480 Dr. C. Stal on the British Museum 



and these again to tJiree very distinct groups or subfamilies. In a 

 short paper recently printed in the ' Journal of Entomology ' (vol. i. 

 No. 5), Mr. Walker has described two new genera ; one of them, 

 Thessitus, is said to be " allied to " the genus Elidiptera : this is 

 certainly a mistake ; the genus has not any relation whatever to 

 Elidiptera — ^not even to any of the genera which Mr. Walker has con- 

 founded ivith that genus in the Museum Catalogue. One other 

 genus of that paper, Dechitus, is said to be " allied to " Cotrades, 

 and also to Serida, genera founded by Mr. Walker himself; but, 

 again, this equally is utterly a misconception, these two genera 

 belonging most apparently, by every character of the insects, to 

 different subfamilies, and neither of them to the same subfamily as 

 Dechitus ! The nothing- sajdng, meaningless characters given by 

 Mr. Walker of these two genera are such as will not enable any 

 entomologist to determine them without the aid of the figures of Mr. 

 Robinson : these at once show us that these two genera are nearly 

 allied to, or, if you please, identical with, the genus EurybracJiys, one 

 of the most striking forms amongst insects ! Several of the species 

 described by Mr. Walker under the generic name Elidiptera belong- 

 to Flatoides of Guerin : certainly in the Catalogue of Homopterous 

 Insects in the Collection of the British Museum there will be found 

 a great number of species placed in the genus Flatoides, but not one 

 truly belonging to that genus ! — tlie species must be placed in other 

 distinct genera, belonging to different groups of the family Fulgoeina ! 



In the British Museum Collection are three examples of an 

 Australian Aphrophora, very striking in form and coloration : one 

 of them is described with doubt as a new species of Clastoptera, a 

 genus truly belonging to the family Cercopina, but placed by Mr. 

 Walker amongst the Jassina ; the second specimen he describes, 

 also with doubt, as a new species, but places it in the genus Ap)hro- 

 phoni ; when for the third specimen he fabricates a third new species, 

 he seems to be sure that it belongs to the well-known genus Aphro- 

 phora — -at least there is no sign of doubt given after the generic 

 name. It is wonderful to say, that these three examples are tJie 

 same identical spiecies one with the other. 



A very great number of species are described as belonging to the 

 genus Ledra, a very curious and distinct genus in habit and cha- 

 racters : on examining the species placed in that genus in the 

 Museum Collection, it will at once be seen that the greater number 

 of species placed there belong not only to other genera, but to genera 

 belonging to some olhcr, and, from the situation of the ocelli, verj 

 striking groups of the famdy Jassina. Of the species belonging truly 



