1887.] PROCEEDINGS OF UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM. 353 



primaries, costal vein terminating: at about third fourth of costa, in- 

 stead of at fourth sixth. 



"All tiie subcostal branches emitted separately, whereas in Ri/per- 

 compa the third and fourth are emitted from a long pedicle or footstalk. 



"Supplementary (or post-discal) cell much narrower and more elon- 

 gated, emitting- last subcostal branch from its inferior margin, instead 

 of from its extremity. 



" Upper radial emitted near to, but not from anterior augle of dis- 

 coidal cell; lower radial also emitted further from inferior angle of 

 same. i 



" Second and third median branches emitted nearer together. 



" Secondaries with louger and straighter costal margin. 



" Subcostal branches emitted from anterior angle of cell and not from 

 a pedicle, as in Hypercompa.^'' 



A careful examination of a number of specimens of several species 

 convinced me that the characters given by Mr. Butler are not constant. 

 The shape of the accessory cell varies greatly, sometimes narrow and 

 linear, and again nearly as broad as long, while the veins arising from 

 it are sometimes all separated or partly (in one case all) from a stalk. 

 The other features are not less inconstant and I cannot see the propriety 

 of a separate generic term for our species. 



However, Mr. Butler's notes have affected the synonymy of the yellow 

 winged species to some extent, and that given in the text must be 

 amended as follows : 



C. clyniene Brown. 



interriqjto-marghiata DeB. et auct. 



comma Wlk. 

 C. colona Hb. 



clymene \\ Esp. et auct. 



Carolina Harr. 



I regret that it becomes necessary to disturb the established synon- 

 ymy in this genus, especially as the new application of the name cly- 

 mene is apt to cause confusion for a time ; yet I presume, even at the 

 end of one hundred years, an error or injustice should be rectiiied. 



It may not be amiss, eitlier, to call attention to the fact that whereas 

 Canadian collectors have very generally contended for the specific dis- 

 tinctness of some of the forms of this genus, the late Jacob Boll claimed 

 that he had raised all the species of the genus from larvae feeding on 

 the same species of plant (see Eiley, Gen. Index and Suppl. to Mo. 

 Eepts., p. 55), and Prof. Eiley assures me that he has seen Mr. Boll's 

 series, including all the known species, and believes his statement. I 

 can only say that I find it impossible to do so. The species seem to 

 me as well separated, with the possible exception of the immaculate 

 forms, as species are in any other family of the Lepidoptera. 



I must also express my gratitude to Mr. Butler for his great courtesj'- 

 in placing at my disposal so freely his notes on the genus. 

 Proc. iN\ M. 87 23 



