[IS75. 125 



59. ECSEMIA LETHE. 



Eusemia lethe, Boisduval, Revue et Mag. de Zool., s. 3, vol. 2, p. 77, 

 n. 39 (1S71) ; Felder, Eeise dcr Nov. Lep. 4, pi. cvii, fig. 7 (1871). 

 Celebes. 



I have much doubt as to the following species belonging to this 

 genus. 



GO. ? ErSEMIA BATESII. 



Eusemia hatesii, Boisduval, lievue ct Mag. de Zool., s. 3, vol. 2, 

 p. 7S, u. 42 (1874) ; Felder, Eeise der N'ov. Lep. 4, pi. cvii, fig. 8 (1874). 

 Moluccas. 



Gl. ? Eusemia lindigii. 



Eusemia lindigii, Boisduval, Revue et Mag. de Zool., s. 3, vol. 2, 

 p. 78, n. 43 (1874) ; Felder, Reise der Nov. Lep., 4, pi. cvii, fig. 6 (1874). 



Moluccas. 



This species closely resembles Phasis separata, Walker, an Amer- 

 ican species. 



G2. ? Eusemia josioides. 



Eusemia josioides, Walker, Lep. Ilet. Suppl., i, p. 54 (1SG4). 



Gilolo. 



Seems to approach the genus Arctioneura, Felder. 



G3, ? Eusemia flaticiliata. 



Eusemia Jlaviciliata, Boisduval, Revue et Mag. de Zool., s. 3, vol. 

 2, p. 79, n. 44 (1874). 



Philippines. 



G4. ? Eusemia meoisto. 



Eusemia me/jfisfo, Boisduval, Yoy. de I'ABtrolabe, Lep., pi. v, fig. 5, 

 p. 179 ; Revue et Mag. de Zool., s. 3, vol. 2, p. 79, n. 4(5 (1S74). 



Dorey. 



Dr. Boisduval himself says, " It would perhaps be better located 

 " near the genus Vi/essa, of Mr. Moore." 



I believe that I have given reasons for expunging from this genus 

 all the remaining species described as Eusemicc in my paper on the 

 Agaristiilce (Ann. and Mag. Nat. Hist., s. 4, vol. 15, pp. 135 — 144). 

 I would, however, add that, unless E. mollis and E. emolliens differ 

 sufliciently from E. Jincea and E. hamhuciiia to form a distinct genus, 

 they may be placed with tliem in the genus Ophthuhnis. 



British Mueeiuu : September, 1875. 



