Report of the State Batomologist 259 



Horn, and Dr. Joseph Leidy, in behalf of the Committee appointed 

 by the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, Oct. 10th, 1876, 

 " to investigate and report upon the introduction of new species of 

 insects and plants through the medium of foreign exhibits at the 

 Centennial Exhibition" — among twenty-eight species of insects men- 

 tioned (no less than eight are species of Bruchus — four undeter- 

 mined), 5ruc/a<s o6.s'ofe<«s is named as found "in beans from various 

 countries of both continents." As this bean-weevil had been gener- 

 ally accepted as a native species, it would have been of interest if the 

 several countries in whose exhibits it was discovered had been speci- 

 fied, so that some intelligent opinion could have been formed as to 

 whether it was native to any of those countries, or had, through com- 

 merce, been carried thither from our shores. 



Dr. Hamilton (loc. cit.), in referring to this Report, says : "It was 

 found in beans from various European countries in the Centennial 

 Building at Philadelphia, but I have not observed the name on any 

 European catalogue." 



In Prof. Riley's Report on the " Centennial Insects," published in the 

 Transactions of the St. Louis Academy of Science, the occurrence of B. 

 ohsoletus in beans from Jamaica, West Indies, is mentioned. 



Just as this Report is about to be submitted for publication, hap- 

 pening to refer to the description by Mr. O. E. Janson, of the "South- 

 African Bean-seed Beetle," which had been submitted to him by Miss 

 Ormerod, and which he had identified, xoith doubt, as B. suharmatus 

 Gyll. (see "Notes and Descriptions of a few Injurious Farm and Fruit 

 Insects of South Africa," by Eleanor A. Ormerod, London, 1889, 116 

 pp.), I am struck with the close agreement of the description of the 

 South African insect with that given by Dr. Horn, of B. ohsoletus. In 

 arranging the two in parallel columns eue?'?/ item in that of " ? suharmatus " 

 agrees exactly with the corresponding one of ohsoletus, except in 

 thoracic punctures, which in the former are given as close and in 

 the latter sparse; also, the sizes assigned are 4 mm, as against 2.5 to 

 3.5 mm. 



Examples of ohsoletus will be sent to Miss Ormerod for comparison 

 with "? suharmatus." 



That the two will prove identical seems the more probable from the 

 extended distribution assigned to B. ohsoletus by M. A. Fauvel, in 

 accordance with the synonymy of the species {B. ohtectus given priority) 

 recent!}' given by him (in loc. cit.), and which has just been brought to 

 my notice through Dr. Hamilton, viz.: 



" Central and South America, Madeira, Canaries, Azores, Mediterra- 



