THE VICTORIAN NATURALIST. 55 



also a note on the synonymy, which has not been made clear by 

 Meyrick and Lower. 



Hewitson's description refers undoubtedly to a male ; he gives 

 the under side as — " Pale rufous grey, except the lower half of the 

 anterior wing and anal angle of posterior wing, which are dark 

 brown. Posterior wing marked by four silvery white spots — two 

 before the middle and two below these, one of which is minute — 

 and by a less distinct white spot and several brown spots. 

 Habitat, Queensland. Exp., i/^ inch " (= 32 mm. double 

 measurement. — G. A. W.) 



P15tz describes the under side of his Tel. praxedes as — 

 " Reddish-grey. Hind-wing with four white spots encircled 

 with black, two close together in central cell and cell ic, the 

 other two in cells ic and 2, towards the outer margin, a black 

 dot in cells 6 and 7. 16 mm. Port Jackson." 



These descriptions agree with Meyrick and Lower's male T. 

 maheia, excepting only that they make seven silvery spots on the 

 under side. This is a form very rarely met with, the four con- 

 spicuous spots being usually present, and the other much smaller 

 ones being represented by dark dots, and only very rarely by 

 silvery spots. 



Meyrick and Lower sink Tel. praxedes under Trap, symmonuis, 

 Hiibn., without assigning any reason for so doing. This cannot 

 be correct, for T. symmomus could scarcely be described as 

 " reddish-grey on the under side," and has more large spots than 

 given by Plotz ; the size also is a telling character, being the 

 same as given by Plotz for ornata, and less than that given by 

 him for picta, iacchus, dirphia, and peronii ; so Meyrick and 

 Lower could only be correct on the very unlikely supposition 

 that Plotz had in his possession only a remarkably undersized 

 specimen of symmomus. 



Again, Meyrick and Lower sink Tel. phlcea under Traj). 

 jjhigalia (= Trap, phillyra), and here again they must be wrong. 

 Plotz describes ^^/iic/a^ta with references to Hewitson's description 

 and Herrich-Schaetifer's figure on the same page with his de- 

 scription of phlcea. The sexes of phigalia are anything but 

 markedly different, so I cannot believe that Plotz would give 

 descriptions of both, on the one page, as separate species ; 

 besides, his description of phlcea agrees very well indeed with the 

 female of maheta. Plotz describes his specimen as a female, 

 17 mm. ; locality, Melbourne. 



There is no doubt that Meyrick and Lower are quite correct in 

 assigning the name j^higalia to Miskin's species ^jAiZ/^/^-a, as can 

 be at once seen by an examination of Hewitson's description and 

 Herrich-Shaeffer's figure. 



It is not quite easy to decide which of the many forms is the 

 typical T. maheia, but as Hewitson describes the under side as 



