oI4 PROCEEDINGS OF THE ACADEMY OF [NoV., 



because some of their species are so insufficiently described that a 

 particular description applies equally well to a number of species." 

 Thus Prof. Chamberlin makes, it seems to me, and I take no unusual 

 stand, a grave mistake in resuscitating these and certain other names 

 of Hentz, for the descriptions are practically valueless, the figures in 

 many cases of little more importance, and nothing but uncertainty is to 

 be gained by replacing names based upon detailed descriptions with 

 ones founded upon inadequate diagnoses unsupported by type speci- 

 mens. Then Prof. Chamberlin places my Lycosa relucens and L. 

 charonoides as synonyms' of saltatrix Hentz, though these species of 

 mine differ in important structural characters ; and similarly he classes 

 my Pardosa scita, that is clearly separable from P. nigropalpis Emerton, 

 with the latter as synonyms of Lycosa milvina Hentz. 



(5) Prof. Chamberlin subjugates my Pardosa mercurialis to lapi- 

 diana Emerton, though these differ in proportion of the legs and in 

 the genital armature. Then he places my Geolycosa texana under 

 Lycosa carolinensis Hentz, though these exliibit a marked difference 

 in the eyes of the anterior row. Further, he brings my Lycosa euepigy- 

 nata, L. insopita and Trochosa purcelli all under Lycosa gulosa 

 Walckenaer, though Walckenaer in his brief seven-Hne description states 

 only the color and a few details concerning the eyes, and though I 

 had shown that Lycosa insopita "comes closest to L. euepigynata, 

 but differs from it in slightly shorter relative length of the legs, in 

 greater relative width of the cephalothorax (in insopita less than one- 

 quarter longer than broad, in euepigynata decidedly more than one- 

 quarter), in the dark coloration of the venter, and in the structure of 

 the genitalia. It differs also from L. purcelli, the epigynum of which 

 is'very similar, in the slightly greater relative length of the legs, in 

 greater size, and markedly in the coloration." 



(6) Prof. Chamberlin has also withdrawn Geolycosa mihi (of which 

 Scaptocosa Banks is a synonym) into Lycosa Latreille, Yet Geolycosa 

 differs markedly from any true Lycosa in the size and length of the first 

 legs and in their possession of thick scopulse. 



Had I the time to do so, I believe I could satisfactorily re-establish 

 all of my species that Prof. Chamberlin has tried to disestablish. He 

 has not seen any of the type specimens in my private collection, though 

 I would gladly have given him access to them had I known he was 

 preparing a revision. His revision needs a considerable amount of 

 emendation. What we should all of us do in such matters is not to 

 work apart but in co-operation, and this is almost essential for progress 

 in systematic studies. When the time has come for a taxonomic 



