DIFFICULTY OF DETERMINING SPECIES. 
61 
ing upon the notices of isolated specimens obtained from various sec- 
tions. The experience in this country bears us out in this opinion. 
Professor Haldeman, as late as 1853, supposes (E. corallines to be the 
species so destructive to vegetation in Utah ; 158 and it was not until 
Walsh took the matter in hand in 1866 that the western locust was specifi- 
cally determined ; nor was the distinction between spretus and atlantis 
suspected until observed by Mr. Eiley in 1874, when the invasion of that 
year caused him to enter upon the careful study of the species. What 
species the migratory locust of California is, in fact whether California, 
has a truly migratory locust, are points not yet satisfactorily settled. 
An incident showing the liability to error in determining a migratory 
species from specimens sent is mentioned in the Proceedings of the En- 
tomological Society of London. 159 A copy of a dispatch from the English 
charge" d'affaires at Madrid was submitted to the society relative to the 
plague of locusts, together with a box of specimens. The insects sent 
were stated to be Locusta migratoria, when, on examination, they were 
ascertained to be Decticus albifrons. 
The confusion in reference to A. peregrinum and the closely allied 
species is so great that no entomologist can decide in reference to a 
specimen satisfactorily without having recourse to a well-stocked cabi- 
net. According to Stal, 160 G. migratorius var. z of Thunb., G. rufescens 
Thuub., and A. flaviventre~B\vcm. are all synonyms of A. peregrinum Serv. 
He also gives as the localities where the specimens of this species which 
are in the Mus. Holm, were found as Buenos Ayres, Montevideo, Bahia, 
Madeira, Tenerifl'e, Algiers, Egypt, Nubia, and East Indies. 
Walker 161 gives as localities from which specimens in the British 
Museum were taken, Syria, Egypt, Madeira, Teneriffe, South Africa, Cey- 
lon, Repaid, Hindostan, North Bengal, and " 500 miles from land." Oli- 
vier mentions Egypt, Arabia, Mesopotamia, and Persia. Kxauss and other 
authorities mention Senegal and the Canary Islands. In addition to 
these localities, it is stated that specimens have been found in Spain, 
Portugal, and England. 
If we should accept these as true, and from them attempt to fix the 
area of distribution for this species, we should have to include all the 
territory bounded by a line running from the Ganges to the Aral Sea, 
thence to England, thence to the Argentine Eepublic, thence to the 
Cape of Good Hope, and back to the starting point. Could such a con- 
clusion be accepted ? We think not. Yet the extreme points depend 
upon the authority of Stal, one of the most thorough orthopterists of the 
present age. That the area over which this species roams is very ex- 
tensive must be admitted. There are also some reasons for believing 
that it is found in the West Indies, but the species inhabiting the Argen- 
^Stansbury's Report, p. 371. 
169 1876— xxi, August 2. 
,M Recensio Orthopterorum, p. 65. 
161 Cat. Dermap. Salt., iii, p. 577. 
