Mr. J.S. Baly on the Classification of the Eumolpide. 148 
EXPLANATION OF PLATE VIII. 
Fig. 1. Xuthia siccana. 1a, trophi. | Fig. 7. Eba cerylonoides. 
5, 2. Gempylodes macer. » 8. Atyscus argutus. 
», 3. Bupala pullata. » 9 Ithris decisa. 
», 4. Caprodes asper. « 10. Minthea dentata. 
» 0. Hyberis Wallacet. 5, Ll. Metopiestes erosus. 
5, 6. Cebia rugosa. 6 a, trophi. ,», 12. Trophi of Hyberis aranei- 
formis. 
XIII.—An attempt at a Classification of the Kumolpide. 
By J.8. Baty. 
Many of the families belonging to the great tribe of Phytophagous 
insects are in such a confused and unarranged state as doubtless 
to deter many persons from their study; they contain, however, 
equally with those better known and more commonly studied, 
numberless beautiful and striking forms, which will quite as amply 
repay patient investigation. Hoping to draw the attention of other 
entomologists to the study of these beautiful insects, I shall attempt, 
in the present series of papers, to draw up diagnostic characters of 
the numerous genera belonging to the Humolpide, a group of Phyto- ° 
phaga in which (with the exception, perhaps, of the Gallerucide) 
less has been done than any other. The possession of a very large 
collection of my own, together with the power of access to the 
cabinet of the Rey. H. Clark, who now possesses the fine collections 
formerly belonging to MM. Chevrolat and Thomson of Paris, in 
addition to those collected by himself in Brazil, places a vast store of 
materials within my reach, the whole probably comprising, with few 
exceptions, all the known species. With the exception of a small 
number of genera formed by Fabricius, Laporte, and other entomolo- 
gists, and also a few more recently established by myself in the first 
volume of this Journal, scarcely anything has been done to reduce 
the group into order or arrangement—all the large collections that 
I have had the opportunity of examining having had their species 
(nearly all undescribed) placed at random under one or other of the 
uncharacterized genera created by Chevrolat and Dejean in the 3rd 
edition of the Catalogue published by the latter, a single genus often 
containing insects belonging to four or five others, and, on the other 
hand, the species belonging to the same genus scattered about and 
placed under eight or ten different generic names, no two collections 
agreeing either in their nomenclature or arrangement. 
The Eumolpide are most nearly allied to the true Chrysomelide, 
VOL. II. M 
