PIERIS NAPI. 63 



l)Of?ins it is, iiulood, ditliciilt tii (lotcrrniiic, l)ut that Veiiosa is identical witli Napi I am sure; Pallida may, 

 perhaps, have the benefit of the shadow of a doubt, but eventually, I believe my opinion will be substantiated 

 as to the identity of all three ; both P. Pallida and P. Venosa are eomuon in California and udjaeeni territory, 

 and eonld the larvie be discovered, their status as species or varieties could be then defined. 



Fios. 2 and 3 are the ordinarv form of P. Venosa, neither the darkest or the li«,ditest marked ; I have 

 others much heavier marked, and, iis I before said, between these and P. Pallida, all the intermediate irrades. 



Time will prove that there are much iewer true species of Le])id()]itcra than are at present supposed tn 

 exist; at first the old authors, owing to the science being in its infiiiuy and eoiiseciuent want of o|)portunities 

 for observation, in many instances described males and females of the same species as distinct; especially was 

 this the case with the trojiical Lep., where the sexes, in numerous instances, are entirely dissimilar in apjjear- 

 ance. P>ut through the lal)ors of Horsfield, Bates, Wallace aud others, the majority of t hese errors have been 

 corrected, and latterly, though occasionally some naturalist, through negligence or inal)ility, makes male and 

 female out of one sex, it has ceased to be a common oilence, but in lieu thereof, every microscoi)ic variation of 

 tint or marking is seized upon with avidity in order to create a new species, and equally often is the sanie 

 result attained through he student's negligence in obtaining the |)roper material for comparison, or in his 

 haste to outstri]) some other unfortunate in foisting an old species with a new title on the world, that will be 

 honored bv having the abbreviation of his name, like an antient tin-|)an, dangling to its tail. 



Though not so palatable to the advowees of multii)licity of species, how much better would it be to en- 

 deavor to define the true status of species already described, than to be eternally <irinding out new ones, and 

 only o-iving to after generations the trouble of undoing what has been done, and earning for themselves few 

 thanks and much ridicule. 



PIKUIS HAP.E, LiNNKus. 



Rap.?:, Linnams, IPapilio H.) Faun Suec. p. 270, (1761); Syst. Nat. I, 2, p. 759, (1767). Esper, Schmett. 

 I, 1, t. ;5, f 2, (1777). Huhner, Eur. Schmett. I, f 404, 405, (1798-1803). 

 Fieris Hapa; Godart, Enc. Meth., \o\. IX, p. 161, (1819). BomUmil, Sp. Gen. I, p. 520, 

 (1836). .S/aMf/tnye/-, Cat. Lep. Eur. I, p. 3, (1871). Kirby, Cat. Diurnal Lep., p. 

 454, (1871). Edwards, Hyn. N. Am. Lep., p. 4, (1872). 

 Poittia Ji'apd', Duncan, Nat. Lib. Ent., Vol. Ill, p. 117, t. 7, (1835). 

 Tachi/ptera Rup(r, Berge, .Sehmetterlingsbuch, p. 94, t. 30, (1842). 



Pkr'k 3J<irginatl>i, ^cuddcr, Proc. Bost. Nat. Hist. Soc. VIII, p. 183, (1861). Morris, Synopsis, 

 p. 321, (1862). Weidemeyer, Proc. Ent. Soc. Phila., Vol. II, p. 151, (1863). Kirby, 

 Cat. Diurnal Lep., p. 454, (1871). Edwards, Syn. N. Am. Lep., p. 5, (1872.) 

 Fieris Yreka, Heakirt, Proc. Acatl. Nat. Sc. Phila., p. 238, (1866). 

 Var. Nelo, Borkhausen, (Fapilio N.) Eur. Schmett. I, p. 127, (1788). 



Var. Metr.\, Stephens, )M7i<w J/.) III. Brit. Ent. Haust. I, p. 19,(1827). Duncan, Nat. Lib. 

 Ent., Vol. Ill, p. 119, t. 8, (1835). Pieris M., Wedirood, Humphrey, Brit. Butt., p. 

 26, t. 5, (1841) Kirhii, Cat. Diurnal Lep., p. 454, (1871). 

 Var. EmtANE, Ilubncr, {Papi/i<, PJ.) Eur. Schmett., I,f. 904-907,(1827?). Pieris E., Staudinger, 

 Cat. Lep. Eur., I, p. 3, (1871). Kirby, Cat. Diurnal Lep., p. 454, (1871). 

 Pontia Narca-a, Freyer, Beit. Eur. Schmett., I, t. 43, (1828). 

 Var. Mannii, JVIayer, (Ponii'a i)/.) Stett.Ent. Zcit., p. 151,(1851), Pieris M., Staudinger, Cat. 



Lep. Eur. I, p. 3, (1871). Kirby, Cat. Diurnal Lep., p. 454, (1871). 

 Var. Lettcotera, Stefluielli, Bull. Enf. Soc. Ital. I, p. 147, (1869). 

 Var. NovANGLi.E, Scudder, {Ganoris A.) Can. Ent., Vol. IV, p. 79, (1872). 



PLATE VIII, FIG. 6, 7, PIERIS MABGINALIS, 8ciidder, (P. Yreka, Reakirl,) c?. 

 FIG. 8, PIERIS NOVANGLI^, Scudder, J"- 



How Mr. Scudder first, and afterwards Mr. Reakirt, could have imagined the examples, which they 

 respectively dubbed P. Marginalis aud P. Yreka, were new species, and distinct from the old P. Rapse, is 

 beyond my ken. I even yet think that Mr. Scudder must have been mistaken when he pronounced the types 

 of P. Yreka identical with P. Marginalis ; then again, it can scarce be possible that he would not know his 

 own species ! With regard to Mr. Reakirt's determinations there can be no dispute ; the figs. 6, 7, were 

 drawn from his two original types of P. Yreka which he described in 1866, and which are now in my cabinet. 



