98 



Gen. Morrisoiiia Grt. 1874. 

 Type: M. evicta. 



858. evicta Grt>) Cauada to Middle States, 

 var. vomerina Grt. 



sectilis i Sni. 



859. peracuta Morr. California (?). 



860. infidelis Grt. Michigan. 



861. mucens Hbu. Middle States to Texas. 



spoliata Wlk. (Xylina.) 



? sectilis Gn. (Xylophasia.) 



862. rileyana Sm. Missouri; Texas. 



863. bisulca Grt. Arizona. 



864. confusa Hbn. Canada to Texas; California. 



infructuosa Wlk. (Xylina.) 

 multifaria Wlk. (Xylina.). 

 Gen. Xyloiiiiges Gn. 1852. 

 Type: X. conspicillaris. 



865. hiemalis Grt. California. 



californica Behr. 



866. peritalis Sm. Colorado; Oregon. 



867. Simplex Wlk. California; Vancouver. 



crucialis Harvey. 



868. curialis Grt. California. 



869. dolosa Grt. Colorado; Maine; Mts. New Hamp- 



shire and New York. 



870. rubrica Harvey. California; Oregon. 



871. perJubens Grt. Colorado; Oregon; California. 



subapicalis Sm. 



872. ochracea Riley. California. 



873. patalis Grt. Vancouver; California. 



fletcheri Grt. 



874. tabuhita Grt.**) New York. 



*) Mr. Butler refers the poor specimen labelled sectilis Gn., iu coli. 

 B. Mus. to mucens. Mr. Smitli says it is a "poor specialen of the normal 

 form of evicta and that it would liave been utterly impossible to recognire 

 the species from the description alone". To this I siy that therc is no proof 

 that this "poor specimen" was Guenee's "type" and that, taking Mr. Smith's 

 assertiiin as true, the name sectilis has only one leg to stand on viz: the 

 labelled spccimen in Krit. Mus., seeing that names niust depend upon des- 

 crij(tif)ns not upon specimens produced as "types". Mr. Smith seems to believe 

 that Bi)ccimenB shown liim ae "types" are always genuine and thenceforth 

 vriteß about tlieni as rcplaciug all other evidence. or as if he had been present 

 wlicu the autlior drew up bis description. 



**) The two genera Morrisonia andXylomiges have hairy eyes and 

 might be both |)lacc(l among the hairy-eyed Orthosians where I placed the 

 lirst in my catalogue of l.S'JO. But why they are placed by Mr. Smith be- 

 tween the naked eyed goncra Lithophaue and (^alocanipa is "a inyetery". 

 Since Mr. Smith has shown the two to be more nearly related thau I knew 

 and has corrected my reference of thrce species of the former genus, I allow 

 both to stand here fogethor aud close the Orthosian series which Stands in 

 need of a füll comparison with the European generic types. 



