C socius, originally described (as above referred to) by Schouherr, with the sole 
ocality " Anglia. Mus. Dom. Walton," has always been regarded with doubt as 
British, not only on account of its genus being apparently exclusively South- 
European, but because there was no reference to it in Mr. Walton's " Notes," and 
10 representative of it (apparently) in his collection (the types of which are now 
n Brit. Mus.) ; and, possibly, because, in the Stettin. Ent. Zeit., 48, p. 346, he 
itates that the origin of the specimen ceded to Schonherr was unknown to him. 
Seidlitz, I. c, 134, notices this remark of Walton, and (note) explains that by 
nistake socius is quoted in the Stett. Ent. Z. as horridus ; and from these data he 
•easonably considers the reference of socius to England as founded on error. 
3eidlitz's only locality for the species is the Sierra Nevada. 
Mistake seems to have followed C. socius hitherto in all its references; but I 
magine that the I. of Wight specimen above-mentioned will enable me to sub- 
stantiate the authenticity of the species as British. On inquiring at the Brit. Mua. 
[ am informed that Walton's single specimen was retained by Schonherr, who 
Founded the species on it. This agrees with the statement by Seidlitz, that 
Schonherr's type-example is labelled " Anglia. Walton." This type appears, 
according to Seidlitz, to be an abraded male, structurally entirely identical with 
males from the Sierra Nevada, with the exception of an evidently individual ab- 
normal formation of the rostrum ; and, according to the same author, it entirely 
igrees with Schonherr's description, with the exception of reference to this 
peculiarity, and to the structure of the scape of the antennae. 
There can be no doubt, however, that Mr. Walton possessed two specimens, 
both abraded, of this insect ; since, on the sale of his general collection, Mr. G. R. 
Waterhouse purchased, amongst other insects, one labelled (erroneously) " Cainopsis 
Waltuni," in Mr. Walton's own handwriting, which is distinctly (being a male, 
luckily) identical with my recent I. of Wight example. Some accidental confusion 
of labelling, possibly at a time when Mr. Walton was not so well acquainted with 
these insects, must have taken place, in order to account for this palpable mistake 
(the insect in no way agreeing with the well-known C. Waltoni) ; and it is evident 
from Mr. Walton's statement in the Stett. Ent. Zeit. that he knew nothing of his 
possessing this second specimen,— which, indeed, is so exceedingly bereft of scales 
and bristles as to be likely to escape attention. 
C. socius seems distinguishable from all its congeners but the Pyrensean and 
instantly separable cordicollis by the shape of the antennal grooves, which are not 
linear, but pit-like, irregular, and conspicuous from above. In the male the 
scape of the antennae is suddenly and angularly dilated close to the base, and 
curved. In a fresh example, like mine, the thorax has the sides and a middle line 
yellowish, and the elytra densely covered with scales, presenting a dull and somewhat 
tesselated appearance, the interstices being set with light bristles. The only British 
species with which it could by accident be confounded is Trachyphloeus squa.mulatus, 
from which its rather larger size, longer and less obtusely rounded elytra, &c., will 
serve to distinguish it, — apart from its evident structural differences. 
Seidlitz remarks that the granuliform, connate, somewhat shining clothing of 
the under-side of all the species of Cathormiocerus will always serve to distinguish 
them from their allies.— E. C. Rye, 7, Park Field, Putney, S.W., July, 1868. 
