89 



which when compared with T. limbatus Fabr., of Europe, sent 

 me by you, offer no differences which I can perceive. 



I believe our Cicindda denticulata is the same with C. rugi- 

 frons Dejean, I, 58. It is true the labrum in all the 9 observed 

 is blackish, but that is very often the case with the <? of C. 

 unipunctata, splendida, hirticollis (repanda Dejean) and my 

 1125 (probably C. rufiventris Dejean, which I suppose to be 

 a variety of C. licemorrlioidalis). Now he may have a speci- 

 men where the labrum has not changed its color. 



Your 582 which you labelled JBrachinus cordicollis, I num- 

 bered 112(> [= "Bracliinus cyanipennis?? Say," Hentz's MSS. 

 Catal.]. I cannot agree with you as to the specific name. The 

 third and fourth joints of antennae have no black spot as in B. 

 crepitans. The fourth at tip, and all the terminal joints are a 

 little darker than the three basal ones. The elytra are not of 

 a color "plus bleue et plus claire" but, on the contrary, are 

 darker. The postpectus and abdomen, instead of being 

 " presque noirdtre," are almost testaceous. If there is no 

 mistake in labelling, I think you will find it does not agree with 

 Dejean's description. In that case, you ought to describe it as 

 new. Is it from Massachusetts or New Hampshire ? 



HARRIS TO HENTZ. 



MILTON, Jan. 3, 1830. 



Your 220 has a close resemblance in the form of the head, 

 antennas and thorax to Telepliorus. It is remarked by Latreille 

 (Gen. Crust, et Insect.) that the mandibles of Malthinus have 

 a strong tooth within the points " mandilula intus dente uno 

 valido" ; this would justify me in placing this insect in the 

 genus Maltldnus ; but I submit to your better judgment. May 

 not Cantharis abbreviate and brevipennis belong to the same 

 genus as this insect ? 



