Vol. xxx] ENTOMOLOGICAL NEWS 19 
and mostly yellow on the apical half, posterior face yellowish except for 
a median blackish and reddish area, distance from metanotum to coxal 
line as viewed from behind: distance between coxal line and abdominal 
line : : 34 : 16; distance between coxal line and abdominal line : length of 
hind coxae : : 16 : 50. 
Abdomen petiolate, Jength of first tergite : its width at apex : : 70:19; 
length of first tergite : length of second : : 70 : 45; abdomen beyond fifth 
tergite almost bulbous, abdomen reddish stramineous throughout, more 
or less covered with blackish stains, first tergite with a yellow streak down 
the middle on its basal two-thirds, lateral margins of tergites, like the 
sternites more or less yellowish, sheaths with their apical fifth pale yellow, 
rest of sheaths black, ovipositor castaneous. 
To Proposers of New Genera. 
[The following has been received through Dr. L. O. Howard.] 
This ought to be quoted in every entomological journal on earth and 
special ‘‘marked copies’’ sent to men of Walkerian tendencies.—C. F. 
BAKER, Los Bajfios, Philippine Islands. 
REMPHAN 
“The remarks of M. Guerin Meneville on this genus are so apposite: 
and are so much more applicable at the present time, that we think we 
are doing some service in calling attention to them here. He says, ‘The 
genus Remphan of Mr. Waterhouse, it seems to us, ought to be placed 
near Macrotoma. ‘The author has forgotten to state its affinities, after 
having given its generic characters, commencing with the head and finish- 
ing with the abdomen, just as is the custom with many entomologists, 
and which is very convenient for celerity. In fact, in thus freeing one’s 
self from the researches which ought to be really made in order to fix 
the place of a new genus, the task is reduced to almost mechanical work; 
for it is only to say all or almost all that can be seen of an insect to describe 
it, and leave to the poor reader the care and perplexity of picking whatever 
seems good to him.’ Mr. Waterhouse is, however, one of the last that 
we can complain of in this respect; but the systematic determination of 
some to content themselves with the barest descriptions, without giving 
the slightest clue to the position of their new genera, ought to disentitle 
them to the right of priority in the event of any of these genera being 
afterwards described in a conscientious and recognizable manner. Of 
course, it is a different matter when it is stated of any new genus that 
its affinities are doubtful or unknown to its author. As M. Guerin 
Meneville observes, these mechanical descriptions can be done by any 
one; the real test of competency will be found in the observation which 
every conscientious writer will feel it his duty to make in instituting, or 
proposing to institute, a new genus.’’—1866, Pascoe, Proc. Zool. Soc., 535. 
