119 
from 7' bipartitus considerably in the sculpture of its pronotum 
but otherwise its structural characters seem identical, —granula- 
tion and shape of eyes, Pass and structure of antenna, structure 
of palpi, &c. Like 7. bipartitus it seems to have only four tarsal 
joints even under a strong powe er, and it is not easy to feel quite 
certain which is the missing fifth joint, but I am fairly confident 
that it is the penultimate which is abnormal, and exists only as a 
minute nodule at the base of the apical joint. I have no doubt 
that the specimen before me either is T. hilaris or is excessively 
close to it, and that 7. hilaris is a Thanasimomorpha, but what- 
ever it is, it is not a Tillus 
T. dux, Westw., is à complete enigma. I incline to the opinion 
that its author was mistaken in calling its claws appendiculate, 
in which case it might well be a large Natalis, but if he was not 
mistaken I can make no suggestion about it — in saying that 
the description, and espec cially the size, do not suggest a true 
Tillus. I am therefore of opinion that there is no true Tilus 
known in Australia. It a. seems unlikely that among all 
e Mr 
size of a Natalis, subsequently (so far as I can discover) not 
mentioned by any author, and appertaining to a different genus. 
OPILO. 
To this genus nine Australian species are attributed in Mas- 
ters' Catalogue ; in Lohde's Cat. they stand at the same number 
but are not the same insects, O. (Notoxus) ephippium, Boisd., 
and maerens, Westw ing been removed, the former Pils Tr. 
A chan nge of name also che Whitei orh., m substituted 
for apicalis, White (nom. prseocc.), a synonym that appears to 
have e escaped Mr. Masters' notice. 
Concerning the species referred to Opilo in Lohde’s Catalogue 
I offer the following notes 
ongruus, Newm. A true Opilo ; very variable and common 
all over Australia. 
O. eburneocinctus, Gorh. Not known to me. Probably a true 
ilo. 
0. ephippiger, White. Identical with Trogodendron (Notoxus) 
ephippium, Boisd., as pointed out by me (Tr. Roy. Soc., S. m 
1891. P. 303). Herr Lohde does not appear to have observed m 
note. 
