200 Mr. C. J. Guhan on the 



distinct subgenus of Cissites, distinct both structurally and 

 geographically. 



So far the result of my investigation was to show that for 

 over half a century the genera Horia and Cissites had been 

 interchanged in our collections and entomological works. 

 But a stranger discovery was to follow. I found that this 

 remarkable error had already been discovered and published 

 by Professor Beauretrard in his admirable treatise on ' Iv- 

 ies Vesicants/ dated 1890. In dealing with the matter 

 the learned Professor himself fell into some trifling errors 

 (one of a somewhat amusing character), and made also one 

 very lamentable mistake — that of adopting knowingly in his 

 own work the very errors to which he had called attention. 

 From Latreille's Hist. Nat. 1804 he quotes the following 

 passages to show what Latreille's original conceptions of 

 the genera were : — " XJ Ilorie testacee differe des autres espe »s 

 par les proportions de la tete et du corselet qui sont plus 

 etroits que les elytres, ce caractere m'a engage h former par mi 

 les Hories un nouveau genre celui des Cissites. Cette nou- 

 velle coupe serait composee de 1' Horia maculata d'Olivier et 

 de son Horia cepkalotes. L' Ilorie testacee serait le type du 

 genre Horia .... On voit ainsi que les Hories a tete de la 

 largeur du corselet ou plus large, mes Cissites. . . ." 



" II ressort de ces phrases que Latreille donnait le nom 

 N Horia aux especes a tgte plus large ou egale en largeur au 

 corselet et celui de Cissites aux especes a tete et corselet moins 

 large que les elytres." 



This exposition by M. Beauregard of Latreille's phrases is, 

 of course, an absolute inversion of the facts, exactly what, a 

 few lines further on, he charges Lacordaire with having 

 made. " Lacordaire/' he writes, " re*prit pour son compte 

 cette division en deux genres, mais par une singuliere erreur, 

 il intervertit les caracteres et assigna le nom de Horia aux 

 especes a tete grande aussi large au moins que le prothorax 

 et celui de Cissites aux especes a tete mediocre plus etroite que 

 le prothorad'." 



The charge made against Lacordaire is just, but there is 

 this excuse for him: the same mistake was previously made 

 by Castelnau, and, as I find, originated with Latreille himself, 

 who in 1S07, three years after the first publication of his 

 genus, assigned the characters and species of his own genus 

 Cissites to Horia, Fab., and vice versa. This mistake he 

 repeated in 1829 ; but in a work which came between — the 

 article " Horia " in the " nouvelle edit." of the ' Nouveau 

 Dictionnaire/ which is signed 0. and L. — the genera are 

 constituted as they originally were in the first edition, and, 



