1901] ENTOMOLOGICAL NEWS. I39 



data — Gryllus roseus-\n'^\2i — Tettigoyiia atrata-lndia (I do not 

 think that our common noisy Tettigonia has ever been de- 

 scribed, it cannot certainly be the Tibicen, its very obvious dis- 

 tinctive characteristic, the white spots could not have been 

 overlooked) Cimex Sineyisis of India Cimex (^T«yraFab") Stoc- 

 kerus of India — Fulgora Candelaria India Nepa Fusca of India 

 — Papilio — Almana & Nos 2. 3. 4. India Argante — Sara — Phyl- 

 lis & No I. South America — Orithya Leucothoe — India Libel- 

 lula Femcgenia — of India — Vespa bicolotir. Cincta India the 

 names of those alluded to by the above numbers, I could not 

 ascertain by L,in> short descriptions as translated by Turton, 

 the only general work on Entomb. I have in my possession — 

 probably you may know them — Dytiscus limbahis of India, I 

 have not seen the American species, but should much doubt 

 from some circumstances of their being the same, but you can 

 now determine by comparison 



I do not see the necessity of removing 294 from the Ips, its 

 characters for the most part seem to agree pretty well with 

 that genus ; at any rate I hardly think it can be placed with the 

 G. Triplax inasmuch as the Palpi are not hatchet shaped 



In examining those I have of the Ips, I found that 291 dif- 

 fered considerably in its generic characters from the others, I 

 allude more particularly to its Palpi, perhaps it would be more 

 correct to place it in the genus Erotyhis of Latr. , though it 

 may bear considerable affinity with Tritoma & Triplax. 



The Insect 708 does not appear to me to be altogether at 

 home in the Genus Clerus — I think it ought to be transplanted 

 in company with N?^ 116 & 117 to Latreilles Genus Necrobia — 

 is 708 found on dead animals ? 



One of the characters of Anobiuvi Perti^iax is " Elytra with 

 8 striae of minute excavated punctures" — N? 164 has 10 striae 

 on the Elytra besides an abbreviated one each side the scutel, 

 taking this differece into consideration with your observations 

 on the thorax & magnitude of our Insect when compared with 

 Pertinax I perfectly agree with you as to the necessity of 

 adapting a new name to our insect 



With the Genus Hyphydrus I am totally unacquainted, but 

 the Dytiscus maculatus of your catalogue most certainly belongs 



