NO. 3 CASEY COLLECTION OF COLEOPTERA BUCHANAN 9 



only a general or State label. An illustration is found in the staphy- 

 linid, Datomicra surge ns Casey. The type locality of this species is 

 given as Glenora, B. C. ; the collection contains two specimens, the 

 first of which, or type, bears the label " Br.C", the second, or para- 

 type, " Glenora, B.C., Wickham ". In this case there can be no doubt 

 that the first example formed the basis of Casey's original description, 

 represented in his eyes the true type, and by any reasonable interpreta- 

 tion must receive the type label, even though the specimen, on visible 

 evidence, does not come from the stated type locality. Any other 

 plan for handling such cases (and it may be said that serious thought 

 was given to other possibilities) leads only to endless and insoluble 

 complications. Bearing directly on this matter are some remarks by 

 Casey himself in regard to Acmaeops variipes Casey. In Memoir 4, 

 page 239, 1913, he explains that " The locality Sta. Cruz Co., given 

 under the original description of variipes (Annals N. Y. Academy 

 Sciences, vol. 6, p. 38) was taken from a specimen of the series bear- 

 ing this definite label ; others had simply ' Cal ' as a label, one of 

 which, the type, I find had a minute label concealed by the other and 

 bearing the initials ' S.D '." In other words, Casey's original set of 

 variipes really included three different labels, " S.D, Cal ", " Cal ", 

 and " Sta. Cruz Co." The original description calls for Sta. Cruz Co. 

 alone, but Casey 22 years later positively states that the real type, 

 (doubtless the specimen on which his description is based) is from 

 "S D (San Diego) Cal". A considerable number of similar dis- 

 crepancies were met with, but the Acmaeops sample happens to be one 

 that Casey comments on in a definite enough way to give an insight 

 into one of his rather free methods of locality citation. 



Another puzzling situation grew out of Casey's occasional misin- 

 terpretation of locality symbols. For instance, N Y, translated by 

 Casey's list of localities as " Catskill Mts (Shokan) ", is more than 

 once confused with N Y, given as " New York City (Brooklyn) " 

 by the same list. 



Again, there are instances where Casey evidently had private in- 

 formation as to the exact source of certain specimens that carry a 

 State label only, and we may find " la " being published as " Cedar 

 Rapids, Iowa ". Also, Casey sometimes gives the locality of the same 

 specimen with a different degree of definiteness in successive treat- 

 ments ; for example, " Pa " in 1900 may be cited as " Philadelphia, 

 Pa." in 1920. One of the more difficult of the curatorial problems 

 resulted from the fact that Casey occasionally shifted the name label 

 from the original type to some other specimen in the series. In all 

 observed cases of such label transfer the specimen bearing the name 



