Report of the State Entomologist 283 



Twelfth Report, for 1889, and in the second edition of her Manual of 

 Injurious Insects, it appears as "Bruchus granarius, Curtis; Bruchus rufi- 

 manus, Boh." Professor Riley, in the American Entomologist, ii, 1870, 

 and in his Third Missouri Report, 1871, gives it place as B. granarius; 

 in the Index to his writings in the Bibliography of American Economic 

 Entomology, Pts. i-iii, 1890, which passed under his revision, no 

 correction of synonymy is attached to the reference to granarius. 



To solve the existing confusion and doubt, appeal was made to Miss 

 Ormerod for aid, requesting her to tell me what their bean-weevil 

 really was, and to send me examples that they might be compared 

 with the " rujimanus Schon." of the Horn Monograph. In explanation 

 of the apparent discrepancy in her reports, the following statement 

 was made : 



The Bruchus consideration is a very involved one. In the first edi- 

 tion of my MaEual I was not aware of this, and accordingly took 

 Curtis' description as being (as he gives it) of the Bruchus granarius 

 Linn. Since then I became aware of the difficulty, and have tried to 

 meet it in my second edition by giving B. granarius as of Curtis, with 

 the now accepted specific name of B. rufimanus Boh. 



I venture to quote still further from Miss Ormerod's letter, as 

 showing additional synonymy, and the confusion existing in the 

 names of the European species. 



You will prefer to have our English views on this subject from a 

 more authoritative Coleopterist than myself, so I venture to lay 

 before you some information sent me in reply to my inquiries, by 

 Mr. Oliver E. Janson — who I always find most trustworthy in run- 

 ning up specialisms which I have not all the works on, nor yet the 

 access to specimens, which he can command. Mr. Janson wrote me: 



"You are quite correct in jour supposition regarding the Bruchus 

 granarius of Curtis: it is the same as that now known under the name 

 of rujimanus Boh. It was in error that Curtis, Stephens, and Marsham, 

 identified our British species as the granarius of Linn." 



I see that Sharp's Catalogue gives only rujimanus Boh., without 

 synonymy. Waterhouse catalogues rujimanus Schon, as granarius of 

 Marsham and Stephens; and further, semi?? anws Linn., as the granarius 

 of Payk., Oliv., Germ., Schonh., but not Linn. Rye gives nothing of 

 granarius in his list of British Beetles, but has rufimanus Schon. 

 Pascoe has rujimanus Boh. Cox, in his Handbook, has rujimanus Boh. 



Regarding the question of priority or superior claims of Schonherr 

 or Boheman to the name rujimanus, I found that many of the descrip- 

 tions in Schonherr's Gen. et Spec. Gurcul., were written by Boheman, 

 and the description of B. rujimanus, is one of these. 



To present the above in a somewhat clearer form, and incorporating 



some additional notes from Dr. Hamilton — too extended to present 



in full, it appears that — 



