314 Mr. O. Thomas 07i 



Australian aud New Zealand seas. In this change Miss Rath- 

 bun has been followed by nearly all writers who have since 

 had occasion to refer to Whitens genus. Mr. Stebbing, in 

 pt. iv. of his "South African Crustacea'' (Ann. S. Afr. 

 Mas. vi. p. 5, 1908) *, rehearses her argument and adopts 

 her conclusion. It is somewhat surprising, therefore, to find 

 that the supposed necessity for the transference of the name 

 Halimus appears to rest upon a mistake. 



Miss Rathbun, having shown that the genotype of Hali- 

 mus is H. aries, Latreille (Guerin, Iconogr. Regne Anim,, 

 Crustacea^ pi. ix. fig. 2, 1834?), goes on to add, "arks 

 having been put in Hyastemis, White, 1847, which genus 

 now becomes a synonym of Halimus." Mr. Stebbing 

 repeats this statement^ but neither author gives any reference 

 for the supposed transfer of Halimus aries. As a matter of 

 fact, I can find no evidence that it ever took place. What 

 did happen was that A. Milne-Edwards in 1872 (Nouv. Arch. 

 Mus. Paris, viii. p. 250) included as one of the species of 

 Hyastenus the Pisa aries of Latreille (' Encyclopedic Metho- 

 dique/ x. p. 149, 1825-28), which is an entirely different 

 species from Halimus aries (cf. Milne-Edwards, Hist. Nat. 

 Crust, i. pp. 315 & 341). 



XXXVII. — 071 African Bats and Shrews. 

 By Oldfield Thomas. 



(Published hy permission of the Trustees of the British Museum.) 



Rhinolophus foxi, sp. n. 



Closely allied to R. decherii, Peters, of East Africa, but 

 greyer in colour and witii smaller teeth. 



Size rather less than in R. deckeni. General colour above 

 " drab-grey," below more whitish grey. Nose-leaf and ears 

 apparently as in deckeni. 



Skull as in R. deckeni, but rather smaller ; the nasal 



* Mr. Stebbing here places the species he is discussing in his family 

 Blastidse, the Pisinse of Alcock's classification ; but in pt. v. of the same 

 ■work {t. c. p. 284,1910) he removes the same species without explanation 

 to the family Inachid?e (Alcock's luachinse). The first position is appro- 

 priate to Halhmis, Rathbun, the second to Halimus, Latreille. It seems 

 possible that the names and not the characters of the specimen may have 

 been the cause of this uncertainty. 



