no Memoirs on the Coleoptera 



and published dimensions, is merely a more completely cupreous 

 example of cupripenne Say, one of which, seemingly similar, lies 

 before me, and the name of Dejean will therefore be found under 

 that species. Suhsericeum Lee, from Kansas, was held subse- 

 quently to be a subspecies of cupripenne by LeConte; I have not 

 seen it, but the punctulate pronotal fovea? and opaculate elytra, 

 only slightly wider than the prothorax, indicate that it is certainly 

 a species wholly distinct from cupripenne, as in fact the author con- 

 sidered it originally. The species described by LeConte under the 

 name crassicolle is characterized in the above table from the original 

 description, as I have not been able to examine an authentic 

 specimen ; it seems to be different from any other of the peculiarly 

 narrow subparallel forms among which I have placed it. 



Deplanatum is not a preoccupied name in Agonum, and I am 

 therefore compelled to reject the name falUanum given it by Mr. 

 Leng. The two genera Agonum and Anchomenus, proposed by 

 Bonelli over one hundred years ago, are distinct and ought not to 

 have been united, but assuming them to be united and that Ancho- 

 menus deplanatus Chd., should be truly a synonym of cincticollis, 

 it seems to me that the disposing of one deplanatus by synonymy 

 ought to be enough, and that the older deplanatus under these 

 circumstances might have been allowed to remain valid. Simply 

 because two species in one genus have the same name is not ade- 

 quate cause for the rejection of both of them. This remark applies 

 also to several other changes of name by Mr. Leng. Elaphrus 

 politus Lee, for example, disappeared many years ago by synonymy 

 and, this being the case, there is no adequate reason — in spite of 

 committee decisions — for suppressing politus Csy. It is irrational 

 to suppose that both species named politus have to be eliminated 

 if they are not both actual synonyms of other species. The case 

 is similar regarding Monocrepidius finitimus Csy. In these cases 

 the synonymy of the older species is absolute, and therefore the 

 use of the same name as applied to a valid species should not be 

 inhibited, unless it be intended that hereafter species shall be 

 known only by their names alone, the author's name to be perma- 

 nently omitted; this would however result in much confusion. 

 But, in the case of Galerita thoracica, I am not certain that thoracica 

 Chev., from Mexico, is a synonym of erythrodera Brul., from Cuba 



