ENTOMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF ONTARIO. 27 



its bite, I consider them unetjiialled. These unwelcome intruders kept me so continuaL 

 ly busy in looking after ray own interests that I came to the conclusion I would not study 

 their food plants — nor would I recommend them to any of ray Bermudian friends as a 

 '• benefical insect " (to mankind at least.) 



Of Hemiptera about H varieiies wern captured, principally about the Loquat tree 

 and upon the tree known as The Pride of India. 



The Jjoquat is a favorite fruit with not only the natives but nearly every visitor who 

 tastes it. The botanical name is Gydonia Japonlcn, and as its name implies is a native 

 of Japan, and thrives in sheltered places. 



The Pride of India, (Melia Azeda'^-ach) is a grand tree and lines the boulevards of the 

 principal streets in Hamilton. I have water-color sketches of these trees, one in fruit 

 the other in flower. 



There is one other fruit tree the product of which seems most palatable to the 

 natives, viz.: The Surinam Ohei'ry. I am at fault about the scientiHc name, but also 

 produce a water-color sketch of the fruit at its best. Upon the blossoms the Piusiada> 

 and bees are to be taken, frequently in February and March. 1 have mi doubt in the 

 summer months the second crop would attract many more examples, for the trees fruit 

 twice a year, I have been told by old residents. 



Preferring to this tree I have taken a few katydids and grasshoppers, (Oichoptera,) 

 amongst them doubtless Conocephalu:? Easiger, although I must confess 1 prefer the song 

 of his green colored cousin Phylloptera Oblongifolia, hailing from our midst and which is 

 found drowned so often on the shores of our lakei? in. Upper Canada after a heavy gale 

 of wind. 



The spiders would give entertainment to any enthusiast for months, for their name is 

 legion. 



In conclusion I may add that the Neuroptera were very scarce during the winter- 

 time, although L saw several varieties in some of the local coUecLions which were 

 unnamed. Evidently they were abundant about the marshes during the summer 

 months. 



COMMON NAMES FOR BUTTERFLIES.— SHALL WE HAVE THEM? 



By H. H. Lyman, Montheal. 



Read before the Montreal Branch 14th November, 181»3. 



This is a question upon which the entomologists of this continent have been as 

 much divided as upon any of the deeper scientific problems which have engaged their 

 attention. 



The great majority of the working entomologists have been strongly oppo3ed to their 

 introduction, some even fiercely so, but there have been a few entomologists, some of 

 them of the first rank, who have espoused their cause with at least some measure of 

 success. 



Of course there are many objectious to these names, the chief being their purely 

 arbitrary and unscientific application, the impossibility of securing uniformity in their use 

 and the difficnlty of obtaining suitable and sulKciently concise names for more than a very 

 limited fauna 



The opponents of popular names assert that it should be as easy to remember the 

 scientific as the common names and th it if it is not, we should not encourage laziness by 

 adopting them. 



I used to be as strongly opposed to these names as anyone but latterly have some- 

 times thought that if their adoption would result in popularizing the study ot this science 

 the gain would be worth the sacrifice. 



