208 
that Meinerts paper treats of a Brazilian species, and because 
Emberiza miliaria is the only bird name mentioned — the Bra¬ 
zilian bird nestling, which contained the Philornis not being 
identified — they have supposed, that it was the host of Phi¬ 
lornis. This has caused them to helieve Philornis a European 
species, and with this wrong deduction it was very natural, that 
they should make Philornis a synonym of Protocalliphora\ but the 
entire reasoning rests on a wrong conception, as Emberiza miliaria 
has nothing to do with Philornis hut was merely mentioned inci- 
dentally, referring to a communication of Collett on dipterous 
larvæ found under the skin of a nestling of the named bird in 
Norway. 
26.-9.—1911. 
