THE CANADIAN ENTOMOLOGIST. I5l 



cloant/ioides. I have no special knowledge now of the specimen referred 

 to, but I believe the Nevada specimens of albalis are distinct. The 

 types in my own collection were fresh, with a white bloom, very different 

 from the smooth strigose cloanthoides from Colorado, which is darker. 

 There was nothing " washed out " about my material. As to balanitis it 

 differs from messoria by the abdominal line, the different maculation and 

 course of t. p. line, all specific characters. As to verticalis, the fact as to 

 whether it be distinct, or only a constant form of designata, must be 

 determined by breeding ; I thought it distinct. In other cases, I believe 

 Prof Smith's large material has enabled him to properly correct the 

 synonymy of the list. 



I would certainly retain the name tricosa of Lintner. In my New 

 Check List of 1882 I say, in a note to this species, p. 24: "'This form 

 should perhaps bear Guenee's name, being later separated from Guenee's 

 Jaaili/era than herilis. The typical form ol j acid if era exactly corres- 

 ponds to subgotJiica of Stephens." And Prof Smith, without giving me 

 credit, prefers the name. Mr. Butler says positively, according to Prof 

 Smith, that tricosa, Lint., is Vy^xcdX juculifera. Now Guene'e happens to 

 figure typical juculifera and he figures typical subgothica ! Prof Smith 

 does not quote Guene'e's illustration, which contradicts both Butler's 

 statement and his own course. Guenee's types oi '■'• juculifera''^ or so- 

 called " types," were several in number at least, as he included two other 

 species as varieties. One of these so-called types Mr. Butler may have 

 and this may be a tricosa, Guene'e's var. A. Guenee made three mistakes 

 as to his material : first he described and figured subgothica 2js, jaculifera ; 

 then he described specimens belonging to two different species, tricosa 

 and herilis, as varieties of jaculifera. Under no circumstances can 

 Butler's statement be correct, while I submit that it is unfair both to Prof. 

 Lintner's acumen in contradicting the conclusions of Guenee and the 

 figures of " The Practical Entomologist," and to an exact interpretation 

 of the names, to resuscitate jaculifera at the expense of tricosa. 



Agrotis morrisonistigma, Grt. — According to Prof. Smith, Mr. Morri- 

 son's so-called " type " of this species does not agree with the specimens 

 returned me by Mr. Morrison. The species figured by me as exsertistigma, 

 will therefore have to be known by the name Morrisonistigma proposed 

 by me in Buffalo Bulletin for this eventuality. The " types " of 

 exsertistig?na, Morr., came originally from me, and it appears that Mr. 



