RARE OR DOUBTFUL BRITISH COLEOPTERA. 291 



Waterhouse informs us there is no doubt about this, and that they 

 were undoubtedly taken by his father, although the locality is not at 

 present known. As regards this species, the extreme danger of taking 

 up such a line of argunaent as that adopted by Mr. Newbery is strik- 

 ingly shown by the fact that in the October number of the Ent. Mo. 

 Mag., p. 2B7, Dr. Joy records the capture of nine specimens of Bledius 

 femoraiis, at Wokingham, the identification being confirmed by Canon 

 Fowler. Such a record as this is a complete justification of the policy 

 we adopted in regard to these very rare beetles. (Kvi/telns picctis, L., 

 was taken by several persons, and the late Mr. Rye gave its characters, 

 see the 7?»i. Annual for 1863, p. 86 ; here again it was impossible 

 for us to reject the insect. Scraptia dubia, 01., the original record 

 is again quite authentic, and although a long interval has elapsed 

 without a recapture, we fail to see why it should be struck out 

 of the catalogue. As regards EIriptchitcs bacckus, L., we have records 

 of undoubted captures, one having been seen alive by Mr. Douglas, 

 whilst PJujnclntes aiiratiis, Scop., rests on an equally trustworthy 

 record : possibly, like Flhantus adspertms, they are now extinct, but 

 there is no reason why, even if that is the case, they should be deleted 

 from the catalogue. OtiorJnjnchus' niorio, F., var. ebeninus, Sch., the 

 capture of this variety by Mr. Greville in the Avest of Scotland is 

 recorded in Murray's Catalogue <if the Coleoptera of Scotland, published 

 in 1858, and, as Mr. Newbery states, there is a sj)ecimen in the Power 

 ■collection ; why, therefore, should we consider this to be a doubtful 

 record ? Poli/drnsiis planifvons, Gyll., there is a specimen of this 

 insect in the Bates' collection, it came originally from the collection of 

 Mr, Harris, the Bates' collection being now in the possession 

 of one of us ; moreover. Dr. Ellis' record is, as far as we know, 

 quite authentic, and the beetle is given in the " Liverpool List," p. 69. 

 Tapinotus sellatiis, F., there is a specimen of this insect in the Power 

 collection, with the dates and all the other necessary records of its 

 capture, and, therefore, here again there is no reason for assuming that 

 the insect is not British. Hypnthencinu^ enuiitiis, West., we see no 

 reason to suppose that this is an introduced insect, as the only country 

 in which it has occurred is England ; the mere capture of it in a book 

 does not in the least prove that it was introduced from abroad, and in 

 the "European Catalogue" the locality given is "Britain' only; 

 further, we would point out that it has been taken since Westwood's 

 time by Mr. 0. Janson. 



With reference to Class iii, those which are inserted upon the 

 authority of a single specimen, we do not propose to go in detail 

 through the list given by Mr. Newbery. No doubt many of them do 

 rest in our catalogue on the authority of a single specimen, but many 

 of those he quotes have been taken for the first time only within the 

 last yeai- or two, and there is no reason to suppose they will not occur 

 more commonly when the localities in which the single specimens have 

 been taken are more thoroughly worked ; certain of them are very rare 

 on the continent, and, therefore, it is not surprising that they are very 

 rare here, but we would point out that, in one or two cases, Mr. New- 

 bery has failed to keep himself informed of recent records. (hi/j>oda 

 longipes, Muls., has been taken since the original record by Mr. Chitty, 

 see Ent. Mo. Map. for 1900, p. 237, and by Mr. J. J. Walker, see Ent. 

 Mo. Mag., 1900, p. 2-1. Medon dilittua, Er., has also been taken since 

 its first record by Mr. Collnis, see Ent. Mo. Mag., 1904, p. 14. 



