el 
Ananca (to which most of the remaining described (demeride 
have been attributed) is now stated by Mr. Champion to be an 
insutticiently characterised genus, most of the species of which 
belong to Copidita or Oxacis. Sessinia (accidently omitted from 
Masters’ Catalogue) is dismissed on the same grounds as Ananca 
and its Australian species, as noted above, are referred to 
Ischnomera. Ischnomera mansueta, Newm. (the only one of the 
genus enumerated in Master’s Cat.) is from its description 
evidently not congeneric with the species now placed in 
Ischnomera. Of the Australian genera added since Mr. Masters’ 
Cat. was published, Ithaca is stated to be identical with Dohrnia, 
Trichananca—as stated below, is perhaps not an (Hdemerid, and 
Pseudananca was described as an extremely anomalous form 
whose place in the (demeride is doubtful. This leaves only 
Pseudolycus and Dohrnia of Masters’ Cat. unchanged, and there 
have since been added (most of them including species enumerated 
under other names by Mr. Masters) Copidita, Ischnomera, and 
Techmessa. As the insect which Lacordaire calls Nacerdes 
melanura, Linn., occurs in Australia (imported, no doubt) and is 
certainly not a member of any of the genera I have mentioned 
above as now admitted to be Australian, V. acerdes must be 
added. 
Unfortunately, I do not find that the Australian (demeride 
before me can be satisfactorily placed in so small a number of 
genera as the six above enumerated. I have tried to apportion 
the specimens generically by means of Mr. Horn’s paper on the 
(Hdemeride of N. America (in Proc. Calif. Acad. of Sci., 1896) but 
I find in it such serious discrepancies in the treatment of genera 
with Mr. Champion’s views that it does not seem safe to follow 
him. For example, he says that almost the only difference between 
Copidita and Asclera consists in the claws of the former being 
simple while those of the latter are toothed, and intimates that 
he considers it a scarcely sufficient distinction for treating them 
as two genera. But in this he differs from Lacordaire, who 
makes the claws of Asclera simple. In examples of the European 
A. cerulea, Linn., in my collection the claws are not absolutely 
simple (as they are in e.g. Copidita 4-maculata, Motsch , of which 
I have specimens before me), but ‘ toothed” certainly seems to: 
me scarcely the term to describe their structure; I should call 
them ‘‘appendiculate.” Mr. Champion, however (loc. cit.) places 
in Asclera species (e.g. swhlineata, Waterh.) which have simple 
claws, and distinguishes the genus from Copidita by its finely 
granulated eyes. 
In the face of all these difficulties it would evidently be un- 
desirable for me, at present, to found new genera for the Aus- 
tralian demeride that do not satisfactorily fit into the six 
