386 Mr. G. T. Bethune- Baker on 



XLIV. — Notes on the Synonymy of the Genus Ogyris. 

 By G. T. Bethune-Baker, F.L.S., F.Z.S. 



WaterhouSE and Lyell are to be congratulated on the pro- 

 duction of tlieir recent work ' The Butterflies of Australia.' 

 Whilst, however, I have the greatest regard for both authors, 

 and particularly for my old correspondent Mr. Waterhouse, 

 I cannot refrain from criticising their treatment of some 

 species in the genus Ogyris; for, instead of clearing up 

 matters, they have made them more involved by adding yet 

 more to the synonymy, by completely ignoring He\vit:>on''s 

 oiiginal descriptions and figures, and by ignoring the rules 

 of noarenclature as laid down in the International Code. 



Ogyris zosine^ Hew. 



This species was described in Hewitson's Exot. Butt, i., 

 and the male was figured on plate xlviii. figs. '6 and 4. 



Ogyris genoveva, Hew. 



This was tiie next species to be described in the same work, 

 and it was figured on the same plate, the numbers being 

 5 and 6. 



In the Spec. Oat. Lye. B. M., p. 2, he (Hewitson) catalogues 

 the known species of the genus and again figures zosine] 

 here he OJily figures the underside, referring to it in error as 

 the ? . The specmen figured is, however, a male ; it is 

 unfortunate that it is so, as he had the female before him 

 at the time and this was the same colour as the male. 



In the Trans. Ent, Soc. London, 1905, pp. 296 et seq., 

 I monograi)hed the genus and revised it up to date. Here I 

 definitely selected the dull purjjle ? as the ? type of Hewitson''s 

 species, and in so doing I acted quite correctly and in accord- 

 ance, with the Code. It matters not whether the dull purple 

 form is rarer tlian the paler blue form. Hewitson himself 

 had described the blue form as genoveva ; he thought it was 

 another species, but that does not alter the fact tiiat he gave 

 it another name, and he did so because he had lying before 

 him the dull purple form of the ? as well as the pale lustrous 

 one, and this alone not only justifies me in selecting that 

 form as the type-form, but, in view of Hewitson's action, it 

 is the only reasonable thing to do. Dimorphic females are 

 always named in these days, and I thiidv rightly named, the 

 object being to designate the form. Waterhouse and Lyell, 



