1878.] 267 [Hagen. 
Drury. There is no doubt that both forms belong to the same spe- 
cies; Harris in his note to No. 8 considered them-different. As Say 
stated that he received a specimen from Dr. Harris, the specimens in 
the collection are to be considered as types. 
16. Diplax vicina Hag. Syn., 175, 4. 
No. 6. Lib. rubicundula Say Mss. (Say’s determ.). 6? 3. 
The catalogue mentions the following six specimens: Milton, 1820, 
Sept. 30, 1821; Sept., 1829; 62, Oct. 7, 1837. There are only 
four specimens in the collection, the same number as stated by Mr. 
S. H. Scudder, Proc. B. 8. N. H., x., p. 221. Twoof them have la- 
bels written on apparently newer paper and marked 6 and ¢. Ap- 
parently those are the specimens taken Oct. 7, 1837. Of the two 
remaining the male is D. vicina, the female is probably D. rubicun- 
dula Say. Isay probably, and it is stated to be so in Mr. Scudder’s 
very elaborate paper, but as the specimen is in very bad condition, 
even the vulva lamina wanting, there is no absolute certainty. But I 
believe Mr. Scudder’s determination is the right one, as is his suppo- 
sition that it is probably the specimen received by Mr. Say. Mr. 
Scudder’s statement that L. ambigua Rbr. was referred by me erro- 
neously to L. rubicundula is also right. Apparently this was some 
lapsus calami as L. ambigua is also referred by me to L. albifrons 
Chp. : 
17. Diplax rubicundula Say. Hag. Syn., 176, 6. 
No. 6. 26, Lib. rubicundula Say ; New York, Mr. Calverley. 
The female is spoken of above from Massachusetts, belonging to 
one of the three first given dates. The New York specimen is a 
fragment of a male. 
No. 7. 3, fragment from Maine, belongs probably here.} 
18. Diplax albifrons Chp. Hag. Syn., 177, 7. 
No. 5. 4, Lib. rubicunda Say ss., var. (Say’s determ.). Milton, 
June 20, 1821. 
The specimen is a fragment of an immature male, belonging, as I 
believe, to this species. 
19. Diplax semicincta Say. Hag. Syn., 176, 5. 
No. 7. ¢, Lib. semicincta Say mss. (Say’s determ.). Milton, 1820, 
and a later addition, Maine, Randal, ¢? 3. 
Of the Maine specimens only a fragment of the male exists, be- 
longing to D. rubicundula. The female taken in 1820 is D. semi- 
1 The description of Lib. rubicundula in Harris’ Corresp., p. 826, belongs'to this 
Bpecies, but apparently not to the specimens now in the collection. 
