\\2 THE <\NAI>IAX RNTOMOUMUST. 



of my Canocara occhtens, and it is almost needless to say that he is in 

 error. Occidens is one of ihe smallest known species of Canocara and is 

 always pale brownish-testaceous in colour. I compared it carefully with 

 the actual type of CW//<;r«/Vrt I. ec, and the two have no mutual resem- 

 blance whatever, Cali/orniia being much larger and black in colour, as 

 stated by I.eConle. The pubescence may have given it a brownish 

 tinge to .Mr. lUanchnrd, but the integuments are black 



In his treatment of my /V///////i y/(i7'//><'/////j, in this paper (p. 25 1), 

 Mr. lall also displays a decided lack of liberality in the absence of positive 

 knowledge, for it is true beyond any legitimate question, that Pti/iniis flavi- 

 pennis is not a synonym of luisa/is I-ec, but is a separate and distinct 

 species. 



Il is seldom that I have attempted to assume the role of critic of the 

 work of my fellows in the field of morphological classification, alihnugh 

 fre(pjenily being forced to defend my own work from attack, when the 

 motive thereftir seemed imjusl or the reason ill-founded. Having done so 

 much work himself in this field, the writer feels only too acutely the 

 uncertainty of the results of our labours and of our helplessness in the 

 presence of the undecipherable ; for we know not a whit of the meaning 

 or origin of il all. Ihe recent work of Dr. V. K. lilaisdell on the genus 

 Eleodes tempts mc, however, to make a few obseivalions, which I trust 

 will be taken in good part, as they are given in a spirit wholly friendly to 

 the author and in no way as captious criticism. 



This work stands alone in the minute and careful study bestowed 

 upon the subject and in its remarkable array of detail. Its degree of 

 departure from the actual truth, so far as indicating the total number of 

 species and subspecies which the author had before him is concerned, is of 

 course a part of his own indivrdual perceptiveness and methods of reasoning 

 and would be viewed dilferently by every investigator ; no two would 

 probably agree, but I think it can be truly said that Dr. HIaisdell has tried 

 to steer an ultra-conservative course, and that in his inner conscience he 

 really felt that there were nrany more forms that should be given places in 

 the taxonomic scheme than he <piitc dared to make known. This can be 

 inferred, at least, from the fact that so many species or subspecies are 

 presented to us under the term ''formal' whiih he modestly states are not 

 to be perpetuated in the catalogue but are only intended as convenient 



