204 THE CANADIAN ENTOMOLOGIST. 



published to the whole world, and from the description in the present 

 case entomologists have for 30 years applied the name perlineata to the 

 insect Mr. Pearsall now renames E. exJmmata. 



If the description were vague, which it is not, the figures in the 

 monograph are unmistakable. 



Dr. Dyar suggests that the Mehmthia cotidensata of Walker* may be 

 this species, but I am informed that Walker's single type is a specimen of 

 E. huata, as his description would lead one to suppose. Walker's 

 Cidaria induiatariiV' is, as I have elsewhere stated,*^ a synomym of 

 XantJiorlioe ferrugata. 



I conclude, therefore, that these species must, after all, be listed pretty 

 much as I placed them in my first note, the only difference being that I 

 am now willing to admit our western Euchoeca to specific rank as 

 E. Pearsa/li, instead of uniting it with E. comptaria, as I was at first 

 disposed to do. 



The list will stand : 



Nomenia duodecimlineata, Packard. 



= unipecta, Pearsall. 

 Euchoeca Pearsalli, Dyar. 



= 1 2-lineata, Auct. (western form). 

 Euchueca comptaria. Walker. 



= I 2-lineata, Auct. (eastern form). 



= salienta, Pearsall. 

 Euchceca perlineata, Packard. 



= exhumata, Pearsall. 

 Eachccca lucata, Guene'e. 



==condensata, Walker. 



A CORRECTION. 



An inexcusable blunder was committed by me some years ago. On 

 page 791, Pioc. U. S. Nat. Mus., XXVI, for 1903, I described an insect 

 under the name Piinidia su/ci/rons, var. amplicoi'nis. For the word 

 sulcifrons the specific name fe?iestralis was intended, and should be 

 substituted throughout the description. A. N. Caudell. 



4. Cat. Lep. Het., R. Mus., XXIV., 1273, 1862. 



5. Cat. Lep. Het., B. Mus., XX\ I., 1727, 1862. 



6. Can. Ent., XXX\'1L, 240 and 413. 



