It will, I think, be already known to every student of exotic Coleoptera that Mr. James Thomson has parted with his beautiful collection and that it is now in the possession of Mr. René Oberthür, who in the last years increased his original collection with that of de Chaudoir, Thorey, Wehncke, van Lansberge, von Harold, de Bonvouloir, Gehin a.o. Being now about to arrange his Cerambycidae Mr. Oberthür wrote me that the species identified by me as Pachyteria voluptuosa Thoms, bears in Thomson’s collection the name of Pachyteria fasciata Fabr., whilst on the other hand a specimen of the species that I believe to be the fasciata of Fabricius is indicated in the same collection as the type of Pachyteria voluptuosa Thoms. In the meantime Mr. Oberthür most obligingly communicated to me, besides some other very interesting Cerambycini, the type-specimen of Thomson’s Pachyteria voluptuosa , as well as two specimens regarded by Thomson as belonging to Pachyteria fasciata Fabr. A comparison of the specimen of Pachyteria voluptuosa above referred to with Thomson’s short description of this species on p. 568 of the »Systema Cerambycidarum” fully convinced me of the fact that I had the type-specimen before me, but at the same time I feeled sure of its identity with Pachyteria fasciata Fabr., from which identity results that Thomson had been mistaken in the identification of the true Fabrician species, regarding an undescribed species as such. Nevertheless I wrote to Mr. Gahan of the British Museum asking him to inform me whether Pachyteria fasciata Fabr. is represented in the Banksian collection or not ¹), calling moreover his attention upon the most striking distinctive characteristics between the species which I believed to be the true fasciata Fabr. and the one which was regarded as such by Thomson. In answer to these inquiries Mr. Gahan kindly gave me the following results of his observations on Pachyteria fasciata Fabr.: » You had no doubt correctly determined this species, and it is not the one so named in Thomson’s collection. I cannot affirm that the type of P. fasciata Fab. is in the British Museum collection, but there are two specimens bearing that name in the collection of Banks: there can be no doubt that these are correctly named, and it is not improbable that they may have served as the types. Thomson’s fasciata is, I dare say, identical with the Pachyteria fasciata of Dejean’s collection — a species for which I had suggested the name of P. Dejeani.”