[ 53 ] 
Male. —There is considerable variation in different specimens, especially 
.s to the amount of banding on the legs and the ornamentation of the 
alpi. In one specimen, the palpi are scaled as follows : ultimate joint 
ark purple with coppery and bronzy reflections; penultimate joint 
ark purple with a long patch of bright peacock-blue beneath and a 
pot of peacock-blue on the inner side of the apex and a row of 
}ng black spines on the outer side and short ones on the inner side ; 
ntepenultimate joint, silvery-white at the base above, then dark purple then 
zure-blue, while beneath it is dark purple for the basal two-third creamy- 
ellow beyond ; the basal joint is almost entirely white above, dark purple 
eneath. The peacock-blue scales in some direction appear brilliant 
lauve or rose-purple. In fact the changes of colour defy description. The 
horax is bright coppery with a median bronze-green stripe and broad azure- 
ilue margins. The basal joint of antenna is black, but instead of being 
ensely clad with silvery spatulate scales as in the female it has a thick 
omentum of silvery down which makes it appear brilliant glistening white; 
econd joint heavily scaled with metallic scales coppery-green, apple-green, 
.ark brown, peacock-blue, all of which colours can be seen, remaining 
oints brown with dense rich olive-brown plumes. The legs for the most 
>art rich royal-purple, but the thighs are scaled with numerous pale apple- 
;reen, coppery, and golden-green scales ; at the knees is a spot of scales 
vhich changes colour from snowy-white to peacock-blue or pale golden-green; 
inder sides of thighs golden ; on the metatarsus and first tarsal joints of 
nid legs there is a partial band which does not show on the upper surface, 
t is snowy-white, pale-green or peacock-blue, according to direction of light; 
find legs have a better marked similar band on tarsal joint. Fore and mid 
ingues unequal, larger toothed. 
Remarks. — Mr. Theobald, to whom a specimen of this mosquito was 
ent, suggests that it is probably Megarhimis Immisericor first described by 
vValker and in his recently published Yol. III. he has placed M. Immisericor 
n the genus Toxorhynchites. He does not seem to have described the 
emale. If this is M. Immisericor , I am at a loss to understand how it can 
)e placed in the genus Toxorhynchites as the palpi are distinctly five-jointed. 
\s mentioned in the remarks on the generic characters I do not think the 
separation of Toxorhynchites from Megarhinus is based merely on the palpi 
hough this is the only character given by Theobald, but even on that 
ground alone this mosquito would be excluded. It now comes in Teromyia. 
Some specimens sent me by Dr. Finlayson from Singapore bred 
rom larvae found in pitcher plants varying somewhat from the type 
lescribed are probably only this mosquito. The mesonotum is clad with 
scales of a peculiar shade. It is a dead colour and old-bronze would 
3est describe it. One specimen shews a peculiarity, on one side is an 
rregular patch which under a lens looked as though it was a denuded 
Portion, but under higher powers it is found to be covered with dark 
Durple-black scales. The males also differ in the scaling of the first 
ibdominal segment, for in the type apple and golden-green is the colour 
ff the scales here, but in the Singapore specimens the segment is clad 
vvith deep blue scales in the middle and bright golden-yellow scales on 
fither side and the lateral abdominal spots are deep yellow and not 
f 
