14 [June, 



grey ; the abdomen very narrow, depressed, and reddish-brown. Zetterstedt only 

 knew the male ; the female is very similar to it, but has the abdomen fusiform and 

 the metatarsi yellow. A pair of this well marked and peculiar species were sent to 

 me for identification by Mr. Dale, of Glanville Wootton in May, 1877. 



(To be continued). 



EEPLY TO ME. MEYRICK'S OBSERVATIONS ON THE SYNONYMY 

 OF CERTAIN MICRO-LEPIDOPTERA. 



BY ARTHUR G. BUTLER, F.L.S., F.Z.S., &c. 



It is a truth which none will question, that no criticism of a 

 man's work (however severe or unmerited) is so distressing as the 

 ignoring of it altogether ; and the distress, such as it is, is still more 

 diminished when the critic bases his observations upon an unsound 

 foundation. 



When a man can say, as Mr. Meyrick cannot, that he has before 

 him, as he writes, the types, or even good figures, of several so-called 

 species, referred by their authors to different genera ; and, that they 

 are specifically identical, his statements may be accepted, until proved 

 to be erroneous ; but when he makes such sweeping statements as that 

 respecting Bliodaria rohina, it may safely be concluded that he will 

 commit many errors through haste which he will afterwards regret : 

 I will not then repeat this error by asserting that B. rohina is not 

 one or both of Guenee's species referred to Endotricha, since I have 

 neither of that author's types before me, but I will positively main- 

 tain that it is neither generically nor specifically identical with any 

 Endotricha known to me, nor with the FyraJis stilhealis and P. docili- 

 salis, of Walker ; I will further observe that I do not believe the last 

 two to be varieties of the same species ; although on this point I am 

 open to conviction if Mr. Meyrick can show me a series of examples 

 linking them together: on the other hand, Walker's species are refer- 

 able to his genus Dotlitha, which appears to be congeneric with 

 Endotricha {E.flammealis') ; and, therefore, on this head, as in all hut 

 one of my notes on synonymy, I am able to agree with Mr. Meyrick : 

 whether he is right in stating that Rhodaria, Guen., is not separable 

 from Botys will depend entirely upon what he regards as the type of 

 the latter genus, a point which, at present, I have not the time to 

 enter into. 



I admit that I was ovor-hasty (in my paper in the Annals) in con- 



