76 Annals Entomological Society of America [Vol. VII, 
Cu2 and the first anal vein is not shown by Quayle. In all 
of my specimens the cross vein from Se to R1 is either exceed- 
ingly faint, or wanting entirely; sometimes being indicated 
by a thickening of R1 at the point where it might be expected 
to occur. Cross vein, from -Ril::to radial sector is usually 
indicated by a sharply defined stub, extending about one- 
seventh of the distance upward from the radial sector, and is 
sometimes indicated above by a less sharply defined stub 
extending downward. The position of the cross vein from 
the radial sector to M1,2 is exceedingly variable, sometimes 
joining above to R2,3,4,5, and sometimes to R4,5. In some 
cases, such a difference occurs between the wings of the same 
insect as in the case of 5L and 5R;3Land3R. Inthe majority 
of cases the cross vein between Cu2 and the Ist A is repre- 
sented by a short stub only, which arises from 1st A. 
The variations in the venation of the hind wings are even 
more striking than in the fore wings, especially regarding the 
types illustrated by Banks and Quayle, when compared with 
my photographs. Banks illustrates a cross vein between 
R1 and the radial sector; Quayle shows a long oblique cross 
vein between Sc and R1; while in all my specimens Sc bends 
sharply downward towards the distal end and joins Rl. Some 
wings have a short cross vein joining Sc and R1 near the point 
where the former joins the latter, forming a very peculiar 
little cell. 
None of the longitudinal veins of the hind wing are shown 
by Banks as joining the outer margin which agrees with Ender- 
lein’s generic description of Conwentzia. Quayle shows radius 
and its branch; media and cubitus joining the margin. In 
my specimens Cu Rl, if not joining the margin, approaches 
perilously near to it, while the radial sector unquestionably 
joins the margin and cubitus joins in some instances. 
An additional and final comparison may be drawn between 
the comparative size of the fore and hind wings as represented 
by the drawings of Banks and Quayle and my photographic 
series. In the entire set of reproductions, the size ratio between 
the fore and hind wings is truthfully maintained, hence, by 
collating wings B, Q and 1, of the fore and hind series, it will 
be seen that no very great difference obtains regarding the size 
of the forewings, whereas the hind wing of Quayle’s specimen 
is markedly larger than either of the others. 
