SYNONYMY OF NORTH AMERICAN NOCTUIDAE. 3 
recognized, Mr. Butler uses very largely, as a basis of Classifi- 
cation, antennal structures, and usually ignores frontal modifica- 
tions, armature of tibiz, and clothing of eyes. I have no present 
quarrel with his system, though I believe it is radically and com- 
pletely wrong; butif he had examined the front of turris, he would 
have found it structurally different from that of saucia, and would 
not have made the reference. Had he seen a male, he would have 
recognized its distinctness by the difference in antennal structure. 
Mr. Butler’s notes are unquestionably of value, and in the 
majority of instances his synonymy is correct ; but where a student 
of a local fauna finds references which he knows cannot be 
accurate, it makes it simply impossible for him to accept any of 
the references implicitly or unquestioned. I must re-affirm my 
position that synonymical references should only be made after 
critical study and comparison, and less damage and confusion 
result from having the same species under two names than from 
having two species erroneously combined. In the latter case, one 
who relies on the correctness of the synonymy is apt to re- 
describe old species, and thus to confuse matters still more. I 
hold, also, that critical remarks should be based either on a 
thorough knowledge of the fauna to which the insect belongs, or 
on a monographice study. 
Mr. Butler is correct, of course, when he calls attention to 
the fact that he has the Noctuide of the world under his charge ; 
but that is not a reason, surely, why he should be privileged to 
make synonymical references without sufficient. study. 
The British Museum Catalogues, by Walker, have been 
stumbling-blocks in the way of American Entomology since 
their publication, and many species of Lepidoptera described 
therein are unknown to us to-day. Some of the groups have 
been satisfactorily and well straightened out by subsequent 
British workers, and it is surely not too much to ask that the 
Museum workers of the present day should not still further con- 
fuse matters by hasty notes based on insufficient study. The 
result would be simply that the latter notes would be considered 
as unreliable as the first, and the synonymy would be just as 
unsatisfactory as before. Nor would the reputation of the British 
Museum and of its workers be enhanced by such papers. 
My notes on the American species in the British Museum 
collections will be ready for publication, I hope, before the end 
of the year. I have nothing but words of gratitude for the 
reception accorded me there. Every facility was afforded me; all 
kindness was shown. 
For Mr. Butler personally, and for his works in general, I 
have the highest regard, and naturally therefore no personal 
motive for my criticism of his notes. 
New Brunswick, New Jersey. Rutgers College. 
