179 



ary-yellow; Harfordii as bright lemon-yellow. Both shades are found in 

 both sexes. The females, some of them, have a close resemblance to 

 the female of Laurentina, but, as Mr. Edwards pointed out, the mar- 

 ginal border is different, being pretty nearly of equal width entirely 

 acroijs the fore wing, whereas, in Laurentina the border " is apical only, 

 and obsolete before reaching the inner margin." All my females agree 

 with that. The discal spot in both sexes is clear white, in a brown 

 pink ring; the spot of Interior is roseate; the marginal border of fore 

 wings in $> Harfordii is equal throughout its entire length, except that 

 it widens a little at apex, of Interior itisWkQ Felidtie much advanced on 

 costa, and the inner side presents from inner margin to costa a much 

 curved arc. Some Harfordii and some Barbara are wholly without 

 e.> tra-discal spots on either wing; others of both have faint traces of 

 these spots, and one ^ , which on upper side is canary-yellow, with 

 narrow straight border, has the under side with discal spot roseate in 

 broad pinkish ring, has large extra-discal pinkish spots on hind wings, 

 black points on fore wings, the patch at outer angle of hind wings. 

 Now on under side I cannot separate this $, from a $, Hagenii, in 

 color or spots. So that Harfordii is a peculiar and very interesting 

 species, and presents two sets of characters, allying it to Interior, but 

 always with a difference, and to Hagenii occasionally, but there also 

 with a difference, for I find no upper surface like Hagenii, only now 

 and then an under surface. Dr. Hagen would say that part of these 

 examples were Edwardsii, and therefore Interior, for it is necessary to 

 make them Edwardsii before they can be passed over to Interior, and 

 part are PJiilodice. I say that they form one distinct species, and that 

 the resemblance to two other species is due to community of descent. 

 C. Occidentalis. I received i 5 2 ? of this species from Fort Simp- 

 son, 1862, and when Mr. Scudder drew up his description he had the 

 male before him. Why he had not the females I do not now remember; 

 but I see that he describes a white female only, which Dr. Hagen 

 thinks is Eurytheme. He has had similar $ ? etc., etc., from this 

 place or that. Very likely there had been similarity in some points. 

 The normal female is yellow, and is figured in the Plate in B.N.A. The 

 white at best is an aberration, such as is common throughout this 

 genus. Dr. Hagen brings the species to Interior as usual. 

 There is one difference between the two that is decisive : the female 

 Occidentalis has a broad border to fore wings, made up of black scales 

 disposed in such a way that it incloses a series of yellow spaces down 

 the whole margin, and except apex, the border is of even width. The 

 same style of border characterizes Chrysomelas, which I put in same 

 sub-group. Now Interior never has such a border, nor does Lauren- 

 tina. I have a long series of these two (though I regard them as one 

 species, from north side River St. Lawrence, from N. Scotia, and Cape 

 Breton — Mr. Scudder's types), and in all cases the border is moder- 

 ately broad at apex, diminishes gradually and ends above the inner 

 angle and incloses nothing. 



Chrysomelas may be looked upon as an intensified Occidentalis; 

 very large, the largest Colias in America out of Group i, with very 

 wide borders to the $ ; the borders to fore wings of female always wide 



