20 



sericcii.:- ill the conspicuous characters of being of large size 

 and also having elytra very finely and closely punctulate. A 

 careful examination of the claws of Jiolo-:<ericeiis indicates 

 that they are really appendiculate, and that the hinder pro- 

 cess, although longer than usual, is nothing but a slender 

 prolongation of the apex of the basal piece of the claw, not- 

 ably more slender than the apical piece ; whereas the corre- 

 sponding process in a claw which I account bifid is (I think 

 in every species whose claws could possibly be confused with 

 those of holosericeifif and a few others with like claws) a 

 compressed more or less triangular tooth which from the 

 right point of view ('..c, with its compressed face opposite 

 the observer) is seen to be at least as wide and stout as the 

 apical process. 



//. Coatesi, Blackb The above comments on H. holo- 

 se7-iceiis apply also to this species. 



H. sevenis, Blackb. The claws of this species are of the 

 same kind as those of H. /lolosericeus, although the hinder 

 process is perhaps scarcely long enough to be likely to cause 

 any doubt of the claws being appendiculate. 



H. relictus, Blackb. The claws of this species ai'e not 

 qiiite simply appendiculate, the apical piece being smaller 

 than usual and the long basal piece being distinctly produ.ced 

 at its inner apex, so that from a point of view making the 

 apical piece appear foreshortened the claw has a bifid appear- 

 ance : but looked at so that the outline of the compressed 

 face of the claw is wholly opposite the observer, the apical 

 piece is seen to be much longer than the projection at the 

 inner apex of the basal piece. 



Among the species that I have placed in this group I 

 do not think there is any whose claws could be regarded as 

 other than bifid. In a few of them the hinder process of 

 the claw is situated exceptionally far back on the claw, but 

 in these species this hinder process is so evidently of well- 

 defined compressed triangular form that it does not seem 

 capable of suggesting any difficulty. 



In dealing with this the first large group of liettr- 

 ovyces it seems desirable to remark on the fact that I am 

 somewhat at a disadvantage (in having written an earlier 

 series of papers, founded on a much smaller number of spe- 

 cies, before the enormous extent of the genus had become 

 apparent), insomuch as species that came near to each other 

 in my former paper are now in many instances separated by 

 a considerable number of subsequently discovered interme- 

 diate species requiring a more scrupulously exact description 

 of sculpture, etc., and also involving a readjustment of 

 classification, an investigation and use of characters that did 



