THE CANADIAN ENTOMOLOGIST. 95 



G. crescent if asciella, Cham., and G. k^rissefasciella are different forms of 

 the same species, although he does not question that the former may be 

 equal to ^^'alker's G. conclusella. Mr. Chambers further says that he 

 ." was never able to reconcile his G. rubevsclla with Clemens' G. ruhid- 

 e//a" from which Lord Walsingham remarks that /le is unable to separate 

 it. These two (?) species belong to a group in which there is considerable 

 variation in coloring, and in which the specific distinctions are evidently 

 slight in the imagines, though sufficiently well marked in the larvs, as I 

 judge from the three or four forms that I have succeeded in rearing. 



As to Hclice gleditschiceella, Cham. (= to palUdochrella, Cham., 

 according to Lord Walsingham), Mr. Chambers says : " The defect in the 

 description of the hind wings, to which Lord Walsingham calls attention, 

 may exist and may have been caused (as I have known similar mistakes 

 in other cases) by a slight fold or wrinkle under the tip. I have an indis- 

 tinct recollection that I observed something of this in this species. I 

 placed this species in Gelechia in the ' Index ' for the reason stated on 

 page 124 of that publication, and it may be that I never gave any other 

 description of it as a Gelechia. * * * >!< -phg reference in the 

 ' Index ' noted by Lord Walsingham, and occurring in various places, to 

 Can. Ent., vol. x., ]). — , was intended to apply to a paper which I thought 

 I had sent to the Can. Ent. for publication in that volume. But I suppose 

 it was never sent, or it was lost in the mail. * * * * 



" From my bred and captured specimens of Gracilaria superbifront- 

 ella, Clem., oak-feeding, and G. PackardeUa, Cham., maple-feeding " 

 (according to Lord Walsingham, identical, and equal to G. sioederella, 

 Thnb., whose name has precedence), " I think the species are distinct 

 (though I have had doubts about it), and that both are distinct from 

 swederel/a as described and figured in Nat. Hist. Tin." 



In regard to Coleophora ieucoc/irysel/a, Clem. — to which species Lord 

 Walsingham relegates Mr. Chambers' C. ars^e/ite/Za and C. ars^eiitialbella 

 — Mr. Chambers says : " In a flying trip through Philadelphia, a year or 

 two ago, I glanced at a part of the Clemens' collection, and the one thing 

 that I recollect (for I made no notes) is that C. Icucochrysella, Clem., is 

 the proper name for C. albc/la. Cham. C. argentialbella is a different 

 insect and smaller." 



These quotations embody the most important of Mr. Chambers' differ- 

 ences from Lord Walsingham's opinions, and I have taken the liberty of 

 transcribing them because I think they will be of interest to others beside 



