Sp. 1. Goliathus. Now the type of the genus Goliathus: it is named Drurii by Mr. Westwood. For the genera belonging to this important group the reader is referred to the 'Illustrations of the Annulosa of South Africa,' lately published by Mr. W. S. MacLeay, and to my observations in the 'Coleopterist's Manual.'

Sp. 2. Cacicus. Now a Goliathus of Lamarck. Olivier, with his usual inaccuracy with regard to country, makes

this species an inhabitant of South America; it comes from the Old World,-from Guinea.

Sp. 4. micans. Now a Dicronorhina of Hope. Mr. Strachan has brought to England with him a new species of this genus from the vicinity of Sierra Leone. It most probably will appear in an early number of the Entomological Transactions' of London." Sp. 6. nigrita. Olivier states his belief that this insect is only a variety of Macronota Chinensis; Col. Whithill obtained it from the Concan, and from an examination of the specimen in the British Museum I consider it as a distinct species.

Sp. 7. corticina. This is still a Cetonia, and is the Cet. purpurascens of Fabricius.

Sp. 9. bimaculata. This insect is not a Gnathocera, but a Coryphe of Gory; the specific name of flavomaculata Fab., should take precedence of bimaculata.

Sp. 10. guttata. Olivier describes this species as inhabiting
South America. I have received it from Sierra Leone.
Sp. 11. aulica. Still a Cetonia. It appears, however, to
afford ample characters for a sub-genus.

Sp. 13. marmorea. This is now a Gymnetis, MacLeay. Mr. Kirby has suggested the adoption of another genus, named by him Marmorina, to which this species with several others ought to be attached.

Sp. 16. carnifex. Olivier's locality for this species is South America; it inhabits the Cape of Good Hope, and belongs to the genus Diplognatha.

Sp. 17. fuliginea. This is now an Oplostomus of MacLeay. For the details consult his 'Illustrations of the Zoology of South Africa,' lately published. Olivier gives no locality; I have received it from the banks of the Gambia, and Mr. MacLeay from the Cape.

Sp. 23. elongata. Now a Cyclidius of MacLeay, of which this species is the type. Cetonia axillaris, Dupont, belongs to the same genus. Olivier does not mention the country from which he received it: Mr. MacLeay and Mons. Gory give it as a South American insect. Sp. 31. quadrimaculata. A Dicronorhina, Mihi. The original specimen from which Fabricius and Olivier described the above insect is now in my possession, and I consider it as the female of Goliathus Daphnis of Buquet; Mr. MacLeay however, regards it as distinct.

The insect alluded to at Cetonia 4, appears to be one of the Goliatida, and is the male of Cet. torquata, Fab.; in its characters it seems mediate between Mecynorhina and Dicronorhina.

Sp. 33. Iris. This species is not mentioned in Percheron's and Gory's Cetoniida; according to Mr. Kirby it belongs to his genus Chlorocala, and is the typical species. Sp. 35. fulgida. No locality is stated by Olivier; it is well known however to be a North American insect.

Sp. 36. quinquelineata. Two species have been described with the above name, both of them I believe are from the East Indies.

Sp. 38. herbacea. This insect is not noticed in Percheron's and Gory's Monograph; it is apparently allied to Macraspis Sp. 44. crucifera. Now a Diplognatha. This insect was called by Fabricius, Cet. atromaculata, and is properly preferred by Gory to the former name. I have repeatedly received it from Poona and Bombay. Sp. 46. Inda. The locality of the East Indies is given by Olivier; it appears peculiar to North America.

Sp. 47. cyanea. According to Gory this is a Schizorhina; the clypeus is bifid certainly, but it deviates however from the type of the genus, and should be separated from Schizorhina, as well as other Asiatic species. Its true locality is Java.

Sp. 49. aurichalcea. This as well as other species recorded by Olivier, are omitted in the 'Monographie des Cetoines.' Sp. 51. stolata. Olivier mentions New Holland and Senegal as the localities of the above insect; with respect to the former he is in error, it may however occur in Senegal, as I have received it from Sierra Leone. Sp 55. cærulea. Fabricius originally named this insect quadrimaculata: there are several oriental species closely allied to it. They ought to be formed into a sub-genus allied to Gymnetis. The Asiatic Gymnetidæ require further sub-division.

Sp. 62. irregularis. Olivier does not mention the locality of this species; it is evidently a Mexican insect.

Sp. 63. hirta. This insect was originally called Scarabæus hirtellus by Linnæus; the Sc. squalidus of the same author, is only a spotless variety of the above.

Sp. 70. pulverulenta. As Olivier does not state the country from which this insect was received he was probably unacquainted with it. The Brazils abound with them. Sp. 76. viridula. Olivier gives a wrong locality to this insect, viz. the East Indies; it occurs only in Northern America. Sp. 79. Delta. Now an Archimedius of Kirby, one of the Trichiide. For an account of the natural groups into which this genus may be resolved, the reader should consult the third volume of the 'Zoological Journal,' p. 136,

where there is an excellent paper by my friend Mr. Kirby. Sp. 85. ignita. This is most likely a Chrysophora; if not it is a Pelidnota of MacLeay.

Sp. 86. glabrata. Olivier gives his opinion that this is an East Indian insect; I believe it to belong to South America and to be one of the Rutelidæ.

Sp. 88. emerita. Most likely a true Chrysophora. Sp. 91. smaragdula. Now a Macraspis of MacLeay. Mr. Westwood in the new edition of Drury considers this insect as a Chasmodia. As no mention in the description is made respecting a divided clypeus, a peculiarity of Chasmodia, I consider it a Macraspis.

Sp. 92. quadrivittata. The name of fucata, Fab., should be used instead of the above. The Scarabæus cinctus of

Drury, is the same insect. Sp. 97. brunnipes. Now a Chasmodia of MacLeay. It is probable that Chasm. castanea De Jean, is only an immature variety of this species. Olivier gives no locality; it abounds in the Brazils.

Sp. 98. lineola. Now a Rutela. This insect is subject to vary considerably, several of the varieties are considered as species. Sc. Hesperus of Drury is one of them. Sp. 101. quadripunctata. Certainly a Popillia of Leach. Sp. 107. strigosa. This species is apparently unknown to M.M.-Percheron and Gory, as it is omitted in their monograph; so also is the following species of Olivier, named Undata.

Sp. 109. picta. This is a true Gymnetis. A specimen is in my collection, others I have seen which vary much in the yellow markings.

Sp. 110. maculosa. The name of Gracula used by Fabricius should take the place of maculosa, on the ground of priority.

Sp. 111. liturata. Now a Gymnetis. As Olivier has omitted it, I give the Brazils as its true locality.

Sp. 112. cincta. This is now a Rhomborhina of my 'Manual.' Cet. Tania of Palisot Beauvois, is the same insect. Sp. 113. marginella. A Cetonia of authors. Three species in the European Cabinets are confounded together under the above name; they certainly cannot be considered as mere varieties, their form and proportions being very diffe

rent.

Sp. 117. velutina. Now a Polybaphes of Kirby. The name of velutina must be changed: the following are the synonyms of the species.