80 ME. F. BALFOUR-BROWNE ON THE LIFE-HISTORY 



three Irish, and thirty, out of the seventy, English county and 

 vice-county divisions. 



Tiie only Scottish i-ecord, for Midlothian, occurs in Duncan's 

 Catalogue (3), where the species is described as " very scarce, 

 Pond at Coates " on the authorit}^ of Sir P. Walker. The same 

 record is repeated in the ' Entomologia Edinensis '" (17), but neither 

 Andrew Murray (9) nor Sharp (11) refers to it. 



For the North of England there are two isolated records for the 

 species, one for Northumberland South and the other for Cum- 

 berland. The former is given by Stephens (15) on the authority 

 of G. Wailes : " Once near Newcastle by Mr. Hevvitson." Bold's 

 comment that this is " probably erroneous as it has never since 

 been met with " (4) is quite valueless. The Cumberland record is 

 bare, being a note by James McDougall (8), who mentions having 

 taken the species at Wigton, and although I have made enquiries 

 I can find out nothing further about it. 



In the case of many ^species, records for localities far beyond 

 the normal range are frequently regarded as due to errors in 

 identification, but Pelohius is not a beetle likely to be confounded 

 with any other, so that, unless a mistake has been made in 

 labelling, records for this species may be regarded as correct, 

 and are pi'obably to be accounted for on the assumption that 

 individuals have, from time to time, wandered northwards. In 

 such a manner might the species extend its range, but in this 

 case the attempts to extend northward seem to have failed up to 

 the pi"esent. 



The extreme northern range limit seems to be Yorks S.E., 

 where the species is "fairly common in the stagnant pools near 

 Withei-nsea," according to H. W. Baker of Hull (4). The records 

 for Torks S.W., Lanes S., and Derby may or may not be for 

 single specimens in each case. The Torks S.W. record appears 

 in the Victoria County History (2) as " Doncaster (J. Wilcock)." 

 The Lanes, record is an old one given by W. E. Sharp (13) as 

 " Rufi'ord (Gregson)," though, for some unexplained reason, this 

 record is omitted in Sharp's later lists of 1906 (13) and 1908 (14). 



The fact that Jahn (6) mentions " two specimens in a pool near 

 Cheadle " seems to suggest that here again we are within the 

 normal range of tlie species ; and although records even south of 

 this are scarce — in many cases only one in a county or vice- 

 county, — there is little doubt but that the species is fairly 

 common in the eastern and southern parts of the country. Tlie 

 accompanying " typo-map " will give a general idea of the 

 distribution of the species, and the letters i^epresenting the 

 county and vice-county names will be sufiiciently intelligible, as 

 they are more or less in correct geographical position. 



Pelohius is scarcely to be described as established in Ireland, 

 since, in the case of both Cork Mid. (7) and Clare (7), only one 

 specimen was found, and possibly the Wicklow record, "near 

 Lara," in the Haliday MS. (5) also refers to a single specimen, I 

 have Avorked many of the Irish counties fairly thoroughly, and 



