88 PROCEEDINGS OF THE ACADEMY OF [March, 



Payne County; VIII, 13, 1901; (N. Caudell); 1 9 ; [U. S. N. M.]. 

 Waurika, Jefferson County; X, 14, 1909; (F. C. Bishopp) ; 1 c^ ; 

 [U. S. N. M.]. 



Kansas: Independence, Montgomery County; VIII to IX, 

 1902; (A. Birchfield); 1 9 ; [U. S. N. M.]. 



Missouri: Hollister, Taney County; VIII, 1909 and 1913; 

 (M. P. Somes); 1 d', 1 9 ; [Somes Cln.]. 



Rehn and Hebard have recorded the species from the following 

 localities: Fayetteville, New Berne, Southern Pines, Wilmington, 

 Winter Park, Wrightsville and Lake Waccamaw, North Carolina; 

 Columbia, Ashley Junction and Yemmassee, South Carolina; 

 Toccoa, Augusta, Macon, Jesup, Billy's Island, Albany, Bain- 

 bridge and Spring Creek, Georgia; Jacksonville, Pablo Beach, 

 San Pablo, Gainesville, Cedar Keys, and Titusville, Florida. 



Merxniria intertexta Scudder. Plate VI, figs. 5-14. 



1897. Mermiria hiviUata McNeill (in part), Proc. Davenp. Acad. Nat. Sci., 



vi, ]3p. 204, 205. [Apparently the single Virginia record applies to this 



species.] 

 1899. Mermiria intertexta Scudder, Proc. Amer. iVcad. Arts and Sci., 



XXXV, pp. 41, 42. [cf, 9 : Georgia; Eagle Pass, Texas.] 

 1904. Mermiria intertexta Bruner, Biol. Cent. -Amer., Orth., ii, p. 39. 



[Eagle Pass, Texas.] 



This striking species occupies a rather intermediate position 

 between the two types of the genus, having appreciable, though 

 not strongly marked, lateral carinas on the dorsum of the pro- 

 notum, yet lacking supplementary carinae on the lateral lobes of 

 the pronotum. The form is very elongate, with the pronotum 

 unusually elongate, yet regularly, though weakly, enlarging caudad. 

 The species is entirely hygrophilous, and as far as known, found 

 only on the eastern and Floridian coasts. 



Tijpe. — cf; Georgia. (Morrison.) [Scudder Collection.] Allo- 

 type. — 9 ; same data. 



The species was based on two males and two females from 

 Georgia and Eagle Pass, Texas (Schott), all in the Scudder Col- 

 lection. Of these we have examined two males and one female 

 from the former locality." 



The present species, like M. texana, is so sharply defined from 

 the other forms of the genus that, with the basic differential fea- 



" We have not had an opportunity recently to examine the single female 

 recorded from Eagle Pass, Texas. There is every reason to suppose it belongs 

 to M. tnaculipennis macidipennis, and has nothing to do with the present species, 

 which, in habitat, is absolutely foreign to that locality. The specimen recorded 

 by Caudell (Mus. Brooklyn Inst. Arts and Sci., Sci. Bull., i, p. 110, (1904)) 

 from the Brownsville region, Texas, as this species, is now before us, and, as 

 we had suspected, represents M. maculipennis maculipemiis. 



