232 THE ENTOMOLOGIST. 



The volume is completed by that great desideratum, a full index, 

 and there are several plates. To some of these no exception can be 

 taken, but we cannot say this of the plate opposite p. 73, the process 

 adopted in which is not sufficiently delicate for its object. The phylo- 

 genetic tree at p. 462 is not pretty, but serves its purpose. We would 

 venture to suggest that in the forthcoming volumes, to which we look 

 forward, there should be a table of contents, naming the species 

 treated of. 



It may seem a little ungracious to find any sort of fault — although 

 only in matters of very minor importance — in this most valuable 

 work ; our excuse must be that we wish to render it even more so. 



With this we must for the present conclude. Nothing but a 

 lengthened study, such as there has been no time to give it, could do 

 justice to the work; and when we think of the amount of attention 

 necessary to assimilate its contents, we are filled with admiration of 

 the labour that must have been devoted to its production. 



F. M. 



T. H. Montgomery. Note on the Genital Organs of Zaitha (American 

 Nat., 1900, XXXIV., pp. 119-21, 2 figs.). [Rhynchota.] 



The author states that an examination of the male genital organs 

 of Zaitha showed him that they were very different from those of 

 Belostoiiia, as described by Leidy.'-' In the females the two genera 

 are quite similar, but in the males each testis consists of a single 

 convoluted follicle (or "capsule") in Belostnma [sec. Leidy] , while in 

 Zaitha each testis is a large organ composed of five follicles, each of 

 the latter thickened anteriorly, the posterior three-fifths forming a 

 narrow tube. 



Mr. Montgomery is inclined to lay great stress on these alleged 

 differences for taxonomic purposes, but as he was unable to procure 

 Belostowa for practical study, and relied entirely on Leidy's descriptions 

 and figures, it will be well to suspend judgment until a comparative 

 examination can be made. The two genera are certainly extremely 

 closely allied in their external characteristics. 



G. W. K. 



The following have also been received : — 



Proceedings of the Eleventh Annual Meeting of the Association of Eco- 

 nomic Entomologists (U. S. Department of Agriculture, Division of En- 

 tomology. Bull. 20, n. s.). P. 112. Washington, 1899. 



P reliminarg Report on the Insect Enemies of Forests in the North-West: 

 an Account of the Residts gained from a Reconnaissance Trip made in the 

 Spring and Early Summer of 1899. By A. A. Hopkins, Ph.D. (U. S. 

 Dep. Agr., Div. Entom. Bull. 21, n. s.). Pp. 27. Washington, 1899. 



The Coccid Genera Chionaspis and Hemichionaspis. By R. A. 

 CovLEY, B.Sc. (Special Bulletin, Hatch Experiment Station of the 

 Massachusetts Agricultural College). Pp. 57. Plates i-ix. Amherst, 

 Massachusetts, 1899. 



■■'- 1847, J. Ac. N.S. Philad. (2), I. pp. 57-67. I have retained Montgomery's 

 nomenclature, but Montaudon has lately shown (1900, Bull. Soc. Sci. Bucarest 

 IX., nos. 2 & 3, p. 9) that Belostoma, Latr. = Zaitha aiict,, and that 

 Amorgius, Stal, Montaudon = Belostoma auct. 



