294 Sir S. Saunders' Notes on 



supersede the text by exhibiting, as a standard of com- 

 parison, any figure which may be hypothetically ascribed 

 to a lost type, though confessedly at variance with the 

 authentic record *? Are we, in such cases, in accordance 

 with this new doctrine, liable to have primary definitions 

 transmuted, ad libit am, to suit any other species of 

 suppositious identity by fanciful illustrations of the one 

 for the other ? Yet such is the avowed object which our 

 worthy colleague proposes to attain : — " C'est pour fixer 

 definitivement cette espece que j'ai cru utile d'en donner 

 le dessin" ! 



In so novel a case some may be tempted to enquire 

 how such fixity of tenure in the domain of science can 

 be definitively conferred upon any interloper, in striking 

 contrast to the immutable precepts of the original 

 diagnosis — or how conjectural disquisitions of casual 

 inference can serve to influence the development of 

 such a theor}'^? Moreover, how can Dufour's record be 

 questioned in this instance, after his own comments as 

 aforesaid ? At all events his definition must be taken 

 for what it is worth, and duly respected as a legitimate 

 title which cannot be infringed ; so that no such process 

 as that now resorted to can avail to instal an incon- 

 gruous substitute in the lapsed estate of the titular 

 absentee ! 



By some inadvertence, however, M. Andre cites 

 Dufour's species as Halticella venusta — Euchalcis 

 reimsta (p. 840), under which name he has also figured 

 the French species (p. 344) ; while, by a curious coin- 

 dence, the H. osmicida, male and female, were figured 

 by Mr. C. 0. Waterhouse, in the course of last year, in 

 his 'Aid for the Identification of Insects' (part v., 

 plate 40). If, therefore, the French species be really 

 identical with the latter, as alleged, the names respec- 

 tively assigned thereto in these figures are obviously 

 synonymous, without in any way detracting from the 

 prior claims of Dufour's type, irreconcilable with either. 



I have deemed it requisite to offer these remarks in 

 self-justification for having characterised the Halticella 

 osmicida as a new species in 1873 ; while I avail myself 

 of this occasion to furnish a more detailed description 

 of the antennae and abdomen, with reference more espe- 

 cially to the terminal segments hereinafter adverted to. 



