138 THE CANADIAN ENTOMOLOGIST. 



Dear Sir, — 



As long ago as August 13th, 1829, Hentz, writing to Harris, notices 

 the fact that Megacephala (Teiracha) Virginica and Carolina, although 

 externally like Cicindelce, have the habits of the Carabidce. May I ask if 

 any good reason can be assigned why this genus should not be placed after 

 Cicindela and not before it, thus bringing it into closer proximity to the 

 family to which it seems to be most closely allied ? See Harris cor., p. 

 77 and 78. W. V. Andrews. 



New York, March 29th, 1875. 



Dear Sir, — 



I venture to suggest an improvement in Mr. Chase's " Cyanide Box," 

 as described in your May No. 



For reasons obvious enough to the chemist, the plan of dissolving the 



Cyanide of Potassium in water is not so good as that of pounding it and 



intimately mixing it with the Plaster of Paris, the water being unable to 



take up but a comparatively small quantity of the Cyanide. On page 208 



of your fifth volume I gave a good recipe for making a collecting box. 



W. V. Andrews. 

 36, Boerum Place, Brooklyn, N. Y., June 21st, 1875. 



Dear Sir, — 



In number 1 2 of Mr. Strecker's work, it is claimed that his number 1 1 

 was printed in "August, 1874." I have before drawn attention to the 

 fact that I can find no record of the issue of any number of this part 

 before November. The point is raised on account of the publication by 

 myself of three species of Catocala in the Trans. Am. Ent. Soc. for 

 September, 1874, claimed to be superseded by Mr. Strecker's notice of 

 the same species in " August." I am of the opinion that a work 

 published privately and irregularly by an author should not take pre- 

 cedence over one published by a Scientific Society, on testimony 

 consisting of the mere assertion of the interested author. It is possible 

 that persons who live nearer Reading than I do may be in possession of 

 facts which will show that none of Mr. Strecker's dates are reliable. For 

 myself I think they are not accurate from a variety of circumstantial 

 evidence. In one case a species is described under a date apparently 

 before it could have been received by Mr. Strecker. I should have been 

 glad to have noticed that Mr. Strecker had added his synonyms of C. 

 illecia Walk. ( = C. magdalena Strecker) and C. nuptialis Walk ( = C. 

 myrrha Strecker) to his other corrections. 



