ing the position and even the specific rank of several species must only 

 be regarded as doubtful and tentative. 



We have carefully examined specimens representing the types of 

 all the European allied genera, and find that, while very closely related, 

 our N. American genera are not identical, but rather show a parallel 

 line of development from a somewhat different ancestral form ; we 

 have, therefore, no hesitation in discarding the genera Dciidrolimus 

 Germ., Eutricha Hbn., and Macrothylacia Ramb., of which the types 

 are respectively piiii, qiicrcifolia and riibi. Eutricha Steph. can natur- 

 ally not be employed, being preoccupied ; it would in any case fall be- 

 fore Dendrolhnus. Regarding Lcbcda Wlk. and Metaiiastria Hbn. 

 the types of which, according to Kirby, are respectively nobilis IValk. 

 and hyrtaca Cram., both Indian forms, we are in some doubt, not hav- 

 ing had the chance to examine specimens of these two species. The 

 probability is, however, great that they will not be applicable to our 

 N. American forms, and we have preferred to treat them as such, 

 rather than cause confusion by an incorrect application. 



In conclusion we would extend our heartiest thanks to Dr. Dyar 

 for his kindness in sending material for study and for his great interest 

 and helpful suggestions at all times, as well as for his notes on unique 

 specimens in the U. S. National Museum which he has made after a 

 perusal of this paper. 



