79 



HENTZ TO HARRIS. 



Chapel Hill, August 24, 1829. 



I begin, as usual, with questions. Do you consider your 

 '-'■Cistela sulphicrea European, but naturalized here," as distinct 

 from Say's C. sericea ? or do you think he described an insect 

 already known ? I want also to know whether all your speci- 

 mens have an impressed spot on each side of the thorax as 

 the one you sent me. My specimens have none ; and if all 

 yours are so, we may establish two species. I have sent you 

 mine, and you returned also that name for it. My number for 

 them is 808. Your 777 [= '•'•Scirtes tibialis, Harr. mss.," 

 Harr. mss. Catal.] has neither antennae nor palpi, but I am 

 almost convinced that it cannot be an Orchesia. I have two 

 species undoubtedly belonging to that genus, one of which may 

 be the European species. The body of Orchesia is '' long and 

 narrow," the elytra are " etroites, terminees en j^ointe.y The 

 posterior tarsi arc " more than twice as long as the tibiae, the 

 first joint as long as the rest together." It is undoubtedly 

 related to the llordellones, and leaps like the insects of that 

 family. It lives in Boleti, where I have found the larva, pupa, 

 and perfect insect. In the twelfth volume of the Dictionnaire 

 classique d'histoire naturelle, there is a frill account of this 

 genus. I will send you one of my smaller species ; both seem 

 to be quite rare. They transform in midwinter. 



I cannot look upon my 648 as Say's Doryphora decemlincata^ 

 though it is evidently related. The suture is not black, the 

 interior hue is never confluent with the suture, etc. ; moreover, 

 though he calls it decemUneata, according to his description it 

 should have twelve lines, counting in the suture. Mine never 

 has but eight, though the centre of the widest band has some- 

 times a little yellow, which approaches to a division into ten. 

 What do you think ? Is that a correct description if mine is 

 his insect ? 



