119 



so-called group Tineina any characteristic, or combination of char- 

 acteristics, which I can " grasp'' as constituting it a family or group 

 of families. It appears to me to be a purely arbitrary and hetero- 

 geneous assemblage of families differing as widely from each 

 other as they do from Noctuidce, PhycidcB, etc. In size and form 

 and neuration, and other respects, they grade up from the smallest 

 and lowest, passing as gradually into the higher groups TortricidcBf 

 etc., as the latter do in these respects into families still higher in 

 the scale. And although by using the termination " idae" 

 instead of " ina" we secure a " termination uniform with 

 Sphmgdce, BombycidcB," etc., we do not secure a "family" of 

 equal value with those families, but only a large heterogenous 

 group composed of numerous families {Gelechidce, Tineidce re- 

 stricted, etc.,) the value of which is at present unproved. 



It appears to me most probable that the small size, long 

 cilia, etc., of such genera as have these characteristics are the 

 results of degradation, not from a common form, but from a 

 variety of originals, and in different directions ; that the stu- 

 dent will be greatly aided, to say the least, by a study of their 

 early stages and development, and that this course is most likely to 

 give us the key to their relationship — that is, to their natural 

 classification. Such study, so far as I have prosecuted it, tends to 

 the conclusion that instead of being a natural group of related 

 families it contains at least five distinct families, degraded from 

 as many distinct originals, and perhaps less related to each other 

 than they are to some of the higher groups. 



With great deference, therefore, for the opinions of so dis- 

 tinguished an entomologist as Lord Walsingham (and, no doubt, 

 of many others), I am compelled to differ with him as to many 

 statements in his interesting paper in Papilio, and I avail my- 

 self of this opportunity to state my own views more explicitly 

 than I have elsewhere done. I will add that I have somewhere 

 (I cannot now give the citation) seen some remarks by Mr. 

 Stainton upon this subject, in which, as I remember, after briefly 

 mentioning most of the characteristics of the supposed group 

 alluded to by Lord Walsingham as above quoted, he concludes 

 that the ciliation of the wings affords the best criterion, but 

 admits that that fails sometimes. I think it is only a mark of 

 degradation, and occurs just about in proportion as the species is 

 more or less degraded, and does not indicate relationship. 



NOTES ON PAPILIO OREGONIA.— £Z>PF. 



By R. H. Stretch. 



During my recent trip to Washington Territory with Dr. 

 Hagen I was fortunate enough, in conjunction with Mr. S. Hen- 

 shaw, of the Boston Natural History Society, to take some 



