100 Lord Walsingham on 



from near angle of cell ; an internal vein runs from between 5 and 

 6 to near base of 11. Hind wings trapezoidal, with produced apex 

 and oblique outer margin. Neuration 8 veins ; 6 and 7 from a 

 common stem ; 3 and 4 from a point, or from a common stem, 

 from the lower angle of cell ; 5 from or near angle of cell. Legs : 

 hind tibiae clothed with smooth appressed scales. 



This genus will probably be found to include a number 

 of forms from various parts of the world, which have 

 hitherto been confounded with Zeller's genus Crypto- 

 lechia, from which they differ in having veins 6 and 7 of 

 the hind wings from a common stem, instead of separate 

 and nearly parallel, as in his original type of that genus, 

 Cryptolechia straminella, from South Africa. 



If the name Cryptolechia is to be retained for the 

 species originally described as the type of that genus, 

 and I fail to see how the rule can be departed from in 

 this instance, any family founded upon an alliance with 

 that genus must at least retain its essential characters, 

 and cannot be established to include the forms in which 

 veins 6 and 7 of the hind wings are not separated, this 

 wide difference in neuration being admitted by all 

 authorities to be of the utmost importance in systematic 

 classification. It follows that Zeller's genus Cnjpto- 

 lechia falls into the family (Ecophorida of Meyrick, and 

 annihilates Meyrick' s family Cryptolechida, which was 

 not founded on the typical form. Mr. Meyrick, recog- 

 nising this, has since recharacterised his family Crypto- 

 lechida under the name Xyloryctidce (Tr. Eoy. Soc. 

 South Australia, 1890, 234). 



I have explained that it is necessary to establish this 

 genus Odites on the strength of its neural characters ; 

 these exhibit affinities to the family Gelechidce of Heine- 

 mann rather than to the (Ecophoridce of Meyrick, and 

 moreover distinguish it from all genera yet described, 

 not only in the now suppressed family Cryptolechidce, 

 but even more strongly from the (Ecopliorida which 

 may be retained, provided always that they agree with 

 the original typical OEcophora, whatever that may be. 

 The error, for which Mr. Meyrick cannot rightly be held 

 responsible, has evidently arisen through the confusion 

 which Zeller created by his attempts to expand and 

 amplify his original work. These attempts (Lin. Ent., 

 IX., 353, etseq. (1854), and Hor. Soc. Ent. Boss., XIII., 



