REVIEW, 843 



ness they might have. Since India pays for them, the Indian worker might 

 have a say in the matter, which he does not. We believe that the bulk 

 of collectors in India do not use these volumes to the extent they might 

 and that the stimulus to work that they might afford is largely lost. For 

 this reason, we would draw the attention of members of the society to this 

 volume which will be of use and which will enable any one with a liking 

 for collecting to do useful and pleasant work with these beetles. 



H. M. L. 



CATALOGUE OF ORTHOPTERA. 



Part III. — Ach.idiid.3e 



by 



W. F. Kirby. 



This is the concluding volume of the Catalogue of Orthoptera issued by 

 the British Museum. It embraces the Acridiidce (here called Lecustidce) 

 which include the Locusts and Grasshoppers. We congratulate the author 

 on having brought to a conclusion this arduous work, the product of much 

 research and delving in literature. Such catalogues, if authoritative, are 

 invaluable to those unfortunate workers who have to deal with nomenclature 

 and literature, and the present volume is fully up to the standard one would 

 expect of our National Museum. The volume has, of course, no interest to 

 any but entymologists, being purely a catalogue of species and references. 

 Nominally such a catalogue lists the described species of the world. 

 Actually it must include many species whose descriptions are extant, but 

 which are practically lost for want of full descriptions and types. 



Like all such catalogues, this adds to the welter of confusion that reigns 

 in entomology by still more muddling up the nomenclature. Acridium 

 or Acrydium, known hitherto as the designation of the old-world Locusts 

 and allied large grasshoppers, is now transferred to a genus of Tetrigine 

 grasshoppers; our locusts become Cyrtacanthacris and Ortliacanihacris. 

 Volumes have been written on Schistocerca {Acridium) peregrinum. Oliv., 

 which has now become Schistocerca tatarica, Linn. Our old friend Epacromia 

 dorsalis is become Aeolopus tamula. The last is very typical of the silly 

 meddling with names now going on in all groups. Epacromia is a genus 

 characterised by Fischer in November 1853 in his Orthoptera Europcea ; our 

 author finds that he can identify the genus with Aiolopus of Fieber in Lotos 

 of May 1853. On that ground (6 months only) the generic name must 

 change. All these changes are doubtless right, if we follow the inter- 

 national rules and if the author's identification of the genus is accurate; but 

 the whole thing is bringing entomology and entomologists into contempt 

 and disrepute with those who have to work in it and not simply tinker with 

 nomenclature and old books. Why could not Acridium stand seeing what a 

 literature there is about it under that name ? 



