43 
the median fascia becoming more or less wider than in the type. 
These last-named examples agree with the description of 
tasmanica in having the elytra "dark violaceous with three pale 
asciæ. I have specimens of the above forms taken in company 
Sen promiscuously, from Tasmania as well as S. Australia, 
Vietoria, and Southern N.S. Wales. Whether this insect is 
identical with S. Mitehelli, Hope, appears to me very doubtful 
in spite of Mr. Saunders’ assertion of its identity, for-he says that 
Mitchelli has elytra unarmed at the apex (which is not the case 
with the present ju and Hope mentions a fovea on the 
pronotum near the hind angle which is not to be found in the 
present insect. The bh of S. Mitehelli was from W. Australia, 
and I have not seen S. Stricklandi or anything like it from that 
colony. S. Stricklandi may be distinguished from all the other 
hitherto fide ii^ Stigmodere as follows: apex of elytra truncate 
and feebly bi-acute, prothorax dark with lateral margins pale, 
under surface dark (except sides of prothorax and of abdomen 
and sometimes a spot on the hind coxze), elytra having transverse 
zones of dark and pale colouring (more than two zones pale, the 
78 NK ME Thoms. This insect is very near Stricklandi, 
but is a good species, differing by, inter alia, its strongly costate 
elytral interstices and stro ong sutural spine at the apex of its 
elytra, as well as in the colouring of its prothorax. T have a fine 
example of it in my collection, but do not know its exact habitat, 
which seems to have been unknown to M. Meque also ; there 
is an example also in the S.A. Museum marked * W.A.? 
S. Karatte, Blackb. In Tr. Roy. Soc., S.A., 1890, pp. 149-50, 
I pointed out the distinctions of this species from S. Stricklandi 
(which I called §. Mitchelli on Saunders’ authority, though 
now doubt the identity.) If S. Mitchelli be distinct from 5S. 
Stricklandi, Karatte is still distinct from Mitchelli, being very 
differently marked and coloured from the type and (even i 
Mitchelli prove to be variable in colour and markings) differing 
also, inter alia, in the absence of a fovea near the hind angles of 
the pronotum ! 
rugosipennis, Thoms., Arch. Ent., 1857, p. 111. This seems 
to be cle early a synoym of S. obscuripennis, Mann. Bull. Mosc., 
1837, p. 32. I believe this synonymy has hitherto escaped | 
Bess 
. Carpentarie, Blackb. This seems to be the insect referred 
to by Mr. Waterhouse (Ann. Nat. Hist. (s) VII.] as a local form 
