CARABID/E 27 



acteristic of sculpture was considered by him. Again, without any 

 kind of justification, he has relegated to inferior rank compositus, 

 por catus and insularis Csy., on pure assumption; his views in regard 

 to these four species are certainly erroneous. The finely reflexed, 

 completely non-metallic elytral margins and the general facies of 

 porcatus are more nearly as in the obliquus series, although the 

 supra-orbital seta shows that it must be associated with dissolutus. 

 Dissolutus, it seems, was not represented in my collection when I 

 drew up my revision of Brennus, but I have since received a speci- 

 men taken by Dr. Blaisdell at Mokelumne Hill, Calaveras Co.; 

 it is closely allied to interruptus; the elytra are more shining and 

 the elytral margins moderately metallic and more broadly reflexed 

 than in porcatus; the female of the latter is also now at hand, from 

 the same source as the male type; I had confused it with the female 

 of opacicollis, they are mutually so very similar. The forms 

 allied to interruptus and dissolutus are in a condition of decided 

 incertitude and confusion. The author has given very little 

 attention to points that must be of considerable taxonomic value, 

 such as the number of elytral striae, metallic or non-metallic elytral 

 margins and structure of the anterior male tarsi and his separation 

 of the oreophilus section because of a feeble incurvature of the 

 thoracic base, is a rather weak feature; this feeble sinuosity exists 

 also in productus described below. 



In regard to my previous work in this genus, which is so severely 

 condemned by Dn Roeschke,* I have only to say that conditions 

 were such at that time that I could not consult all the original 

 literature and had to rely upon the identifications of my prede- 

 cessors, so far as possible. It is for this reason that I failed to 



* The generally undisguised animus toward me and my work, exhibited by Dr. Hans 

 Roeschke in the course of his Monograph on the Cychrini, is quite unaccountable, 

 for such a personal attitude was entirely unnecessary in a critical review. The intima- 

 tion made on page 102, with the most amusing naivete, that my "Arten" have in 

 every instance proven to be spurious or to be masquerading under false pretenses, 

 will be in considerable part controverted under more reasonable and unbiased com- 

 parative study from the types. It would have been at least in better taste had the 

 author given the benefit of the doubt to his fellow worker, in those cases where he could 

 not be sure, because of lack of authentic material. As a matter of fact neither Dr. 

 Roeschke nor his active helper in this country, Dr. Van Dyke, has ever written me a 

 line concerning my collection or has ever had so much as a glimpse of any of my types 

 or evinced any desire whatever to see them. His work contains many errors of identi- 

 fication, which I hope it may be my pleasure to demonstrate to him eventually. 



