190 THE CANADIAN ENTOMOLOGIST. 



ignore the British Museum Lists from their defective composition has 

 been answered by us, with subsequent American lepidopterists, in the 

 negative. I may say that American lepidopterists have made visits at 

 a considerable sacrifice to London for the main purpose of finding out 

 what Mr. Walker described, and they have always accepted cheerfully the 

 result of these visits. It was necessary to build up in America a stable, 

 specific nomenclature. As to the generic, it will always be unstable, 

 partly from the difference in opinion as to what constitutes a genus, 

 partly that here tradition has been stronger than priority. In vain I have 

 shown that Jaspidea is older than Bryophila, Heliophila than Leucania, 

 Graphip/iora than Taeniocampa. At least the acceptance of these names 

 is but partial, and I myself have hesitated to use two of them. The 

 necessity for a stable basis for our specific nomenclature is clearly greater 

 than necessity for ideal justice towards this or that American describer, 

 and he must bear his synonym, as he has to bear other injustice in this 

 world. One word as to the employment of double names in the 

 Noctuid?e, and I have done. It is extremely desirable that no two 

 Noctuids should bear the same specific title. The value of a Check List 

 is largely dependent on the carrying out of this rule. Guenee went so 

 far as to change all double names. In the more than seven hundred 

 species of N. Am. Noctuidas I have described, I have never used a name 

 twice except by accident. Of late there has been an unnecessary dupli- 

 cation of such names. The coat of ice, which the works of European 

 writers on North American Lepidoptera laid upon our knowledge of the 

 scientific titles of our insects has been broken, and to this freeing of our 

 literature I have assisted to the extent of my ability. A responsibility 

 now rests with future American students that they keep the current clear 

 and take large and philosophical views in their classifications. 



OVIPOSITING OF MELIT^A CHALCEDON IN PAPER 



ENVELOPES. 



BV RICHARD E. KUNZE, M. D., NEW YORK, N. Y. 



In March number, Vol. XXIV, of Canadian Entomologist, Mr. W. 

 G. Wright, of California, mentions a number of genera of diurnals not 

 requiring plants for ovipositing thereon. Those enumerated belong to 

 Parnassius, Argynnis, Euptoieta, Neonympha, Ccenonympha, Hipparchia, 



