80 THE CANADIAN ENTOMOLOGIST. 



is corroborated by Prof. Smith. I do not know whether Prof. Fernald 

 had signosa with him, but one thing is clear, that if he had this ox petiilca, 

 then he could not have failed to note the fact, \{ petidca was really identi- 

 cal with Walker's original type of signosa. He had petidca, and he con- 

 sidered it near or identical with infructuosa, Walk.! Now, has there 

 been here any shifting of Walker's "types"? If Prof Fernald had my 

 signosa with him in 1879, then its correspondence with Walker's sigfiosa 

 would be proved inferentially by his general statement quoted above. 

 If, again, he saw the type of signosa, he could not have failed to note its 

 correspondence with the /^i!'z^/(;fl he certainly had with him! Why did 

 Prof. Fernald compare petulca with infructuosa, if Walker's " type " of 

 signosa was petulca ? As a matter of fact, what Walker says agrees 

 better with signosa than w'xlh. petulca ; I have no sufficient material now 

 before me to go into this point. Walker's description convinced me that 

 he had what I call signosa before him when I determined and compared 

 our species with his text, but I am aware that much belter descrip- 

 tions than Walker ever wrote are liable to be misinterpreted. Nor am I 

 primarily interested to rescue my name. I wish to show reasons for 

 assuming that the Walker collection is not now, in all its details, what it 

 was before Mr. Butler took charge and merged my collection with it in 1883. 

 And I insist that Walker's text must not conflict with the present " types " 

 when we are called upon to identify the two. Perhaps, in the present 

 case. Prof. Fernald has some additional information to that which he 

 gathered for me and kindly communicated in 1879. At any rate, Prof. 

 Fernald's published remarks (1. c.) should be read ni the light of Prof. 

 Smith's present references. 



Lithophane unimoda, Lintner. — This may be a distinct species, but 

 the single specimen I saw impressed me with the probability that it was 

 only a dark, suffused form of one of the species of the antennata series. 



Lithophane gausapata, Grt. — I believe the specimen was sent me by 

 my friend Behrens. Why the type "should" be in Mr. Neumoegen's 

 collection I do not know, except that I gave him all my material before 

 leaving home. I believe he has it and also the type of Maniestra fer- 

 realis, unless I gave it to some one else — Prof. Smith, perhaps. 



Lithophane deposita, Morr. — The specimens in my collection, or, at 

 least, one of them^ came from Mr. Morrison, and are thus authentically 

 named, if not " types." This same is true of fagina and curvimacula 

 in my collection. 



