THE CANADIAN ENTOMOLOGIST. 119 



placed in the same group with its parent species. What would be said of 

 a botanist who should define his genera by the color of the flowers, the marb- 

 ling or the pinking of the leaves! It is for these reasons that, after the 

 example of Ochsenheimer, of Latreille, of Godart, of Treitschke, of 

 Duponchel, of Guenee, etc., we reject this sort of genera and consider 

 them as not having been made." Dr. Boisduval. Spec. Gen. Het. Sphin., 



1874. 



" We should likewise speak of the classification of Hubner, but we 

 have never been able to comprehend the principle on which it is based. 

 This author so often places in distinct genera species between which are 

 scarcely found specific distinctions, that the whole forms for us a chaos 

 almost unintelligible. In our opinion, while Hiibner is the first of 

 iconographers. he is the last of svstematists." Boisduval, Spec. Gen.. I, 



p. i53. l8 36. 



" I must not pass in silence his Systematic Catalogue, to which there 



seems some disposition to return after it has been justly neglected for 

 thirty years. I cannot deny that it contains some happy hits, some 

 natural groups, but one could scarcely assert that there are many such. 

 On the other hand, he has multiplied genera with an incredible reckless- 

 ness. Many pages would be required in citing all the examples 



Our Xanthia are scattered over 7 coitus, Agrotis comprises not less than 

 17 ! And yet one would be mistaken if he thought this extreme division 

 permitted Hubner to bring together only analogous species. The genera 

 of fewest species are often the most heterogeneous. (Here several 

 examples are given.) His Tribes agree among themselves no better than his 

 genera. I have given these examples because there seems to day a desire 

 to erect the Verzeichniss into an authority, and it was well to show why I 

 consider it, with my associate (Boisduval), as not having been made, and 

 why I have not felt myself obliged to employ the generic names of this 

 still-born work." Guenee', Spec. Gen. Noct. I, Pref., p. 73, 1852. 



NOTES ON PREPARATORY STAGES OF DANAIS ARCHIPPUS. 



BY W. H. EDWARDS, COALBURGH, W. VA. 



On the 14th May last I found several eggs of archippus on milk- 

 weed. These hatched on the 17th inst. On the 19th all had passed first 

 moult. On the 21st all had passed second moult. On the 22nd two 



