12 THK ENTOMOLO<jIST. 



sending the MS. to the printers I omitted to erase the generic 

 names written in pencil, and in revising the proof-sheets the 

 repetition escaped my notice. I need hardly say that I regret 

 having thus laid myself open to the charge of carelessness. Such 

 an imputation one reviewer has in fact brought against me, and 

 in evidence thereof refers to these unfortunate repetitions. 



Apart from the inevitable strictures on my shortcomings, I 

 did not suppose that my list would be accepted without comment. 

 At the same time I may say that I was not prepared for such ob- 

 jections as Mr. Ramsden has brought forward in regard to specific 

 names. Mr. Ramsden says that I appear to have " overlooked the 

 desirability of avoiding the same name for different insects." 

 With all due deference to Mr. Ramsden's opinion in this matter, 

 I must confess that I fail to recognise the desirability of altering 

 specific names so as to facilitate the use of such names only. To 

 argue that a Nepticula, for example, should not bear the specific 

 name of arcuatella, because a species of the genus Scardia 

 already bore that name, is as illogical as to say that Smith's 

 son should not be called John, because the son of Jones was 

 already named John, and in after life confusion might ensue as 

 to their identity, because they were both named John. 



It does not appear to occur to Mr. Ramsden, that when two 

 or three species bear the same trivial name, the generic name 

 taken in conjunction therewith is of some importance in denoting 

 the species we wish to refer to. He would seem to attach 

 greater value to the author's name following the specific name. 

 To speak or write of comma, L., would not convey any dis- 

 tinct idea of the species intended, but if we say or write Hesperia 

 comma, L., or Leucania comma, L., we refer definitely to a species 

 of Lepidoptera. It is a common practice of some lepidopterists 

 to speak of the objects of their study by their trivial names only, 

 and the generic name is never used by them if they can possibly 

 avoid it, but " it is a custom more honoured in the breach than 

 the observance." 



I do not quite understand Mr. Ramsden where he says, " in 

 over 70 cases the same specific name is applied to different 

 insects." But in looking over the interesting list of duplicate and 

 triplicate specific names he has been at the trouble of drawing up, 

 I find that in 71 instances two insects bear the same specific 

 name, and in 5 cases three insects have each the same specific 



