NYMrHALID."E — MORPniN.E. — TENARIS. 



T. Dimona, How., iu which the middle ocelli are all developed aud are surrounded by a common 

 fulvous zone." 



We lately received Baud VII., Heft 1, of "The Iris," which now forms the Lepidopterous 

 section of the "Deutsche Eutomologische Zeitschrift," and we find that at pp. 109, 110, Dr. 

 Staudinger, in criticizing Mr. Grose Smith's description of this species, quotes a part only of his 

 final remarks upou it ; bv omitting the words " In the arrangement of the spots on the underside 

 of the posterior wings," and quoting only the remainder of the sentence iu which these words 

 occur. Dr. Staudinger misrepresents the meaning of the whole paragraph, which obviously only 

 draws attention to an analogous arrangement of the spots on those wings in a variety of 

 T. Dimona, also captured by Mr. Doherty. 



Upon this misrepresentation Dr. Staudinger bases his conclusion that T. Rothscluldi is 

 identical with the specimen noticed immediately afterwards as a variety of T. Dimona, and 

 proceeds to make sarcastic remarks about legal subtleties aud Mr. Grose Smith's logic, which ai'e 

 unwarranted and irrelevant. 



If Dr. Staudinger had taken the trouble to carefully read the description of T. RoihscJiildi 

 before he ventured upon his criticism, he would have seen that this species cannot be merely a 

 "variety or aberration " of T. Dimona, that it must be an entirely distinct species, and that the 

 only respect in which it approaches the variety of T. Dimona referred to is the arrawjement of the 

 spot^ on the underside of the posterior wim/s, words which Dr. Staudinger carelessly, but doubtless 

 unintentionally, omits. 



AVe shall be surprised to find that the three aberrations of T. Dimona, mentioned by Dr. 

 Staudinger as being in his collection, and which he (erroneously as we believe) identifies with 

 T. Rothschildi, turn out to be that species, and we anticipate that Dr. Staudinger will, if he finds 

 he is in error, take an early opportunity of expressing his regret for tlie mistake into which he 

 has fallen. 



After reading the foregoing remarks, which throw some light ui^on the spirit which appears 

 to pervade Dr. Staudinger's Paper in " Iris," our readers will be iu a position to form their own 

 opinion upon them, and to estimate the amount of reliance to be placed, generally, ujion Dr. 

 Staudinger's criticisms of Mr. Grose Smith's Paper iu " Novitates Zoologicse." 



v.— TENAEIS MICROPS. $ . Figs. 4, 5. 



Tenaris Microps, Henley Grose Smith, in " Novitates Zoologicas," I., p. 359 

 (April 1894). 



Exp. 3f inches. 



" 3Iale. Upperside. Both wings fuliginous grey. Anterior wings with 

 the outer part of the cell and the disc from the upper median nervule to the 

 inner margin sordid white, the veins over the pale space grey. Posterior wings 

 with the basal third greyish white shading outwardly into the fuliginous grey 

 of the outer area. 



" Underside. Anterior wings as above, but the pale space extends upwards 

 nearly to the costa. Posterior wings with the cell, except at the base, and the 



