18 [June, 
the fine eand. I never before saw Buch a quantity and variety of beetles together 
in so small a space (about thirty yards), to be got without the least trouble beyond 
picking them up. It was collecting made easy, as I never saw it before. The 
exact spot is between Foreness and Whiteness, not far from a coctney erection 
called Neptune's monument. I subjoin a list of the genera as far as I can recollect ! — 
NotiopMlus, Calathus, Ancliomenus, Pterosticlius, Amara, Anisodactylus, Harpalus, 
Bemhidium,Ihjhius (! !) , Homalota, Mycetoporus, Philonthus, XanthoUnus, Lithocaris, 
Bilplia, Choleva, Helophorus, Spharidium, Cercyon, Aphodiws, Agriotes, Cneorhinus, 
Sitones, Alophus, Phytonomus, Trachyphlceus, Cryptorhynchus, Lema, Crepidodera, 
Coccinella, Coccidula, Sfc. — V. C. de Eivaz, 4, Shrewsbury Road, W. 
"Note on a third species of Bamaster. — As I foretold (Ent. M. Mag., Vol. iii., p, 
189) in September last, there is another species of the genus Bamaster, besides 
llaptoides and Fortunei. It does not, however, come from the locality I anticipated, 
but from Yesso. Its head and thorax are metallic green, and its elytra are far 
more rugose than in the other two species. Its size, moreover, is barely two-thirds 
that of Fortunei, and about one-third of that of blaptoides, the Nagasaki insect. 
Provided I am the first to record the existence of this species, I purpose describing 
it after the name of its amiable captor, A. J. Gower, Esq., our Consul at Hakodadi. — 
G. Lewis, Nagasaki, 26th February, 1867. 
[This is, of course, the insect described at the Entomological Society on 4th 
March last (E. M. M., Vol. iii., p. 264) by Mr. C. 0. Waterhouse, under the name of 
Bamaster ait/ricollis. — E. C. R.j 
Note on Oreshius castaneus. — Of this curious insect, recently described by Mr. 
Marshall in this Magazine, I find I have a $ example, captured by me some years 
back on Goatfell. — D. Sharp, Crichton Institution, Dumfries, May 6th, 1867. 
Note on the Boeocrara Uttoralis of Thomson. — In a former note (Ent. M. Mag., 
Vol, ii., p. 242), I said that I coiild not perceive any reason for separating this 
species from Trichoptcryx on account of its external characters, biit that I had not 
examined the organs of the mouth. I have lately done this, and can safely assert 
that they are perfectly normal in every respect ; the mandibles, maxilliB, mentum, 
labium, labial palpi, and lingua are exactly similar to the corresponding organs of 
T. lata and T. fascicularis ; in the labrum and maxillary palpi a slight, but only 
specific, diiference exists. The former of these is somewhat shorter in proportion 
to its width, though the outline is the same, and the penultimate joint of the latter 
is more widely truncate at the apex. 
The anatomy of the underside, which varies much in the different genera of 
this family, in this insect entirely resembles the most typical form of Trichopteryw, 
and the shape and neuration of the wing— a highly valuable differential character — 
is so exactly like that of T. fascicularis, that it would be almost impossible to say 
from which species the wing had been removed. 
I therefore feel no hesitation in saying that the species in question is a pure 
Trichoptcryx ; whether it be the Bceocrara Uttoralis of Thomson may possibly admit 
of doubt, as we have never yet obtained a type from that author, but I think its 
chai-acters can scarcely be mistaken. 
