78 



insect is always found under stones, and never flies off when 

 discovered, like Oicindela. The external resemblance to that 

 genus is remarkable, and yet they differ wholly in habits. 

 I have also received a Pamnachus from Newbern, marked 

 1001 in my catalogue. It is very doubtful whether it be 

 Mr. Say's P. subsulcatus. This is fully as large as P. depressus^ 

 which is described as beino; verv much larger. The lines on 

 the elytra cannot be said to be obsolete; they are nearly sul- 

 cated. 



Have you the $ and 9 of Trlcliius canalicidatus taken in 

 the act of copulation ? It is not rare here, and does not differ 

 much from the specimens you have sent me, except that it 

 varies much in size. But what puzzles me about that species 

 is, that young Andrews and I have each found a specimen 

 apparently of that species, having a tail or ovipositor like that 

 of the 9 of T. hemii^terus of Europe, to which, by the by, it is 

 closely related. Is it possible that these are the only females 

 among so many males that I have caught ? or is it a distinct 

 species ? But I cannot see any other difference between the 

 one I have and all the others. Did I ever send you my 373 ? 

 It is the only insect in my collection to which I can affix the 

 name of Blajjs. Have you any insect of that genus ? I can- 

 not find that mine is described anywhere. 



I have, this season, collected a great number of Melolontha 

 polyphaga Melsh. (I think this name is the best.) 



I am just beginning to study Hymenoptera in earnest. Do 

 tell me how you find out the sexes, when there are no external 

 differences, as in wasps and bees. Jurine mentions one being 

 able, in that case, to find them in sexual connection ; but it is 

 an actual fact that I do not recollect seeing a hyraenopterous 

 insect in that situation once in my life. 



