272 September, 1915.] 



widened in front, and by its still more strongly crenate- striate elytra. 

 Long. 3.7 mill. England (Pandellej." 



In the Col. France he gives a short description, which he com- 

 mences by saying, translated : " This species, of which M. Pandelle 

 communicated to me an individual from England, has been collected 

 in fresh water, 5 kilometers from the sea, in the neighbourhood of 

 Morlaix. I owe several examples to his generosity." Then follows 

 his description. 



We gather from this that Key named his species from a single 

 British example lent to him by Pandelle ; that he returned this example, 

 and subsequently obtained others from Morlaix in the extreme west of 

 France ; that, trusting to his memory, he believed them to be the same 

 species as the British type, and made a description which now passes 

 as the authorisation of the species. I conclude that he was mistaken 

 in his memory of the British example : that his Morlaix specimens 

 were a different species, and one that has probably not yet been found 

 in England. 



I have strong reason for believing that the Pandelle specimen was 

 given to him by myself. Whether I am correct in these conclusions 

 can only be ascertained by an examination of the type in the Pandelle 

 collection, which I believe is still in existence at or near Tarbes. 



Mv result amounts to this, that H. crenahis Rey is an English 

 species, in all probability represented in my own collection, and, not 

 having been described by Eey, his name has no validity until it shall 

 have been proved that the English and Morlaix examples are of one 

 and the same species. 



Hence I have given the name ganglhaueri (postea q.v.) to a species 

 passed under the name of crenahhs by Granglbauer and Edwards. 



a"'. Flanks of elytra not visible beneath. 



8, — HelopJwrus laticollis Thoms. ? 



This is another of Thomson's species that has not been satis- 

 factorily identified. He makes one of its chief characters that the 

 presternum is carinate in front of the anterior coxae. That is not the 

 case with our laticollis, but if Thomson were mistaken as to this point, 

 as his description accords in other respects, it was probably represen- 

 tative of this species. After much hesitation I have decided that he 

 probably was mistaken, as I know of no Helophorus in which this 



