7 
robust and porrect mandibles, and more especially in the peculiar, slender and elon- 
gate antenne, with their lengthened basal joint; and finally, to Leptinopterus in the 
ciliated and strongly acute posterior angle of the prothorax, more especially to be 
noticed in L. Fryi, Parry, a figure of which species, as well as of C. Luxerii, it is my 
intention shortly to publish ; in this latter respect there is evidently a strong con- 
nexion with Chiasognathus and Sphenognathus. 
AL GUS CICATRICOSUS. 
“ This insect, formerly belonging to Count Dejean’s collection, is stated on the 
label to have been received from Java. I cannot but think this to be erroneous. In 
the first place, I have had the opportunity of examining various collections containing 
numerous series of well-known previously-described species from Java belonging to 
the genus Agus, and I have never as yet been able to recognize another specimen of 
the insect alluded to. Secondly, numerous examples of it (now before the Meeting) 
have lately been received, both from Cambudia and Malacca, evidently identical with 
Count Dejean’s species, and found (upon examination with a specimen in the British 
Museum collection notified as received from Mr. M‘Leay) to be likewise identical with 
Agus Chelifer, described by that Entomologist in the ‘ Hore Entomologice, p. 113, 
and stated to be from Australia. The last-mentioned habitat must also be incorrect, 
in corroboration of which opinion I may further add that Nigidius cornutus, described 
by Mr. M‘Leay (id. cit.) with the habitat of Australia, has recently been received both 
from Cambodia and Malacca ; examples in the collections of Mr. W. Saunders and 
Count Mniszech being identical with a typical specimen in the British Museum. 
** Mons, Reiche, in his ‘ Critique’ upon Dr. Burmeister’s ‘ Handbuch der Entomo- 
logie’ (wide Ann. Soc. Ent. de Fr. vol. i. ser. 3, p. 82), states Count Dejean’s insect to be 
identical with Dorcus cicatricosus of Wiedemann, from Java. In this I cannot agree, 
as, according to Wiedemann’s description in the ‘ Zoologisches Magazin,’ vol. ii. p. 
108, it is evident that the insect there characterized represents a female, no allusion 
at all being made to the male. Wiedemann’s species is no doubt, as suggested by Dr. 
Burmeister, the female of Augus acuminatus, Fab., a species far from uncommon in 
Java. 
“ With all these facts before me, I have but little hesitation in referring Count 
Dejean’s species to Hgus Chelifer of M‘Leay with the habitat of Cambodia and Ma- 
lacea instead of Australia, and a distinct species from Agus acuminatus of Fabricius. 
“ The interesting series of this species now exhibited, with their extraordinary va- 
riety of form and sculpture, shows the very great difficulty the Entomologist must ex- 
perience in deciding as to the identity of species from a brief written description only, 
seeing that the same species may be most conscientiously described under three or 
four different names,—a fact which has, to my knowledge, already in several instances 
occurred. 
“To obviate this inconvenience I would suggest to Entomologists who may here- 
after describe any of the Lucanoid Coleoptera to have regard to and to notify the 
state of development of the specimens described. In using this expression I allude 
exclusively to the growth of the mandibles, those organs being of primary importance 
in this group of Coleoptera, exhibiting as they do the most anomalous character of the 
group, especially as regards their dimensions in comparison with the insect itself, and 
their extraordinary variability in form and sculpture. An acquaintance with nume- 
rous series of species of the different genera sufficiently establishes that three distinct 
