J. EDWARDS ON BAGOUS LUTOSUS, GYLL., IN NORFOLK. 105 
I recorded, and pointing out that, as he had 
never seen the specimen in question, his 
dictum on either point must be equally 
trustworthy. I am still waiting for his reply. 
Stephens many years ago gave “ Norfolk ” 
as a locality for this species ; it has remained 
in our text-books of British Coleoptera ever 
since, and I had no difficulty in identifying it 
by means of the characters there laid down. 
Champion (Ent. Mo. Mag. vol. xxxiv. p. 52, 
March, 1898) says that he had not seen a 
specimen in any British Collection. Xewbery 
(Ent. Rec. vol. xiv. pp. 149-156, June, 1902) 
says that his investigations had led him to the 
conclusion that no authentic British specimen 
of B. lutosus was to be found, and he omits 
the species from his otherwise excellent 
Revision of the British Species of Bagous.” 
He says that he had been induced to attempt 
the latter task from having all the British 
forms in his possession ; from which it would 
appear that what he had not seen wasn’t 
British — for him. Under these circumstances 
I thought it well to reinvestigate the material 
on which my Norfolk record was based, and 
by the kindness of Mr. Champion I had an 
opportunity of comparing my insect with an 
authentic Swedish example of B. lutosus from 
the collection of Dr. C. G. Thomson, of the 
University Zoological Museum, Lund, said to 
have come from Gyllenhal himself. Finding 
that the two insects agreed in their essential 
characters I took occasion to point out (Ent. 
Mo. Mag. vol. xxxviii. p. 240, October, 1902, 
nearly a year and a half before Mr. Morley’s 
paper was read) that, Champion and Xewbery 
notwithstanding, I certainly had one Norfolk 
specimen of the species in question. Since 
