164 



orange and Hagenii would be indistinguishable from Eiirytheme. This 

 struck Mr. Mead, when collecting in Colorado, and he wrote me then; 

 " if there can be a yellow Eurytheme, this is it." 



C. Hagenii is also close to C. Eriphyle, a common species in Br. Col- 

 umbia. At the end of my description of Eriphyle, Tr. A. E. Soc. V. 

 1876, I said : "Mr. Mead brought from Colo., in 1871, a Colias very 

 close to this from Lake Lahache, and which ia Mr. Reakirt's paper on 

 the But. of Colo., Pr. E. S. Phil. 1867, p. 14, is doubtless the one 

 called Philodice. The same form was brought from Montana by Dr. 

 Coues, when engaged on the Boundary Line Commission. For the 

 present I shall give no opinion as to these, but they seem to me nearer 

 to Eriphyle than lo Philodice.''' The species spoken of is Hagenii, and 

 1 now see that it lies between Philodice and Eurytheme, the four species 

 making a sub-group. 



I name this fine species, conquered by the bows and spears of Mr. 

 Nash and myself, in honor of our distinguished Neuropterist, whose 

 recent zeal in a new field, to wit, the N. A. Lepidoptera, has been the 

 admiration of all beholders. We have established it on a sure founda- 

 tion by breeding from the egg, and I respectfully commend this meth- 

 od of determining the position of doubtful spejies to Dr. Hagen. 



CoALBURGH, W. Va., Octobcr I, 1883. 



CAPITALIZING SPECIFIC NAMES. 



BY C. V. RILEY. 



There could scarcely be greater justification for the inquiry on p. 

 62, of this volume, as to the reason for the uniform capitalizing of 

 specific names than the temper of the answer given by Mr. \Vm. H. 

 Edwards on pp. 103-5. My question, while somewhat obscured by 

 typographical errors, subsequently corrected, was a simple one and 

 has not yet been satisfactorily answered. Mr. Edwards in his reply 

 tries hard to be facetious, but instead of bringing forward any valid 

 defense of the custom, would dispose of it by the assertion that '' it is 

 the only proper thing to do!" Let us see what are his grounds for 

 this assertion ? Mr. Edwards has not been very accurate in his quota- 

 tions from my inquiry, especially in the closing paragraph, and he 

 misapprehends my point if he supposes that I have any objections to 

 the proper use of capitals for specific names in accordance with the 

 well known and generally accepted rules of the Latin language, which 

 would include all proper nouns. My objection is to the uniform use 

 of such capitals, whether the specific name be a common one or in the 

 adjective or genitive form. The fashion is peculiar to Lepidopterists, 

 and I hold that it is comparatively recent and that it is improper and 

 unjustifiable My reasons for this belief are : 



I. The rules governing the popular designation of individuals are 

 different from those adopted for the technical designation of genera 

 and species ; for while we write "John Brown," we as invariably write 



