EUCHIEIN.E. 367 



any of greater importance, for grouping the species, would not 

 by themselves be regarded as of generic value by any systematist. 

 The hairy fringe to the tibia of the male therefore remains the 

 only distinction of any real significance. 



A character distinctive of one sex is in my opinion never a 

 proper one on which to base a genus, as, apart from the serious 

 objection that it affords no means of determining specimens 

 of the other sex, experience shows that such characters are 

 specific only and may be absent or totally different in forms 

 with the closest possible relationship. On the other hand, when 

 species from different regions are closely related their separation 

 under different generic names, unless required for adequate 

 reasons, is undesirable, as obscuring the important fact of geo- 

 graphical distribution which is conveyed by their union under a 

 single name. The vast, almost unexplored, regions of Central 

 Asia probably contain undiscovered species of these insects, 

 which may be expected, like the Chinese Propomacrus davidi, to 

 fill in the slight interval which separates the Syrian and Indian 

 forms ; but it is improbable that the number of recognized species 

 will ever be so large that their inclusion in one genus will cause 

 serious inconvenience. 



The Malayan Euchirus longimanus and dupontianus differ from 

 all the rest in the general shape of the body, especially the 

 entirely different form of the prothorax; there is also a con- 

 siderable divergence in the secondary sexual characters, as well 

 as an important difference in the mouth, which seems to indicate 

 a corresponding difference of habit, viz., the maxillae are furnished 

 with extremely well-developed sharp teeth, which in the other 

 species are either absent or reduced to slight and probably 

 functionless vestiges. 



For these reasons the correct course seems to me to be that of 

 Deyrolle, restricting the genus Euchirus to the two Malayan 

 species, while treating all the remaining ETJCHIRITOJ; as forming a 

 single genus, for which the name Propomacrus must be used. 



Genus PROPOMACRUS. 



Propomacrus, Newm., Entom. Mag. iv, 1837, p. 255 ; Burm., Handb. 



Ent. iii, 1842, p. 702 ; Lacord., Gen. Col. iii, 1856, p. 317 ; Deyr., 



Ann. Soc. Ent. France (5), iv, 1874, p. 455. 

 Cheirotomts, Hope, Trans. Linn. Soc. xvii, 1841, p. 594; Pouillaude, 



Insecta, 1913, p. 467. Type, C. macleayi, Hope. 



TYPE, Scarabceus bimucronatus, Pall. (Syria). 



Range. S. China, Indo-China, Northern India, Syria, Con- 

 stantinople. 



The body is rather massively built, not narrow and elongated 

 as in EucJiirus, and the prothorax has a very irregular outline, its 

 sides being more or less flattened, the posterior angles more or 

 less spinose and the middle of the dorsal surface distinctly 



