1895.] Entomology. 1017 
(about 6 fish) could be profitably retailed by costermongers for one 
penny, or 2 pounds of sprats for one halfpenny” 
A sharp arraignment of the “ Billingsgate Ring,” which Dr. Hamil- 
ton accuses of diminishing the market supply of fish, in order to keep 
up the price, by getting the fish destroyed at various places along the 
coast, and a brief description of the “koshering” process for preserv- 
ing animal food, closes this interesting paper. 
The idea embodied in the article is, that foul fish is one of the most 
unwholesome, disease-producing factors in existence, but the conditions 
that result in such food being put upon the market are not necessary, 
but are due to ignorance, carelessness and greed, and can be remedied 
at no great expense. (Bull. U. S. Fish Commission, Vol. XIII, pp. 
311-334). 
ENTOMOLOGY. 
The Genera of Lysiopetalidz.—The genus Spirostrephon was 
founded by Brandt on Tulus lactarius Say, in 1840. Owing to the fact 
that many subsequent naturalists have not had an equally vivid appre- 
ciation of generic characters and limits, Spirostrephon has usually 
appeared as a synonym of Lysiopetalum, the typical species of which 
is L. feetidissimum (Savi). 
Through the kindness of Mr. Pocock of the British Museum I have 
had the opportunity of comparing specimens of fætidissimum with 
abundant material of /actarium from Pennsylvania, Ohio, and the Dis- 
trict of Columbia. The form, and ornamentation of the body and the 
location of the repugnatorial pores render the generic distinctness 
evident, as Brandt pointed out. Brandt also remarks’ the similarity 
with Cambala, but holds the genera distinct because the ocelli of Cam- 
bala are represented as arranged in a single row. ‘There seems to be 
no ground for Latzei’s inference that Brandt included Cambala under 
Spirostrephon. Brandt saw but one specimen, which must have been 
young, as the length and number of segments are less than in mature 
specimens of /actarium. 
1 Edited by Clarence M. Weed, New Hampshire College, Durham, N. H. 
? Recueil, p. 90. 
3 Myr. Ost. Ung. Mon., II, p. 353. 
