Mr. G. Newport on a new genus of Parasitic Insects. 515 
where, he asserted, I had seen his drawings of it, which I in- 
stantly denied. Siz weeks after this aspersion, and after I had 
adduced—at the reading of the second part of my paper to the 
Linnean Society on the Ist of May instant—living evidence 
of the truth of my previous announcement, Mr. Westwood 
disclaimed having doubted my discovery of Anthophorabia in 
1832, and also disclaimed having cast any imputation on my 
statements. But six days later, May 7th, he appears to have 
addressed himself a second time vivd vece to a meeting of the 
Entomological Society, at which I was not present, and at which 
he well knew, as I have ceased to be a Member, that I was not 
hkely to be present to reply to his assertions. In the carefully 
drawn up report of that meeting, printed in the ‘ Gardeners’ 
Chronicle’ on the 12th of May, No. 19, page 295, he again re- 
pudiates, yet at the same instant reconveys the imputation, and 
there, for the first time, prints his description of Melittobia, and 
claims to have described this insect sufficiently in 1847. Now 
the facts are these :—In tie second volume of Mr. Westwood’s 
‘Introduction,’ page 160, and printed in November 1839, the 
author refers to an insect found im France by M. Audouin in the 
- nests of Odynerus, Anthophora and Osmia, and says, “ the male has 
most singular antenne, and minute rudiments of wings,” and then 
remarks, “ the species has not yet been described.’ Nearly eight 
sip elapsed and no description of the insect had been published 
y M. Audouin, nor had any reference again been made to it by 
Mr. Westwood until July 1847, when, according to the printed 
Proceedings of the Entomological Society, vol. v. part 3. p. xviil, 
he “exhibited specimens and drawings’? of Audouin’s insect, and 
mentioned that “the antenne of the males are singularly dis- 
torted (!) and the wings almost rudimental ; thus offering a strikingly 
opposite analogy (! ?) to other bee-parasites, such as Siylops, Meloé 
and Sitaris;’ and for this insect he proposed the name of “ Me- 
hitobia Audouinn.” This is the whole that he had published re- 
specting it, and those are his own words, Mr. Westwood being 
at that time Secretary of the Entomological Society, and enabled 
to prepare and to publish in the ‘ Proceedings’ what he pleased. 
But every naturalist will perceive that neither of these extracts 
constitutes a description of the insect named; these vague allu- 
sions being equally applicable to other genera of Chalcididous 
insects: No entomologist advanced beyond his schoolboy days 
will contend that “most singular antenne” or “ singularly dis- 
torted antenne”’ are descriptive terms or phrases. They apply 
equally well to at least four other genera of this family of insects, 
and of which three have been characterized by Mr. Westwood 
himself, viz. Tetracnemus, Dicladocerus, Elasmus, and Eulophus ; 
while “ minute rudiments of wings” or “ wings almost rudimental ” 
33% 
