— 2o8— 



AMBLYCHILA, Say. 



Dokhtouroff correctly places Picolomitiii as a synonym of cylindri- 

 formis but our French confreres seem unwilling toadmit this and indulge 

 themselves in the belief that they possess the unique type of a distinct 

 species. The type has been examined by Dr. LeConte, and on two oc- 

 casions at an interval of eight years I have done the same and find no 

 reason for changing the views already published by us. It is quite cer- 

 tain that Dr. LeConte and myself have seen more specimens and from 

 more widely separated localities than Mr. Fleutiaux will probably ever 

 see. so that the question being one of opinion, the entomological public 

 may judge which has the greater weight. 



The Amblychila in question was collected by Picolomini quite fifty 

 years ago with other species many of which came into possession of Du- 

 pont who disposed of them to friends who described them. The species 

 were all credited to California and for a long time gave us great trouble 

 in their identification. Among those who purchased from Dupont were 

 Chaudoir, Spinola, La Ferte and Motschulsky and the species described 

 have in every instance been recognized as Texan or from the adjacent 

 States of Mexico. In other words Picolomini was not in what is now- 

 known as California. 



As for the characters separating the Picolomini specimen very little 

 can be said except that it is smoother and blacker than the specimens 

 from Kansas. Unfortunately the French authors know specimens of 

 Amblychila from the two most remote regions of its habitat and speci- 

 mens from Arizona and New Mexico in the cabinets of Dr LeConte and 

 Mr. Ulke are exactly intermediate. 



While we can not prevent our friends in France from cataloguing 

 two species we can at least enter our protest against the acceptance of 

 their opinion by others. 



Here is the proper place to call attention to the spelling of Picolo- 

 mini's name by Reiche with one "c'\ 



DROMOCHORUS, Guer. 



This genus seems to be recognized as valid by Dokhtouroff and 

 Fleutiaux and is placed between Omus and Tetracha. A genus to be 

 valid should have characters of its own, but there is nothing that has been 

 seen by Dr. LeConte or myself to separate Dromochorus from Cicindela, 



M. Fleutiaux makes the following remark: 



"Cependant M. Horn dit quelque part que les differences sexuelles 

 ne sont pas les memos que dans le genre Cincindela, en dehors des tarsus 



