580 Mo/iograph of the 



Bosc is probably the First one who sjicaks of any spe- 

 cies of Callhicctes. Unfortunately, however, he speaks of 

 it under the name of Cancer haslntus Fal)r., (which is 

 probably the Achelous spinimanus Stm.) and translates 

 Fabricius' description of that species into French, instead 

 of describing his own specimens. I think that no one can 

 doubt that Bosc really had before him specimens belonging 

 to the genus Callinectes, and probably to C. hastatus. For 

 he speaks of them as being daily used in Charleston for 

 food, and as caught in great numbers, and describes the 

 method of catching them. No other Portunid is so caught 

 and used there. 



Latreille, in the " Encyclopedic M(!thodique," was the 

 next author who described any species of Callhiectes. But 

 his description is so indefinite and confused, that I have 

 found much difficulty in unravelling it. Under the name 

 of Purtunus didcanthus, he evidently includes several spe- 

 cies, one of which was from Brazil, described by Marc- 

 grave — I cannot say to what genus this belongs. He says, 

 also, " Quelquefois, comme dans deux individus envoyes 

 de Philadelphia par M. Milbert, les quatre dents du front 

 sont rt'unies et ne forment qu'un lobe largement 6chancre." 

 Here he evidently speaks of the C. hastatus, which is the 

 only species that occurs at Philadelphia. In the preceding 

 paragraph he speaks of the carapax as being of an obscure 

 greenish anteriorly, and in his Latin diagnosis as being 

 yellowish, maculated with red, which contradiction is 

 somew^hat puzzling. We might at first be inclined to 

 reject the name diacanthus, as it seems impossible to affi^^c 

 it to any one species, except arbitrarily. But in such 

 cases as this we must always endeavor to ascertain 

 an author's intention, and I think that I have done that. 

 Under the name of Portiimis pelagicus he previously de- 

 scribes the Ncptiitms pelagicus from the East Indies, 

 remarking that it is the pelag-icus of Fabricius, but not of 



