203 
behind the hind angle, while in the present species the hind mar- 
gin of the hind angle runs directly inward almost at right angles 
to the general lateral outline of the prothorax. The elytra are 
very like those of sigz//atws, but with the interstices scarcely so 
convex, and the sutural apex evidently more produced. 
S. Australia. 
CYCLOTHORAX. 
C. cinctipennis, Blackb. This species seems to be identical 
with that described by Castelnau under the name Phorticosomus 
lateralis, and must, therefore, stand as Cyclothoraa lateralis, Cast. 
It has nothing to do with Phorticosomus. 
HY DROPHILID AL. 
PARACYMUS. 
P. (Cyclonotum) pygmaeus, Macl. I have recently received 
examples (compared wich the type) of this insect from Mr. Lea. 
They seem certainly identical with Paracymus (Hydrobius) 
nitidiusculus, Brown. Macleay’s is the older name. 
STAPHYLINID. 
PHILONTHUS. 
P. sanguinicollis, Fauv. This species (from comparison with 
a type of Macleay’s species sent to me by Mr. Lea) is identical 
with Philonthus subcingulatus, Macl., and must, therefore, 
become a synonym as Macleay’s is the older name. 
SCOPAUS. 
S. ruficollis, Fvl. This insect is probably, judging by Fauvel’s 
description, identical with that described by Macleay as Stilicus 
ovicollis. I have recently obtained from Mr. Lea an example of 
the latter that has been compared with Macleay’s type, and it is 
certainly a Scopewus. Macleay’s is the older name. 
NITIDULID. 
BRACHYPEPLUS. 
b. Haagi, Reitter, seems to be identical with B. Murray, 
Macl., of which Mr. Lea has sent me an example compared with 
the type. Reitter’s description is too brief for absolutely certain 
identification, but the specimen of 4. Murrayi agrees well with it 
as far as it goes. Both are founded on examples from Queensland. 
Macleay’s is the older name. 
CARPOPHILUS. 
C. excellens, Keitter, is probably identical with C. luwridipennis, 
Macl., of which Mr. Lea has sent me an example compared with 
the type. Macleay’s is the older name. 
