412 THE CANADIAN ENTOMOLOGIST, 



Packard's type specimens came. We are indebted to Dr. Pearsall* for 

 discriminating these two forms, and he has, quite rightly, I think, placed 

 one in the genus Euchmca, and for the other has established ihe new genus 



Nomenia. 



I may remark here that I have never refused, as Dr. Pearsall asserts,^* 

 to accept the genus Nomenia. On the contrary, I am satisfied that it is a 

 perfectly valid one, and I have now in my own cabinet a fair series of both 

 males and females of the type species, but I still think, as I stated in a 

 previous paper, that it is not quite clear whether Packard, when describing 

 i2-lineata, had before him the Nomenia or the Euchceca, and that, there- 

 fore, until the point has been settled by the examination of the actual types, 

 it cannot be certain to which form Packard's specific name should be 

 applied. 



Now, Walker* in i860 described a moth from Nova Scotia as 



Tephrosia ? comptaria. 



This species was not identified in American collections until 1895, 

 whtn Dr. Hulst,' after inspecting the type specimen, pronounced it to be 

 the Larentia perlineata of Packard, and in consequence the name 

 perlineata lias been dropped from our lists. 



Quite recently, however, as I stated in my last note to this journal,*^ 

 Mr. L. B. Prout, who has gone to a great deal of trouble to compare for 

 me American material with Walker's types in the British Museum, has 

 informed me that in this particular determination Hulst was in error, for 

 that comptaria. Walker, equals /2//;/^a/'rt, Pack., not /^r//«.?a/a. Having 

 great confidence in the carefulness and good judgment of my friend, I 

 therefore list oar species as follows : 



Nomenia 12-lineata? Packard. 

 Euchtcca comptaria. Walker. 



= I 2-lineata, Auct. pars. 

 = salienta, Pearsall. 

 Euchceca perlineata, Packard. 

 These entries to replace Nos. jjjo and jj-j/ in Dyar's Catalogue. 

 Dr. Pearsall disputes this arrangement, and writes : 



2. Canadian Entomologist, XXXVII, 125, April, 1905. 



3. Canadian Entomologist, XXXVII, 331, September, 1905. 



4. Cat. Lap. Het. Brit. Mus., XXI, 406, i860. 



5. Entomological News, VI, 70, March, 1895. 



6. Canadian Entomologist, XXXX'II, 240, July, 1905. 



