T?rof. Frey^ and some American Teneina. 207 



ent insect. It differs as follows : If Mr. Stainton's surmise, before 

 mentioned, is correct, viz., that the flat larva is not found in Europe, 

 then the larva of stetinensis must be cylindrical, while that of ornafella 

 is flat. Sletinensis mines alder leaves, and the mines, as figured loc. cit, 

 differ decidedly from those of ornatella, in the leaves of black, and 

 flowering locust trees (^Rohinia pseudaccia and R. Hinpida'), which are 

 smooth, placed indifferentl}' on either the upper or the under surface 

 of the leaves, which are not folded nor creased in any way by then:. 

 L. stetinensis passes the pupa state in the mine, at least I judge so from 

 Mr. Stainton's statement, the L: helianthum, H. Sch., was the only 

 species hitherto known which leaves the mine to pupate ; ornatella 

 leaves the mine to pupate. Stetinensis has the tip of theantense white, 

 ornatella has it of the same brown hue with the remainder thereof. 

 Stetinensis has a median basal white streak on the forewings, which is 

 wanting in the forewings of ornatella. Sletinensis has one more dorsal 

 white streak than ornatella (the one nearest the apex of the forewings). 

 The costal and dorsal spots have not relatively to each other the same 

 position in the two species. In our judgment these are more than sufii- 

 cient differences to base new species on ; in addition thereto, stetinensis 

 has a black spot at the apex of the wings, and ornatella has none. In 

 what confusion are American Micro-Lepidopterists about all this ? None 

 whatever. The confusion, if it exists at all, is all in the Professor's 

 own thoughts, and so it ought to be, after the tremendous head cudgel- 

 ing he seems to have given himself about it. In fact, there ought to be 

 a high court of Entomology to determine how much cudgeling of the 

 head, or other punishment, an entomologist ought to suffer, who pro- 

 mulges such a disturbing element as this brochure, into waters as quiet 

 and placid as these were before Professor Frey got into them v/ith this 

 brochure. But such cudgeling as the Professor gives himself is hardly 

 adequate punishment for such riotous misconduct, entomologically 

 speaking, as a man is guilty of when he makes L. Argentinofella, Clem., 

 synonymous with L. ulmella, Chambers, or when he publishes new 

 descriptions, and new names for half a dozen old insects, and makes 

 confusion worse confounded by such comments as the Professor makes 

 on P. rohiniella, Clem. But, jesting apart. This little pamph- 

 let has put more confusion into American micro-lepidopterology, than 

 everything else put together that has ever been written on the subject. 

 Mr. Stainton, somewhere in his edition of the Clemens' papers, states 

 that he had determined not to publish anything on this subject until 

 it had first passed through the hands of American Micro-Lepidopterists 

 (or something to that effect, I can not now refer to the passage) — the 

 value of the result of such a course is evident in Mr. Sainton's edition 



