1905.] 201 



(Joe. clt.) gives Felixstowe, St. Osyth, Essex, and Bearsted, Kent. It 

 seems to have been unknown to Schiner, Walker, and Meade, and 

 in fact Kondani appears to have been the only author who did know it| 

 so that there is no synonymy. 



It and hcEmorrhoidalis are very closely allied, but there are 

 abundant and constant, though slight, differences. The most useful 

 and constant character of all lies in the number of fine setae at the base 

 of the 3rd longitudinal vein. These in hcBmorrhoidalis are normally 

 seven in number, and in pudlcus thirteen. It must not be forgotten 

 that frequently some of these get rubbed off, but still the character 

 will almost always be found sufficiently recognisable, especially as the 

 seven in hamorrlwidalls are packed closely together at the base of the 

 vein, and in pudlcus they are spread out almost to the small cross 

 vein. Another constant and good character lies in the fact that the 

 hairs on the genae of licBtnorrJioidalis are sufEciently robust to be 

 described as bristles, while in pudicus they are fine and down-like, 

 though long. In the male sex the possession of brown or reddish 

 genitalia in hcBmorrhoidalis and black ones in pudicus, is an instantly 

 recognised character. The length and width of the 3rd joint of the 

 antennae differs in the males of the two species ; in pudicus the length 

 is to the width as "1^ to 1, and in hcBmorrhoidalis as If to 1. The 

 palpi in pudicus are shorter and perhaps a little thicker than in 

 hcBmorrhoidalis ; in pudicus they are barely as long as the 3rd an- 

 tennal joint is wide ; and in hcBmorrhoidalis they are distinctly longer 

 (and in this species the 3rd antennal joint is also wider than in 

 pudicus). These characters, however, of the antennae and palpi are 

 less constant than the before-mentioned characters, and not so useful. 



HcBmorrhoidalis is common in the north of Scotland, according 

 to Col. Terbury, and the specimens I have examined (which were 

 thirty-five in number) came from Aviemore, Nethy Bridge, and 

 Brodie ; in addition to which I took a couple of males myself at 

 Rannoch in 1902. The synonymy is most complicated and uncertain. 

 HcBmorrhoidalis was first described by Fallen, but his description by 

 itself is of course inadequate. The species which Schiner recognised 

 as hcBmorrhoidalis, Fall., is certainly not our species, but the one 

 which he describes as p ictus, Meig., is ; on the other hand, the species 

 which Eondani regarded as Fallen's species is almost certainly the 

 same as our own. Brauer and von Bergenstamm (Die Zweifliigler 

 des Kaiserl. jNIuseums zu Wien, pt. v, p. 104<) seem to consider that 

 Eondani is right, whereupon they proceed to mix up the synonomy 

 terribly by using the name pictus, Mg., for Fallen's and Eondani'a 



