both t\\e European and American species, but does not seem to notice 

 how different they are. That the larvK are entirely unlike each other is 

 confirmed to me by Mr. Bruce of Brockport, N. Y., who has raised many 

 specimens of the European species in England, and of ours here. I think 

 as long as the matter stands this way, it is only fair to regard the Ameri- 

 can as a good species. 



Nematocampa limbaria Haw. This is the insect afterwards named 

 N. filimentaria by Guenee. But the insect was undoubtedly the one de- 

 scribed by Haworth. As such it is figured in Wood's Index Entomo- 

 logicus, as it was regarded as a European as w-ell as an American species. 

 Both Guenee and Packard seemed to have a suspicion that Haworth 's 

 name was the correct one for the insect. Mr. Grote's N. expunctaria is 

 a variety of this species. I have never met with the type form, but I have 

 seen examples of N. limbaria corresponding in both the front and hind 

 wings, but never in the same specimen, 



Eurymene serinaria H. Sch. Dr. Packard thought this to be the 

 same as E. rosaria Grt. He does not seem to have known E. floscularia 

 Grt. Herrich-Schaeflfer's figure, though undescribed, is very excellent, 

 and is not E. rosaria but E. floscularia. E. rosaria seems to me to b6 

 a good species, though it differs from E. floscularia only in a general 

 softening of the colors, a very unreliable basis for specific distinction. 

 But with the few specimens of each I have, the two do not seem to inter- 

 grade. 



Hyperetis amicaria H. Sch. This name, as has been remarked by 

 Mr. Grote, antedates the name ZT, wv^sar/a of Guenee. The latter as 

 bemg the name of the form dark reddish brown on the outer third is a 

 good variety. 



The determinations given in the foregoing notes are without personal 

 knowledge of the types of either Guenee or Walker. Dr. Packard, as 

 well as Mr. Grot^, have examined and commented upon those types, 

 and in the majority of cases identified them. 



Mr, A. G . Butler has also published some notes upon the British 

 Museum types. Very few of the species in the Enjiomiiice of Guenee and 

 Walker remain to be identified. A hasty count gives 6 to Guenee, 9 to 

 Walker, But these will not disturb the synonomy much, if these authors 

 keep up their average of synonyms. Upon another hasty count of identi- 

 fied species I find Guenee named 36, and Walker 44. Of those ot 

 Guenee 26 are synonyms, 10 are good. Of Walker's 38 are synonyms, 

 6 are good. It is however only fair to say that some which are not good 

 species are good varieties. But with the few species undetermined, 

 there stands very little possibility of much disturbance of the synonomy. 



