24 DESCRIPTIONS OF 



nuscript names published in catalogues such as Dahl's, Me- 

 gerle's, and DeJean's, &c. &c. &c, cannot stand. 



Sp. 99. crass ipes. In my Manual I considered this insect as 

 a Monochelas of Illiger. It appears to be a Pachynema of 

 Serville, according to M. Laporte. 



Sp. 101. Podagricus. I am inclined to consider this insect 

 as a Cape species, although the locality given by Olivier 

 and Fabricius is that of Coromandel. 



Sp. 103. gonayra. In the same Manual I gave the term Mo- 

 nochelus to the above species, with a query, and as I sus- 

 pected, it turns out to be a Dichelus of Serville. 



Sp. 106. longipes. Probably a Dichelus ; the locality is the 

 Cape of Good Hope. 



Sp. 108. monticola. All the species of this genus are pecu- 

 liar to the Continent of Australia. 



Sp. 110. varians. I know not under what modern genus I 

 can place this species ; it has never fallen under my in- 

 spection. Can it be a gigantic Anomala ? 



Sp. 112. hcemorrhoidalis. No locality is given by Olivier. 

 From the figure I am inclined to consider it a Mimela, and 

 consequently as inhabiting the East Indies. 



Sp. 114. picipes. I have added the name of Mimela with a 

 doubt ; the country is not mentioned. 



Sp. 116. ignea. Probably a Bolax of Dr. Fischer. 



Sp. 121. 12-punctata. This species is evidently the same as 

 Sc. aureolus of Pallas, and is now considered to be an Hop- 

 Ha. 



(To be continued). 



Art. IV. — Description of two new species of Beetles, belonging to 

 the Family Cetoniidae of MacLeay. By Mr. Adam White. 



The two species now to be described belong to a family 

 which comprises about 600 species, and is peculiarly tropical, 

 not more than seven species having been registered as British 

 by the most latitudinarian entomologist. By Linnaeus and 

 old authors they were included in the genus Scarabans, and 

 even after the division of that overloaded group into several 

 genera, some of the Cetoniidce were placed along with Melo- 

 lontha. Latreille, MacLeay, Kirby, St. Fargeau, Serville, 

 Gory and Percheron, have by their labours, rendered the 

 study of them a work of comparative ease. 



The genus Trichius of Fabricius, distinguished at once 

 from Cetonia of the same author by many characters, among 

 others by the mentum not covering the maxilla, and by the 

 epimeron (Audouin,) {peice axillaire Latr.) not being promi- 



