AMERICAN LEPIDOPTERA. 19 



ferred to Prionoxystus. In Hypopta we find our sjoecies unchanged. 

 Prionoxystus contains our species and jiiger from Cuba. Cossnla 

 basalis appears in genus 21, in the full glory of its synonymy, generic 

 and specific. Under Zeuzera we find canadensis H.-S. and deciplens 

 Kirby. The latter name has as synonym Hepialus pyrimis Fab., 

 Zeuzera pyrma Wlk. and Machesney. Mr. Kirby seems to consider 

 that our species is not the same as the European form, and therefore 

 names it, giving N. America as the habitat. I believe that Mr. 

 Kirby is mistaken. The insect has been carefully compared with 

 European specimens by competent entomologists and has been de- 

 clared identical with them. It is still so limited in distribution, and 

 its history since its appearance here is so well known, that its recent 

 introduction is a matter scarcely questionable. It would be inter- 

 esting to have Mr. Kirby point out the differences between the spe- 

 cies. It is curious that Z. canadensis should not have been redis- 

 covered by the many good Canadian collectors, and it raises a 

 suspicion that the locality may have been erroneously given. 



Family XXIX is the Hepialidse, and the last of the series. The 

 typical genus heads the list, and contains a large proportion of onr 

 species. Camus is not credited to our fauna, and Walker's identifi- 

 cation of the species from Hudson's Bay Territory may easily have 

 been incorrect. All the varieties in my list, save montanus Stretch, 

 are here given specific rank. Argenteomactdatus, argentatm, quadn- 

 guttatus, purpurasce)i.s and thule, are referred to Sthenopis, and in the 

 other genera no species from our fauna appear. 



In its entirety Mr. Kirby's work is worthy of the highest praise. 

 I have noted no important omissions and very few errors of any 

 kind. Mr. Kirby shows a remarkable acquaintance with entomo- 

 logical literature — an acquaintance in which no one who has not 

 access to the vast wealth of the London libraries can hoj)e to rival 

 him. To the working entomologist the work is indispensable, and 

 a very godsend. In typography and general get up, it leaves little 

 to be desired. Mr. Kirby has apparently been at great pains to fix 

 the types of geaiera, and in most cases his conclusions will have to 

 be accepted. In the adoption of the Tentamen names I must de- 

 cline to follow him ; but I have long felt that many of the Verzeich- 

 niss names must come to be used in time. A serious fault in the 

 work is, that it is not possible to learn from it what synonymy is 

 original and what is adopted. As a guide to distribution, it is use- 

 less, except in the most limited way. No pretence to completeness 



TRANS. AM. ENT. SOC. XX. ' MARCH, 1893. 



