190 



HarpaJus Deyrollel, Cast. I have identified this species with 

 -some certainty, having taken it at Port Lincoln and on Torke's 

 Peninsula. I am, however, much puzzled as to its affinities. 

 Pive specimens are before me regarding the sex of which I am 

 •uncertain. In two of them there seems to be a slight dilation 

 of the four basal joints on the anterior and intermediate tarsi, 

 but it is very slight. If I am right in regarding these specimens 

 :as males the insect probably belongs to the true Harpalides. 

 If, however, they are females the species may be a Hyijhmyax, 

 although it is narrower and more elongate than any other of 

 that genus that has come under my notice. I should be very 

 glad of any precise information regarding the sexes of this 

 insect. It appears to me not unlikely that H. Fortnumi, Cast., 

 is founded on this same species, in spite of the Count calling it 

 *' rather short and broad," for the expression would not be in- 

 applicable if it be compared with true Harpali. The descrip- 

 tions of Fortnumi and Deijrollei are vague in the last degree, 

 not even placing their sub-family beyond doubt, but they do 

 not mention any satisfactory distinction of one from the other 

 except the presence of some sculpture on the surface of the 

 thorax in Fortnumi which is not attributed to BeyroUei. The 

 specimens before me, however, vary in this respect, some hav- 

 irig a few striolce, others none. 



STAPHYLINID^. 



LEPT ACINUS. 



Z. jncticornis, mihi (vide ant. p. 7). Dr. Sharp, of South- 

 ampton, tells me that specimens of this insect which I for- 

 warded to him are identical with Xantholinus socius, Pauv. I 

 have no doubt as to the correctness of this identification on 

 Dr. Sharp's authority, and will ask all correspondents to whom 

 I have supplied the name to substitute socius, Pauv., for 

 picticorjiis, Blackb. But I do not think that the species can be 

 regarded as rightly placed in Xantholinus. Its dilated anterior 

 tarsi alone prevented my looking for it among species attri- 

 buted to that genus. Its intermediate cox^e, too, are scarcely 

 more widely separated than those parts are in many species of 

 Leptacinus, and the apical joint of the maxillary palpi agrees 

 much better with Leptacinus than with Xantholinus. I think 

 the insect should be called Leptacinus socius, Pauv. It should 

 be noted also that M. Pauvel in his description makes no refer- 

 ence to the peculiar colouring of the antenn?? (which suggested 

 my name), and which is strongly marked in almost every one 

 oi the multitude of examples that I have examined— the first 

 and third joints being black or pitchy, while all the rest are 

 ferruo-inous. 



