BY THE REV. T. BLACKBURN. 723 



differs by its considerably larger size, prothorax not narrowed 

 behind and having the hind angles rounded off, and by the en- 

 feebling of the lateral stride on the elytra. All the other 

 previously described species are either very much larger or very 

 much smaller, except P. Nuytsii, Cast., from Western Australia, 

 which is described as a black insect with the prothorax almost 

 rectangular behind. 



N. Territory of S. Australia ; taken at Barrow's Creek by Mr. 

 "VV. D. Randall, to whom I have dedicated it. 



TRIGONOTOMIBES. 



Abacetus. 



It seems at least doubtful whether the Australian species attri- 

 buted to Abacetus and to Drimostoma are generically distinct 

 inter se. Baron deChaudoir (Bull. Mosc. 1870, p. 375), expresses 

 the opinion that D. vicina, Cast., may be even specifically iden- 

 tical with his (de Chaudoir's) A. australis, but makes no comment 

 on Castelnau's other species. Another of the insects referred 

 (though in this case doubtfully) to Drimostoma by Castelnau 

 (D. ? tasmanica) is asserted by Bates (Cist. Ent. II. 321) to be 

 an OoiDterus, a genus which Lacordaire associates with Cnemacan- 

 thus. Of the remaining four of Castelnau's Drimostoma^ one 

 (Thouzeti) is said to be very like vicina from which it is perhaps 

 safe to infer that de Chaudoir would have called it an Abacetus. 

 The rest are from the mountains of Victoria ; D. australis may 

 be almost anything, — if it be congeneric with D. vicina it would 

 necessitate a new name for Abacetus australis, Chaud. ; D. mon- 

 tana from the description {e.g. " thorax not marginated laterally") 

 cannot have anything to do with Drimostoma, and the same 

 remark would probably apply to D. alpestris, which is said to be 

 very like D. montana, but the description is so worthless that 

 unless the type can he referred to its identification is hopeless. 



According to de Chaudoir Drimostorna and Abacetus resemble 

 each other very closely in facies, — but that learned writer men- 

 tions as the main distinction between them that in the former the 



