394 Dr. Hagon's and the Rev. E. A. Eaton's 
TaprobaneSf Walk. Only the genus Baetis led to my 
error. 
[l\1iat then becomes of my L. annulata, of which I 
accepted as tjrpes a S im. in the British Museum, and 
another $ im. in M. de Selys-Longchamp's collection, 
both of them said to have been authenticated by Dr. Hagen? 
I suspect my fig. 23 (immediately below 23 a, b, and ac- 
cidentally unnumbered), in which the terminal joint of the 
forceps is not rej)resented, having been concealed by the 
penultimate joint from the point of view from which the 
drawing Avas made, is the cause of misapprehension. The 
proportions of the last two joints are given in 23 a. The 
forceps in both L. Taprohanes and L. annulata are very 
much alike ; it is the penis which should be taken as the 
principal criterion of identity in examining specimens of 
Leptophlehia, and of this structure Dr. Hagen makes no 
mention. It therefore remains to be seen whether annulata 
should be reduced to a synonym or -not. I still suspect 
that the species described by Dr. Hagen in 1858 is dis- 
tinct from Mr. Walker's Taprobanes.^ 
Page 83. Lept. femoralis. I possess $ $ imago and 
subimago. The tarsi of the hind legs are four-jointed; 
claws alike very small. The forceps, penis and hind 
wings are greatly damaged ; but with care CA^erything can 
be made out. The middle seta is wanting (broken ?) in 
all ; but I believe the species belongs to this genus. 
[The absence of the middle seta in the Ceylon species 
seems to have caused Dr. Hagen a little trouble and hesi- 
tation. In my characters of this series of the genus I 
have stated that these species usually cast off the inter- 
mediate seta. Now and then individual specimens retain 
it, but they are scarce.] 
[After L. femoralis some of the " Species generis 
incerti," descnbed in the foot-note of pp. 131-2 of the 
Monograph, should be inserted ; my conjecture as to 
their belonging to Leptophlehia having been verified by 
Dr. Hagen. J 
Page 83. Lept. tristis [Monogi'., p. 131, foot-note. 
No. 1.] I have never stated that the male of this species 
has three setae (as you say at p. 131) ; only of C ? signata 
did I mention this. In fact I had seen of L. tristis only 
the female subimago ; which, Avhen alive, is stated to be 
" oculis parvis nigris." One of my types is in good con- 
