﻿6 Major Parry's Catalogue 



our collections, and most of these are illustrated by figures. 

 Having lately returned from visiting the several collections at 

 Leyden, Amsterdam, Halle, Berlin, Stettin and Paris, I have 

 ascertained some interesting points with reference to the synonymy 

 of certain species, and have acquired the knowledge of others 

 previously unknown to me. I take this opportunity of thanking 

 the o'entlemen connected with the museums already alluded to for 

 the great kindness and courtesy they respectively evinced towards 

 me when visiting the collections placed under their charge. 



Chiasognathus Latreillei $, Solier. 

 Re'ich'ii $, Thomson, 

 imberbis, Dohrn, MS. 



I have no douht as to the identity of the above (already re- 

 ferred to in my Remarks on Mr. Thomson's Catalogue o? Lucanidce, 

 Tr. Ent. Soc. 3rd Series, vol. i. p. 444). Although my collection 

 does not contain this species, I have been able to examine speci- 

 mens of it in the collections of Count Mniszech and Herr Dohrn, 

 at the Jardin des Plantes (Solier's type) and the Leyden Museum ; 

 all of which accord so entirely with the excellent figure in my 

 possession by M. Migneaux, that I have now no hesitation in unit- 

 ing them. 



Chiasognathus Mniszechii $ , Thomson. {V\. X. fig. 3.) 

 ? Jousselinii, Reiche. 



Of the identity (although very probable) of these species I am 

 not quite so certain. Single specimens of C. Mniszechii are in 

 the collections of Mr. I'homson, Count Mniszech and M. Ger- 

 main ; the unique type specimen of C. Jousselinii is in the collec- 

 tion of M. Jousselin at Versailles. According to a recent com- 

 munication from M. Reiche, the two are to be considered as 

 distinct. 



Cantharolethrus LuxERii $, Buquet. (PI. IX. fig. 6.) 

 Whether this unique species is to be placed with the Chiasog- 

 n(ithid(B or the Lucanidce is problematical ; both Mr. Thomson 

 and Count Mniszech have considered it as belonging to the latter 

 fimily ; the ? being as yet unknown, it is difficult to assign its 

 true position. The second species mentioned by Mr. Thomson 

 in his Catalogue, C. Reichii J , was originally described by the 

 Rev. F. W. Hope (Trans. Ent. Soc, vol. iv. p. 182, pi. xiii. fig. 3), 

 and placed with PhoUdolus ; the two species may possibly here- 

 after prove identical. 



