240 Dr. ArzeLius’s Ob/ervations on the Genus Paufus. 
Infeétes de Fuefily. “Here occurs nothing but what is found in the 
original edition, except a new blunder, and a remark in the notes to 
this purport : ‘* that there are two other {pecies of Pax/us mentioned 
in the memoirs of the Swedifh Academy, and that Fabricius, not 
having examined thefe infects as minutely as he ought, has placed 
them amongft his Cerocome, till there may occur an opportunity of 
determining their genus with more accuracy.” 
Thefe are all the'writers I have feen who treat on the genus and 
fpecies of Pau/fus. And it is very remarkable, that almoft every one 
of them has committed fome miftake. This may be excufable, 
when there are feveral accounts of anatural production from ocular 
obfervations of different perfons; but not fo when there exifts 
only one, as is the cafe in regard to Linné’s Pau/us; for though 
Thunberg and Fabricius may both have feen it, yet neither of them 
has added any thing to illuftrate it but what might have been col- 
lected from Linné’s defcription and figures of it, the latter having 
only created greater confufion than any before him, by putting 
it among the Cerocome. As to Fuefsly, Gmelin, Herbft, and 
Fuefsly’s tranflators, { am almoft certain they never faw a Pau/us ; 
and therefore, whatever they have written, they ought to have 
taken from Linné, and are to be e{teemed in proportion as they have 
copied him faithfully.—But I fhall ftate their refpective miftakes 
more at large, when I come to the hiftory of P. microcephalus in 
particular, and fhall now in the firft place fettle the characteriftics 
of the genus. 
Befides the Linnzan fpecies, which I have examined here in Lon- 
don, I brought another nondefcript with me from Africa, which, in 
imitation of Linné’s deriving the {pecific name of his from the 
Greek, I call (from cgaipe and xépas) P. /pherocerus, on account of 
each of its antenne bearing at itsenda large and remarkable globe. 
Both 
———— 
