132 



captures and the descriptions of the new species were soon in MS. 

 form. Mr. Edwards at once sent descriptions of some of them to the 

 Canadian E^itomologist, in which they appeared about November ist 

 (Can. Ent. IX, p. 189-192, October, 1877), and of others to Field and 

 Forest {¥. and F. Ill, pp. 87, 88, 89, loi, 103, and 118, 1877). As 

 the October number of the Canadian Entomologist was on the table of 

 the American Entomological Society, at their meeting held Nov. 9, 

 1877, there can be no doubt that the names given by Mr. Edwards to 

 the species described therein can base their claims to precedence on 

 that date. On the other hand, Mr. Strecker reserved the publication 

 of his descriptions for Part 14 of his Lepidoptera, Rhopaloceres et 

 Heteroceres. Now it appears that while these descriptions were written 

 during September, 1877, and were doubtless in type as early as the 

 descriptions of Mr. Edwards, still the part in which they appeared was 

 delayed, by various causes, until the latter part of the following March. 

 After very careful and far-reaching inquiry I find that March 25, 1878, 

 is as early a date of circulation as this part can be credited with. It 

 was not on the table of the American Entomological Society, nor was 

 it received by the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, before 

 that date, and inquiry of subscribers in Philadelphia and elsewhere, 

 fails to indicate that any one received it before the last week in March. 

 My attention was called to this matter by the receipt of a portion of 

 Godman and Salvin's superb work on the fauna of Central America, 

 at the rooms of the American Entomological Society. In this part 

 (Godman and Salvin, Biol. Cent. Amer. Rhopal. vol. i, p. i, pi. i) 

 they give Mr. Strecker' s names the precedence in each case where the 

 question arises. Just prior to the receipt of this work by the Society, 

 my brother, S. F. Aaron, had returned with a very complete collec- 

 tion of butterflies made in the region of Corpus Christi, Te.xas. This 

 collection contained most of the species which Mr. Boll had taken at 

 San Antonio. As we wished to send some of these to collectors cor- 

 rectly determined, and also to contribute to the pages of Papilio for 

 November a notice of these captures, it became necessary to settle to 

 our own satisfaction this question of priority.* To enable us to judge 

 conclusively both Mr. Strecker and Mr. Edwards were written to; from 

 their replies I extract the following: 



COALBURGH, \V. Va., NoV. 18,1884. 



Mr. E. M. Aaron, Dear Sir:— 



Yours of 17th is received. I reply to 

 your inquiry about Melitc^a Ulrica versus M. Imitata. If Godman and 

 Salvin have given Mr. Strecker' s names the priority, as you tell me, 

 it is because they have overlooked the facts. 



* It is probable that a few of these species will be found to belong to Hewitson and other Euro- 

 pean describers. 



