 

 corrected as soon as possible. At p. 468 is a description under the heading 

 " N. maculipinnis (sic!), Gray," with the locality " Brazil." This insect is common 

 enough in Java and Sumatra, and probably elsewhere in the East, but is not 

 American. The error can probably be traced out by Prof. Davis's synonymy. There 

 we find Corydalis illota. Hag., which was used by Hagen to indicate some species 

 said to come from Brazil which was never described. If " C iUota, Hag.", be really 

 the same as N. maculipennis, Gray, there must be some error in the locality label. 

 Or " illota " may possibly represent another species, for the description does not 

 accord very well with N. maculipennis.— Id. 



Psocidse at Margate in 1903.— For reasons connected with the health of a 

 member of his family, my friend and colleague, Mr. E. Saunders, was compelled to 

 stay at, or visit, this popular resort on several occasions in the latter half of Sep- 

 tember and beginning of October. Thinking he would not find much to interest 

 him in his own specialities (which pi-oved to be the cnse), I suggested he might look 

 for Psocid^, and he captured the following species, amongst which are more than 

 one of considerable interest : possibly no species have been hitherto recorded from 

 the Isle of Thanet. 



Psocus variegatus, Latr. (3) ; Ps. sexpunctatus, L. (1) ; Ps. quadrimaculatus, 

 Latr. (3). 



Stenopsocus [Graphopsocus) cruciatns, L. (17), nearly all females, which pre- 

 sent every gradation of wing-development down to an amount of abbreviation quite 

 equivalent to that shown in the example described by Reuter as Teratopsocus 

 maculipennis {cf. Ent. Mo. Mag., 1900, pp. 6 — 7). 

 Elipsocus Westwoodii, McLach. (1). 



Cn-cilius flavidus, St. (9) ; C. (Ptcrodela) pedicularius, L. (15), showing con- 

 siderable variation in size, and in the form of the " areola poslica," but apparently 

 not of specific importance ; C. (Trichopsocus) Dalii, McLach. (4). 

 Ectopsocus Briggsi, McLach. (6). 



