GS Mr. BiTi.ER tn Mr, Mci/zi'vi's vii'ics of certain 



Furthermore, Mr. Mej-rlck states tliat I have "• described the 

 sexes of one of the I'ortricina as two distinct species, and placed 

 them in two distinct genera in different famihes"; this may be 

 so, l)nt, if it is, there are two utterly dissimilar females to the 

 same species, one of which is not only unlike the male, but like 

 species of the genus Stenopiycha] in the second place, as we 

 only possess a pair of the first form described, and one specimen 

 of the second ; as their expanse of wings (not from tip to tip of 

 primaries, as many Lepidoj)terists measure, but fairlji, from tip 

 of Aviug to centre of ihorax. doubled) is exactly 4-| lines, and 

 therefore it would be impossible to make a critical examination 

 Avithout breaking up the tjpes, the question must for the 

 present remain an open one. 



In some instances I am accused by Mr. Meyrick of giving 

 bad descriptions, at other times he remarks upon my having 

 altered my mind as to the location of the species ; to the first 

 I reply I)y referring to p. 4 of his paper, A\here Mr. Meyrick 

 after .saying tliat Zeller's descrijitions are all easily recognizable, 

 immediately goes on to thank liim for sending figures which en- 

 abled him to " ensure their accurate determination " ; it would, 

 therefore, seem that although the descriptions were so excellent 

 that Mr. Meyrick recognized tliem as representing soJiiethhif/, it 

 was, nevertheless, necessary for him to have figures to enable 

 hiui to determine tr/iat they represented. As touching my failure 

 in omniscience, and the consequent growth of my knowledge 

 regarding the affinities of species, I should certainly apologize 

 to my critic but for the fact that he has virtually admitted his 

 own liability to err, e\en in such easily detected characters as 

 the cresting of the tluirax; he says (p. 42) "I was also Avrong 

 in imagining the existence of a thoracic crest." Surely when a 

 majL has so lively an imagination as this, he can hardly claim 

 to lie a more relialjle authority than Walker; however, I sliall 

 now pass on to examine more seriously ]).ir. Meyrick's views as 

 exhiljited in this paper. 



In the introduction. Mr. Meyrick speaks of the terminology 

 generally in use on the Continent of Eui'ope as siraj)le and 

 adaptable, and lar siq)eiior to the awkward and confusing 

 nomenclature sonietinits adopted. From wliat he subsequently 



