112 [October, 



Loyclen, accusing me of rc-iiaming an old and well-known species of moth, Crino 

 Sommeri, Iliibner, under the new generic and specific names of Tarsolepis remicavda. 



C. Sommeri is figured by Iliibner in the second Tolume of his 'Sammlmig,' at 

 pi. 197 ; on pi. 196 is another species, C. Beschei, both sexes of which are correctly 

 figured, and this species must certainly be considered the type of the genus Crino, 

 subsequently altered to Crinodes. 



Hiibner states his figure to be a representation of a male insect, which its 

 possession of a well-developed anal tuft of radiating scales goes a long way to prove. 

 My insect is also a male, and differs from the insect figured by Iliibner in the 

 following important characters, — some of them generic, others merely specific. 



Generic differences. — 1. Antennre of J bearing about 43 well-developed pectina- 

 tions. (In C. Sommeri, as figured by Iliibner, and as exhibited by all the species of 

 Crino in the British Museum, the antenna? of the (J arc very feebly pectinated). 



2. Two long tufts of carmine hairs springing from the base of the abdomen 

 beneath the wings. (No such character occurs in Criiio). 



3. Palpi short and robust, scarcely projecting beyond the head. (In C. Sommeri, 

 as represented by Iliibner, the palpi are long, slender, and project considerably in 

 front of the head) . 



4. Body robust, almost clumsy. (In C. Sommeri, the body appears to be com- 

 paratively slender, the abdomen, moreover, appears to bear spinous processes, as in 

 Chccupa fortissima, a Hadenid, figured by Moore, P. Z. S., 8, pi. vi, fig. 5, 1867). 



Specific differences. — 1. Costal border of front wings continuous from base to 

 ajJcx. (In C. Sommeri, it is restricted to the centre of costa). 



2. Basal pale patches well-defined. (In C. Sommeri, they seem to be merely 

 represented by the usual elongation of the basal scales). 



3. Inner margin of front wings slightly convex. (In C. Sommeri, it appears to 

 be undulated as in C. ftilgurifera, a species evidently allied to it). 



4. Hind-wings comparatively (to 0. Sommeri) long and oval, with ill-defined 

 central spot, and the central marginal line converted into spots ; none of the mar- 

 ginal lines continuous. 



5. Under-side of wings considerably paler than in C. Sommeri, the markings 

 less defined. 



G. Transverse band of front wings scarcely waved, and nearly parallel to the 

 outer margin. (In C. Sommeri, this band is strongly angulated, so as almost to 

 touch the discoidal cell). 



7- Fringe of all the wings very short. 



The conclusion at which I arrive from the above comparison is tliis : — inasmuch 

 as all the members of the genus Crinodes, so far as we know them, are from the 

 New World ; as the males of the typical species, and of other species more nearly 

 resembling the Javanese moth, are destitute of the abdominal tuft, and of the 

 strongly pectinated antenna? ; I consider myself fidly justified in retaining the generic 

 and specific names, Tarsolepis remicauda, for the moth so designated, and I should 

 recommend that that name be attached to the other Javanese specimens known to 

 Mr. Ritsema in place of the name Crinodes Somintri, the type of which, in my 

 opinion, will prove to be an American insect. — A. G. Butleb, British Museum : 

 September, 1872. 



