REVISION OF TENEBRIONID SUBFAMILY CONIONTIN^ 165 



chological, unaccompanied by an illustrative drawing, shall not 

 be considered valid, — a wholly impossible and illogical dictum, 

 as a good description in words is not increased a particle in value 

 by a poor figure, and the degree of excellence which the figure 

 must possess is not stated definitely in the edicts of the congress. 

 Another congressional dictum, to the effect that no description 

 of a new species, more especially botanical, can be considered 

 valid that does not involve at least a short Latin diagnosis, is 

 equally illogical and absurd. A description following a name 

 properly formed and printed in Roman characters, written wholly 

 in Japanese or in any other decipherable language, would be 

 perfectly valid. This might be very inconvenient for European 

 taxonomists, it is true, tending to halt scientific progress until 

 the descriptions could be translated, but it cannot properly be 

 assumed that every investigator of nature must be familiar with 

 some particular language as a condition for the recognition and 

 acceptance of his work, and, furthermore, to be of any real 

 value a description must extend beyond the few words of the 

 old-fashioned diagnosis. 



III. 



Remarks and Corrections Relating to the Revision 



OF THE TeNTYRIIN^ IN THE PRECEDING VoLUME 



OF THESE Proceedings. 



Page 289 — The genus Ditaphro?iottis yva?, added to the table after the 

 latter had been drawn up and was inadvertently given an errone- 

 ous position. It should come immediately after Uylocrinus, 

 under the number " 10" and referred to previously under 

 "7 — Surface glabrous." 



Page 365 — The original type of Auchniobhis Icevis Lee, was lost at 

 sea, together with the original type of Cryptadius itijiatus and 

 some other species, while being sent by LeConte to Lacordaire 

 for study. 



Page 395 — The word " female " in the first line of the description of 

 plufnbeus should read ?)iale. It was the impression of Le- 

 Conte that the two thoracic ridges of Epitragus (^Bot/irotes) 

 pertain to the male and that the pronotum of the female was 

 even in convexity. The facts are the reverse of this, but I 



