96 THE CANADIAN ENTOMOLOGlSl". 



The other "descriptions" will be found to vary quite as widely from 

 Dr. Dyar's. Length, as compared to width of tube, appears to be one of 

 his favourite characters, and is absolutely undependable in skins, espe- 

 cially when such a close distinction as that between 5 x i and 4 x i must be 

 drawn. Against this I protest in my book, as also against a too extensive 

 use of another of his favourite characters, the number of comb scales (pp. 

 t6 and 17). The italicised characters in my "description" he never uses. 

 I have made large use of the number of hairs in certain tufts on the head, 

 while he rarely notices the tufts at all. 



6. Mr. Knab (who is certainly a fine artist) must have conveyed his 

 criticisms to me by telepathy, with the additional obstacle of our being 

 unaware of each other's existence. All my drawings, save O. bitnaculatus, 

 plate III, the mouth parts of some of the Uranotcenias and the egg of Z. 

 squamiger were made in Louisiana long before I came to Washington. 

 The exceptions mentioned were made in Washington from specimens sent 

 by Dr. Dupree for that purpose, save the bimactdatiis, which I made in 

 pencil for a nature-study article from a specimen given me by Dr. Dupree, 

 who also gave me permission to publish as I pleased. I made a some- 

 what similar wash-drawing of this species for the Monograph. At no 

 time has Mr. Knab supervised or corrected my drawings. 



7. I fail to see how I could have "absorbed a large amount of 

 information" from the Museum (not Carnegie) collection of larvae, on 

 which I was at first set to work. 



I have worked on very few of the species belonging to the actual 

 Carnegie collection. Be jt observed, that my work, outside the keys, is 

 wholly biological as contrasted with Dr. Dyar's "systematic" work, and 

 could not possibly be derived from dead specimens. At no time have I 

 had access to any of Dr. Dyar's or Mr. Knab's notes, and I have never 

 even seen any except as they appeared in print. 



8. As to the keys themselves. When I began drawing I had, as 

 stated in my Introduction, keys covering the Louisiana forms. I was 

 encouraged to extend these, and no objection was made to my using them 

 as a thesis, which I plainly said I expected to publish. When I wished 

 to do so, however, opposition was made on the ground that "everything in 

 the larva key outside the Louisiana species was Carnegie." Now, some 

 had been collected in the District of Columbia and in New Jersey by 

 myself, some sent to me, and for the rest I had been careful to use only 

 what I was informed was the Museum study collection, to which, as a 

 George Washington University student, I had right of access, except in 



