172 ON THE SPECIES OF CICINDELA AND ELAPHRUS. 



S]^. 26. quadrilineata. This species is exceedingly abun- 

 dant. I have seen Indian basket-work ornamented with 

 the elytra of this insect ; the effect was good. From the 

 account I received from my informant, the Malays and some 

 of the races which inhabit Singapore, adorn their handy- 

 works with the wings of the above insect. 



Sp. 30. octoguttata. I have thought proper to change Oli- 

 vier's locality for this insect; he records it as a species from 

 South America. Fabricius mentions North America ; Pa- 

 lisot Beauvois the Island of St. Domingo ; Schonherr, in 

 his ' Synonymia Insectorum,' gives Sierra Leone as its na- 

 tive country ; and with the latter authority I am inclined 

 to side. 



Sp. 31. trifasciata. This insect must not be confomided 

 with our European species, which is evidently distinct. 

 The trifasciata of the New World enjoys a very extended 

 range, occurring in North and South America as well as in 

 several of the West Indian isles. 



Sp. 35. minuta. This species has not fallen under my no- 

 tice ; I give it as a Cicindela on the authority of French 

 entomologists. 



Sp. 36. emarginata. Now a Drypta according to Fabricius. 

 Olivier considered Drypta as a Cicindela; according to 

 modem views the Dryptidm constitute a particular family, 

 consisting of several genera. As far as is at present known 

 respecting Drypta, it belongs to the Old World. The 

 European species are comparatively rare inland ; in Sicily 

 and Italy it is abundant under the rejectamenta maris ; in 

 England I believe it has only been found on the coast of 

 Hastings and Devonshire. In Scotland, some years back, 

 I captured it at Leith in a similar situation. Although it 

 does not appear to be known in the New World, I think it 

 not improbable that it will eventually be found there, oc- 

 curring perhaps in North as well as South America. The 

 East Indies afford several species ; those from tropical 

 Africa are worthy of notice, some in my collection are from 

 the banks of the Gambia, and others from Sierra Leone. 



JElaphrvs, Fabricius. 



The genus Elaphrus was by Linna3us regarded as a Cicin- 

 dela, Geoffroy properly considered it as belonging to Carahus 

 rather than to the former genus; he however injudiciously 

 applied to the species the name of Buprestis. Fabricius first 

 separated them from Carahus, and they now form a family by 

 themselves, according to the views of Messrs. Stephens and 



