of the Family Tabanida*. 101 



IS not exact. The specimen in the Museum came tVnn 

 Soutli Africa, not Oceania, whence Macquart says his type 

 was received. 



I lab. South Africa (Smith). 



*Cadtcera melanopyga^ (^ , Wicdem., Auss. zwcifl. Ins. i. 

 p. 08(KS28). 



Vanf/onia inelanopyqn, ^^'iedeIU., /. (. ; $, ^Incq. l)i]it. Exiit. i. p. 07 

 (lS-if<) ; Loew.Uipt. Siidafrik. p. H» (18(50) ; Walker, List Dij.l. pt. i. 

 p. \m (1846). 



Hah. Cape of Good Hope {Smith, Whitehill). 



*Cadicera crassipalpis, Macq. Dipt. Exot. i. j). lt<S (1<:>.')<S). 

 Pangoniacrassipalpis, Macq., I.e. ; Walker, List Dipt. ]tt. i. p. 138 (1848). 

 Ilah. Caj.e of Good Hope {Children). 



*Cadicera chrt/sostigma, Wiedeni., Auss. zweitl. Ins. i. p. IdO 

 (1828). 



Pangonia chrysostigma, "Wiedem., /. c. ; Walker, List Dipt. pt. v. 

 Suppl. 1, p. 137. 



Hah. Cape of Good Hope, Stellenbosch {V'ujors). 



There is an uiidescribed specimen in the collection un- 

 labelled, which |irobably belongs to this genus, from the 

 Cape ; and another probably new species from Pirie Bush. 



PeLECORHYNCHUS, Macq. 



Vvlecorhinchm. Macq., Dipt. Exot. vSuppl. 4, p. 28 (1850) ; Loow, 



Dipt. Siidafrik. (18(50). 

 C<tnopnyga, Thorns., Eugen. Kesa, p. 449 (1868). 



This genus was formed by Macquart for P. maculipennis 

 from Australia ; he distinguished the genus from Pancjon'm by 

 the j^eculiar shape of the |)robo3cis, which ends in the form of 

 a hatchet : Loew is doubtful as to this being a good character- 

 istic for a genus, though Schiuer, in describing P. ornatus 

 (* Rcise der Novara,' p. 08), mentions this as justifying the 

 genus being established ; it seems peculiar to t!io genus so far 

 as I can judge from the species in the jMuseuni. Thomson 

 formed a new genus, C(rnopny<ja, for the same species, dis- 

 tinguishing it from Vancjon'ia by its subulated antenna? and 

 the posterior spiracles being ovate not horizontal. Macquart's 

 name has priority, though he gives an insufficient and in- 

 correct description for his genus. Thomson's should be referred 

 to: his statement '' wings many-spotted" will only hold good 

 for some species, not for the genus, some having (juite clear 

 wings ; his distinction as to spiracles 1 have not been able to 



