} 
some Earthworms from India. 215 
luzonica (which has a clitellum of four segments and a ventral 
and two lateral areas deprived of seta), together with some 
other forms described by Grube * and Horstt+ and a new 
species (Perichata armata) may be conveniently included in 
the genus Pericheta.  . 
Hutton ¢ has recently applied the generic name Mega- 
scolex to certain New-Zealand earthworms described by him ; 
these species also, with the exception of Megascolex antarctica, 
Baird, ought, on the view advocated here, to be referred to the 
genus Pericheta§. 
It is very possible, however, that when more is known 
about this group of earthworms it will be necessary again to 
subdivide into several other genera the species which I pro- 
pose for the present to call Pericheta. It is true that the 
name Pericheta applied, for instance, to such a form as P. lu- 
zonica, which is distinguished by not. possessing a continuous 
circle of sete, is (etymologically considered) a misnomer ; but 
this is no objection whatever to its use. ‘The practice of chang- 
ing names because they are ‘ inapt,” so largely imdulged in 
by many naturalists, ought not to be encouraged, as it throws 
zoological nomenclature, already sufficiently complicated, into 
the most utter confusion. 
There were several specimens in the collection apparently 
belonging to this species; in structure they agreed exactly 
with the description given by Perrier ||, with the exception 
of the arrangement of the sete upon the clitellum. On 
page 107 of his memoir is the followmg sentence :—“ trois 
anneaux . .°. . forment la ceinture. . .. . sur lesquels on 
distingue parfois nettement le cercle de soles caractéris- 
tique des Pertcheta.” In all the specimens that I exa- 
mined sete were invariably present upon the clitellum, but 
confined to the ventral portion of each of the three segments 
of which it is composed, and noé continuous all round the 
body, as the above quotation, if I understand it rightly, 
seems to imply. ‘This small difference, however, hardly 
warrants the introduction of a new specific name; and since 
the specimens which M. Perrier described came from Cochin 
* Grube, Phil. Trans. vol. clxviii., and MB, Akad. Berlin, 1877, 
pp. 509-554. 
+ Horst, loc. ci. 
t Hutton, Journ. of New-Zealand Inst. vols. ix. and xi. 
§ One of the species described by Hutton (Megascolex sylvestris) ought 
perhaps to be removed altogether from the genus Pericheta (or Mega- 
scolex), since it differs by the presence of the male apertures upon the 
19th segment instead of the 18th as is universally the casein both Per7- 
cheta and Megascolex. 
|| Perrier, Nouy. Arch. du Muséum, t. vill. (1872). 
iG 
