270 Mr. T. Vernon Wollaston on 
Hab.—Maderenses (Mad., Pto. Sto., Des.), et Canari- 
ensis (in Gom. sola haud observatus); sub lapidibus in 
aridis, preesertim calcariis inferioribus, late diffusus. 
(Sp. 840) Hypera trrorata. 
While recording it properly as Canarian, M. Capiomont 
(as just stated) misquotes this insect (loc. cit. 121) as 
likewise Madetran, and even refers it (in general terms) to 
the ‘Insecta Maderensia;’ though, of course, had he 
taken the trouble to look into that volume he would have 
seen at once that it was not contained there. ‘This how- 
ever is but one instance out of many (alluded to, passim, 
in my Canarian Catalogue and elsewhere), in which the 
excessive inaccuracy of the French entomologists, as 
regards habitats, is well-nigh incredible. The fact is, 
that the P. wrroratus has been observed hitherto only in 
Lanzarote and Fuerteventura—the two eastern islands of 
the Canarian archipelago. 
After allowing it to be truly distinct, M. Capiomont 
then states that he believes, on re-consideration, that it is 
a variety of the P. isabellinus—a species which is found 
in Arabia, Egypt, and Algeria; but I suspect that in this 
conjecture he is wrong,—for I compared the Lanzarotan 
and Fuerteventuran insect very diligently with types of 
the isabellinus, and pointed out in my Canarian Catalogue 
(p. 327) the exact characters, one or two of them being 
structural ones, in which it seemed to me to differ from 
that species. Therefore, until further evidence has been 
adduced, I certainly shall not refer the H. irroratus to the 
isabellinus, 
(Sp. 841) Hypera murina. 
In my ‘Ins. Mad.’ and Madeiran Catalogue (published, 
respectively, in 1854 and 1857) I treated the common 
P. murinus and variabilis, however nearly related inter se, 
as specifically distinct; but in 1865, when compiling the 
‘Coleoptera Atlantidum,’ I had so thoroughly satisfied 
myself (as I thought) that they merge imperceptibly 
into each other that I made up my mind to regard them 
as but phases of a single plastic form, and cited them 
accordingly. Yet M. Capiomont, in his late revision of 
the Hyperides, has expressed his conviction that, after 
