Ce pt a Sy 
BH) ant ~ 
and on some Types of Oriental Carabidae. 171 
(Pusa Coll.), which I took with me to Copenhagen and 
compared with the type. 
24. Callistomimus (Panagaeus) chalcocephalus,* p. 57. Java 
(1919, 136). 
This proves to be Callistomimus (Pristomachaerus) messv 
Bates (Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond. 1873, 324), described from 
Hong-Kong, but ranging across Southern China to the 
Himalayas and Burma. A local race, Bates’ C. quadristigma 
(Ann. Mus. Civ. Gen. 1892, 303), also occurs in Burma, and 
has been found by Mr. R. Vitalis de Salvazain Laos. I have 
seen no other examples from Java, and, as Wiedemann was 
in the same paper also describing specimens from Bengal, 
it seems possible that some mistake may have been made 
regarding the locality. 
I have seen examples from Hong-Kong, Tonkin (R. Vitalis 
de Salvaza), Burma—Maymyo (H. L. Andrewes), Sikkim— 
Gopaldhara (H. Stevens), Kumaon—W. Almora (fH. G. 
Champion), and Dehra Dun. In writing his paper on the 
Scientific Results of the Second Yarkand Mission (Col. 1891, 
p- 4), Bates—for reasons which I am not able to fathom— 
attributed a specimen taken in the Jhelam Valley to Wiede- 
mann’s species, which he did not know, rather than to his 
own C. messi. This specimen, now in the Indian Museum 
collection, has lost both head and prothorax, but, judging 
by the elytra, I have no doubt that the species is the same. 
Kollar did not know the locality of his Panagaeus chloroce- 
phalus (Ann. Wien. Mus. 1, 1835, 335, t. 31, £. 4), but it seems 
probable that it will prove to be the same species.+ 
25. Badister thoracicus, p. 57. Bengal. 
I thought I recognised this species, and took over with 
me an example which I found to correspond exactly with 
_the type. No other description has appeared, and I have 
therefore redescribed it at the end. 
I have seen examples in the British Museum from 
Bengal—Berhampur, and in the Indian Museum from 
Calcutta, some “at light” (7. H. Gravely). 
26. Stenolophus (Badister) quinquepustulatus, p. 58. Bengal 
(1919, 178 and 189). 
* Already referred to in my note on the genus Callistomimus 
(see note on p. 146). 
+ I have recently sent an example of Wiedemann’s species to 
Vienna, and Dr. Holdhaus has kindly compared it with Kollar’s 
type. This is unfortunately a wreck, unfit for transport, so that 
I have not seen it, but Dr. Holdhaus’ comparison has convinced 
him that the two species are different. 
