116 



think he bases this reference on the episterna of the metasternum 

 being in those species narrower than in L. proxima, Cast., which 

 he regards as a typical Lacordairia (probably correctly, although 

 I do not know L. cychroides, Cast., which is I presume the real 

 type, and Mr. Sloan e seems to imply that he has not seen it 

 either). For my part I do not find the diversity in the episterna 

 of the species mentioned above at all of a kind that would 

 suggest generic diversity to me, and certainly the species are 

 extremely like each other in facies. But however that may be 

 it appears to me that the episterna of the least closely allied of 

 them all are far less distinct inter se than they all are from the 

 episterna of Microferonia, which moreover is very different from 

 them all in facies. My own inclination is to leave them in 

 Lacordairia, but if they are to be removed from it I think they 

 ought to be formed into a new genus. Mr. Sloane in his tabula- 

 tion of Licinides (loc. cit., p. 188) makes two aggregates of genera 

 having the episterna respectively "quadrate (short) " and "de- 

 cidedly longer than broad." I feel no hesitation whatever in 

 referring all the species of Lacordairia mentioned above to the 

 former aggj-egate and no hesitation in referring Microferonia to 

 the latter. I do not feel much doubt as to the correctness of 

 my indentitication of the species mentioned (I collected the 

 specimens on the Victorian mountains — Castelnau's locality), 

 except in the case of L. argiitoroides, my single (supposed) 

 example of which is much darker in color than the description 

 indicates and which moreover certainly presents some structural 

 differences from the other t[iree, but not in the direction of 

 Microferonia. 



L. angustata. Cast. I have a specimen (taken by myself on 

 the Blue Mountains — Castelnan's locality) of an insect which I 

 cannot doubt is this species, as it agrees perfectly with the 

 description. It, however, is a Siagonyx (having the intercoxal 

 projection of the prosternum strongly margined behind, ikc), and 

 is closely allied to S. amplipemns, Macl. (my identification of 

 w^hich has been confirmed by Mr. Sloane), but it differs from 

 Macleay's species inter alia by its prothorax being very much 

 narrower and its labrum so deeply bisinuate that the middle part 

 stands out as a strong projection. 



TRECHUS. 



The Australian species that I attribute to Trechus differ con- 

 siderably inter se in facies, none of them, moreover, bearing 

 much resemblance to any European species known to me. Their 

 characters of a kind likely to be generic are very uniform how- 

 ever excepting perhaps those of T. haldiensis in which the re- 

 curved elytral striole is very near the margin — practically want- 

 ing — and T. Tasmania whose comparatively stout antennae and 



