30 



ascertaining the genus to which (at least some of them, in all 

 probability) should be referred. I propose therefore, before pro- 

 ceeding to describe various new species before me, to review the 

 Sericoid genera and endeavour to set forth their characters in a 

 tabulated form. I shall not, however, attempt the ambitious 

 task of placing the genera in anything like a permanently satis- 

 factory condition, as in my opinion that would be at present 

 impossible, and moreover would require very extensive alterations 

 that should be made by someone who has a wider knowledge than 

 I possess of the Sericoides of other parts of the world. 



I may say, in passing, that I believe the character which should 

 have the greatest weight in the classification of the Sericoid 

 species into genera to be the nature of the sexual distinctions. 

 There are far too many species of which the sexual characters are 

 at least uncertain to allow of this system being carried out 

 to-day, but I am convinced that in it will be found the key to 

 the essential distinctions among the Sericoid genera. 



What I shall attempt will be simply to determine which of the 

 existing generic names can be retained as founded on characters 

 that are (at any rate among other characters) valid, and show the 

 relation of them to each other, — making as few additions as 

 possible, and not attempting to split them up even in cases where 

 I have little doubt that a fuller knowledge of the sexes will 

 eventually require that they be split up. It is necessary however 

 to add a few new genera. 



It will be observed that in the following classification of genera 

 considerable weight is conceded to characters seeming very slight 

 in comparison of others which are treated as of little value though 

 apparently more important ; as where the nature of the elytral 

 striation is made generic and the number of antennal joints 

 specific. On this I have to remark that in what I believe will be 

 the really scientific classification characters founded on the nature 

 of the sexual distinctions will take the place of the apparently 

 unimportant characters now employed and also that, however 

 superficial some of these make-shift characters may appear, long 

 and careful observation of a very extensive series of species from 

 many collections has convinced me that they accompany real 

 generic difference and that there is no fear of future observations 

 requiring the genera thus slightly characterized to be suppressed, 

 but that the effect of future observations will be only to show 

 the necessity of further sub-division of the genera now distin- 

 guished by apparently slight characters. 



The following may be noted in respect of the result of my 

 observations regarding the Australian >^eHcoio?es. 1. The nature 

 of the armature of the claws where the claws are not simple 

 cannot be relied upon as generic, but the difference between claws 



