— 6- 



nearly related to Daremma than some of the other genera are. The study 

 which I have already given to these genera leads me to think that when 

 Mr. Smith reviews his work and critically examines all the species struct- 

 urallv, including the genitalia, he will also include Ceralomia, or else, 

 (what is more likely), he will retain all the above named genera distinct. 

 I have already trespassed too far and will not take time and space to point 

 out their respective distinctive characters. 



NOTE BY EDITOR. 



Prof. Fernald rather intimates in the preceeding paper that he would 

 like to have me "rise and explain'' — a thing I am never averse to doing. 

 In the first place my paper on the Sphingida? is very general in character, 

 does not pretend to go into the minuter details of structure, and gives 

 only in brief my ideas on the subject, in the form that seemed to me 

 most suited to the needs of the class that I desired to reach. The quest- 

 ion of Sesiidce or AegeriiJce. is not touched in my paper; but I take this 

 opportunity of signifying my entire concurrence in Prof. Fernald's view 

 of the matter. 



Macroglossa or Hemarisi The great majority of European authors 

 place croatica and stellatarum together with the clear winged forms, and 

 Staudinger so catalogues them. Stellatarum makes a long reach in 

 habitus to Aellopos, while croatica has rather more the true Macroglossa 

 form. It is a question of opinion, and as my paper was designed to 

 leave out such discussions, I adopted the more comprehensive term. As 

 we have only the clear winged forms in our fauna it may be preferable to 

 use the more restrictive term Hemaris. 



As to Lepisesia or Pogocolon, Prof. Fernald is right. The former has 

 priority. The only awkward point is that whereas Pogocolon includes 

 Lepisesia, that genus being created for a somewhat peculiar species, does 

 not include Pogocolon. Mr. Grote's genus was created for this species 

 only; but as the species of Pogocolon are really congeneric with Lepisesia 

 flavo/asciata Mr. Grote's genus must be used. 



As to Darapsa: No one reading Walker's characterization and no- 

 ting the general agreement of the forms placed under it, can doubt that 

 the genus created by him was really nothing but Otus Hb. , and as Otus 

 was preoccupied Darapsa should properly have been used as a substitute. 

 Mr. Grote's action in breaking up the genus was therefore somewhat 

 arbitrary; but as the term really included heterogeneous material he had 

 perhaps the right to restrict the name to any form he chose. But he 

 should have provided the three species of Otus with a new generic term . 

 Mr. Grote's return to Darapsa was probably based on a view similar to 



