234 THE CANADIAN ENTOMOLOGIST. 



name Callimorpha for these moths, writing as follows: — " I have strongly 

 objected to the use of this generic name for this group on the following 

 grounds, viz.: — i. The type of Callimorpha is C. Jacobcece, a European 

 Lithosiid. 2. There is already a generic name — Haploa Hlibn. — for the 

 North American representatives of Hypercompa. I have pointed out to 

 Smith that there are structural differences between Hypercompa and 

 Haploa, and although these characters are slight in themselves, I am of 

 the opinion that, taken in conjunction with the utterly different aspect and 

 style of coloration of the species, they should be regarded as sufficient." 



Mr. Smith, it will be remembered, in his paper in the Proc. Nat. 

 Museum, '87, 23, held that these "structural differences" were too slight 

 to warrant such a separation, and affirmed, besides, that they were not 

 constant, and for myself I may say, as I wrote to Mr. Butler, that I am 

 not in a position to decide the question satisfactorily, even to myself, and 

 so prefer to leave it to the authorities. 



Mr. Grote, in two short communications to the Canadian Entomolo- 

 gist, while complimenting me on my plate and on my sorting out of the 

 moths, insisted that my work was not original, and that these forms could 

 not be regarded as distinct until they have been proved so by breeding 

 from the egg. 



I am not greatly concerned as to whether my humble work in this 

 department is " original " or not. I contend that it is at least useful, but 

 if the description of a form as a new species is not original, what is to 

 be said of Mr. Grote's own work in the same direction ? As to the argu- 

 ment about breeding from the egg, which has also been urged in letters by 

 others, I repudiate it as unscientific and impracticable. If no one was 

 to be permitted to describe a species as new until he had proved it to be 

 such by breeding from the egg, there would long ago have been a complete 

 block in the study of North American entomology, and there would not 

 have been so many specific designations followed by the honoured name 

 of Mr. Grote. Besides, it is not such a long time since a very dis- 

 tinguished entomologist described as a new species a form which he had 

 " established on a sure foundation by breeding from the egg," and which 

 shortly afterwards turned out, upon further breeding, to be only a pre- 

 viously named form of a well known polymorphic species. It is, there- 

 fore, difficult to say how much breeding would have to be done before 

 these doubting Thomases could be convinced. I may say, however, that 



