490 Rev. A. E. Eaton^s supplementary notes on 
fig. 19 : first, on account of the sex assigned to it in 
the explanation of the plate, and afterwards in con- 
nection with the suspicion of plurality of type suggested 
by fig. 16. 
Fig. 19 is attributed to the and fig. 20 to the $ of 
M. pilosella. The latter is an excellent representation 
of the apex of the abdomen of a male Psychoda, viewed 
rather obliquely from the side, the artist omitting 
hairs and (doubtless because they did not show to 
advantage in that posture) the superior genital appen- 
dages. Fig. 19, however, has no resemblance to the 
female genitalia of any Psychodidss hitherto described : 
therefore, if everything be correct, the insect is most 
remarkable. But if it be allowable to assume the 
possibility of error in the explanation of the figure, one 
is led to enquire whether the mistake concerns the 
artist's record of the species, or only that of the sex of 
the original specimen. The wrong sex might easily 
have been entered by a slip of the pen on the original 
drawing at the time of its execution ; or it might have 
been introduced into the explanation of the figure at a 
later date, through an oversight or lapse of memory. 
From the nature of the figure, it seems likely that one 
of these things happened, and that the figure concerns 
male genitalia, viewed from above : and if it can be 
reconciled with the corresponding view of these parts in 
a Psychoda, there is no ground for supposing that the 
error in the artistes record extended to the species of 
the specimen. One might even entertain the supposition 
that figs. 19 and 20 w^ere different views of the same 
specimen, designed by the artist to be supplementary to 
each other. In favour of this hypothesi^s, one may 
point to the lower portion of the figure, which resembles, 
in outline and in the contour of its lowest border, the 
forceps-basis or subgenital plate of a male Psychoda — 
the artist omitting sundry hairs and the ill-focussed 
inferior genital appendages (which are sufficiently 
displayed in the other figure), but showing the places of 
their articulation' with the basis. And then in the upper 
portion of the figure, one may trace considerable re- 
semblance to a pair of superior genital appendages 
inflexed obliquely downwards towards a sheathed penis — 
the appendages comparable to those of Ps. sexpunctata, 
Curt, (figured Ent. Mo. Mag., 2nd ser., vol. v., pi. iv.. 
