1874.] 229 



Note on Ilarpalus lideicornis, Viifls. — I have recently had an opportunity of 

 carefully examining the supposed individual of this species recorded at p. 75 of vol. i 

 of this ^lagazine, as having been taken near Lowestoft, in June, 1861, by Mr. E. 

 Saunders, and which is a very small and immature female example of H. tardus. 

 As this is the only British representative of II. luteicornis that has come under my 

 notice since I could distinguish a Ilarpalus from a Pierostichus, I have been induced 

 to examine the claims of tlie species to a place on our list, and I find that all the 

 evidence adduced by Dawson (Geod. Brit. p. 143) in introducing it is : 1st, that an 

 individual in the Stephensian collection, standing incorrectly under the name servus, 

 " appears to correspond " with luteicornis ; 2ndly, that " there are two other ex- 

 " amples in Mr. Curtis's cabinet, and two or three in the National collection, which 

 " will likewise, I believe, be found to accord with it, besides the examples wliich may 

 "exist in private collections;" and, 3rdly, apparently as a deduction from these 

 dubious premises, that " the insect is found very sparingly in sandy districts in the 

 " south." I have just examined the pseudo-seryws of Stephens, above mentioned, 

 which is almost certainly a little example of H. latiis, and is positively (if only from 

 the posterior angles of its thorax being distinctly obtuse, as in latusj not luteicornis. 

 Curtis's examples are in Australia, and are referred to with such a want of certainty 

 that they could not be relied on. There are no representatives of S. luteicornis in 

 the (British) National collection ; and the examples which " mai/ exist " in private 

 collections cannot of course be reckoned. My own impression is that Dawson did 

 not know the species, as he does not make the least mention of its close affinity with 

 S. latus, from which he separates it by four other species (including atricornis, 

 which is an Anisodactylus !) ; and, so far from its being likely to be found "in sandy 

 " districts in the south," it would, from the localities given by Erichson, Heer, and 

 others, seem to be a dweller in mountainous regions, like its other (recently added) 

 ally, IT. quadripuiictatus. 



The entire description of H. luteicornis given by Schaum is a comparison with 

 latus, which he states it to resemble inordinately, being, however, always considerably 

 smaller, with the hinder angles of the thorax perfectly rectangular, the points of the 

 angles not being blunted, the base of the thorax more slightly punctured, often 

 wholly impunctate in the middle, and the antennae and legs still lighter in colour. 

 Besides these characters, its thorax seems to be somewhat longer. 



From the range of the species on the continent, there seems every reason to 

 expect that it should occur in this country ; but I do not think it has as yet been 

 recorded correctly as British. I observe that Mr. Crotch omitted it from the 1st 

 edition of his Catalogue, but he restored it in the 2nd edition of that work. His 

 supposed exponents of it, judging by a typo from his collection now in that of Mr. 

 O. Janson, and which I have just seen, were H. latus. — E. C. Rye, Parkfield, 

 Putney, S.W. : Fehruary, 1874. 



Note on Bostrichus Bulmerincqii, Kolen. — The description and figure of this 

 insect given by Kolenati in liis " Meletemata Entomologica," fasc. iii (1846), p. 39, 

 pi. xiv, fig. 12, seem to accord well enough with the long subsequently described 

 Dryoecetes alni of Georg (1856), with which my Marshami has been identified by 

 Ilerr Eichhoff. Kolenati's species was, like Marshami, found in beech, in Iberia 

 (Central Georgia, not Spain), and the Caucasus ; it is deocribed as being most like 



