40 Mr. J.O. Westwood on a genus of Parasitic Hymenoptera. 
imperfect sketch, and that seven out of the nine generic cha- 
racters given by him im the ‘ Gard. Chronicle,’ p. 183, are erro- 
neous ; namely, Ist, the size of the head of the female ; 2nd, the 
description of the female antennze ; 3rd, description of the wings 
of the female ; 4th, description of the tarsi of the female ; 5th, de- 
scription of the antennz of the male ; 6th, description of the eyes 
of the male; 7th, size of the insects. Some of these characters, 
namely the veins of the wings and the 5-jointed tarsi, neither 
belong to the family nor subfamily to which the msect is to be 
referred, whilst the possession of stemmatous eyes by the male is 
disproved by every known species of winged insect, whereas it 1s 
as essentially a character of some of the Ametabolous tribes. 
Mr. Newport admits it to be possible, but not probable, that he 
has made these mistakes (Gard. Chron. May 26th), and brings 
forward his own and my descriptions of the male antennz to show 
the improbability ; but on examining his drawing I find the space 
for the joints he has overlooked indicated by an imereased length 
of the base of the following jomt. The proper way to disprove 
my assertions is to produce his specimens for the examination of 
competent entomologists. 
Ath. Respecting the physiology of Mr. Newport’s paper it is 
to be observed, that finding two species of larvee im the nests of 
Anthophora, both of which produced species of Chalcidide (a fa- 
mily hitherto known only as insectivorous parasites), and finding 
moreover on dissection that both these larvae possessed the same 
forms of the digestive organs, Mr. Newport arrived at the con- 
clusion that one was insectivorous, and the other pollinivorous ! 
Driven however from this ground by the direct observation of the 
parasitism of Monodontomerus by Mr. F. Smith (who, notwith- 
standing Mr. Newport’s attempt to deprive him of the credit 
thereof, was the first who discovered the parasitic larve of that 
insect, and directed Mr. Newport to the spot), Mr. Newport tells 
us (Gard. Chron. p. 231), that “ what he had chiefly dwelt upon 
in his paper was the circumstance of its beg an external feeder, 
as proved by the hairs on its body, although he had advocated 
the opinion that it fed on pollen; but as to whether this was the 
case or not, he considered that it mattered but little with refer- 
ence to the anatomical facts he had described :” in other words, 
that it was immaterial whether the imsect were carnivorous or 
pollinivorous, its peculiar anatomy being equally suited for either 
condition! But even here Mr. Newport has arrived at a wrong 
conclusion, for the hairs on the outside of the body of the larva 
are not characteristic of external feeding parasite-larvee, since 
those of Eulophus Nemati, which feed on the surface of the body 
of the larva of Nematus intercus, are destitute of hairs. 
As the paper which I read at the Linnzan Society on the 
