123 



XIII, 121) places callidus as a small narrowly marked brizo on the 

 strength of a presumable S type sent him by Grinnell, and Skinner 

 (1914, Tr. Am. Ent. Soc. XL, 202) follows these authors in listing 

 callidus, with lacustra Wright as a synonym, as a variety of briso. A 

 reference to Wright's figure of lacustra (1. c. PL XXXII, Fig. 480) 

 leaves little doubt in our mind that lacustra is properly referred to 

 briso, but after reading Grinnell's description we have considerable 

 doubt in our minds as to whether callidus can be correctly referred 

 here. In the first place the sketch of the $ clasping organs given by 

 Grinnell is vastly different from that given by Dr. Skinner of brizo 

 and secondly there are points in the description of the $ (which must 

 hold the specific name), which almost prohibit an association with 

 brizo; for instance Grinnell says the primaries show 'a small white 

 discal spot and midway between this and outer margin a group of 

 three whitish spots arranged in a diagonal line and close together; a 

 somewhat large white spot in the same plane, half way between costal 

 and inner margin,' all of which cannot possibly fit any form of 

 brizo. The 9 description on the other hand might very readily be 

 made to agree with brizo and we wonder if Grinnell has not confused 

 two species, the $ being a form of brizo and the $ some species 

 related possibly to persius. Specimens distributed later by Grinnell as 

 callidus certainly are brizo forms as a $ in our possession fiom San 

 Jacinto Mts. shows ; this however does not validate the name which 

 must be held to the $ sex. The types should be in the Calif. Acad, 

 of Science Coll. in S. Francisco and an examination by some of our 

 West Coast collectors is much to be desired. 



T. lilius Dyar. 



The species was described from Kaslo, B. C. ; Dr. Dyar says (Jour. 

 N. Y. Ent. Soc. XIII, 122) that the $ genitalia resemble Scudder's 

 figure of the genitalia of tibullus but lack spines on the middle lobe 

 of the left side piece. Dr. Skinner (Tr. Am. Ent. Soc. XL, 208) states 

 that the genitalia are like those of pacuvius Lint, which he figures as 

 quite distinct from those of tibullus according to Scudder's figure. Dr. 

 Skinner sinks tibullus to propertius, his figure of the genitalia agree- 

 ing however closer with Scudder's figure of tibullus than that of the 

 same author's figure of propertius. It remains to be seen if Scud- 

 der's figures of the genitalia of tibullus and propertius represent specific 

 differences or merely slight variations of one species and further it 

 will be necessary to decide between Dyar and Skinner regarding the 



