ENTOMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF LONDON. Ixxix 



often in Coleoptera do brevipes, rufipcs, &c., occur in the same 

 main groups ! 



" Yet it creates confusion to have a Peronea rufana and a Car- 

 pocapsa rufana, and the latter must change its name and become 

 Westwoodiana ! How do we know it will retain that name? 

 Perchance, before the publication of that name, a Lepidopterist in 

 New York, Sydney, Calcutta or Kamschatka, has described an 

 EupceciUa by the name of Westivoodiana ; a new name is then 

 selected for the unfortunate Carpocapsa, which might perhaps 

 again have to undergo the same fate ; in short, the poor insect 

 seems likely never to attain that essential requisite, a fixed name, 

 — when Jo ! a fortunate chance enables a Swedish student to re- 

 cognize as a Linnsean species the Peronea rufana, W. V. Of 

 course this rufana is now dropped for the older name, and the 

 unfortunate Carpocapsa is allowed quietly to regain its cast-off 

 clothing. 



" I now ask which creates most confusion ? 



" But why should there be more confusion between Peronea 

 rufana and Carpocapsa rufana than between Pieris Cratcegi and 

 Trichiura Cratcegi, or between Thecla Quercus, Smerinthus Quercus 

 and Lasiocampa Quercus? I am told that the limits of our genera 

 are so uncertain that Peronea rufana and Carpocapsa rufana might 

 be placed in the same genus. Well ! when that does happen it 

 will be time enough to change one of them ; to change it on the 

 mere contingency is making present confusion to prevent some 

 future confusion, which may perhaps never come to pass. 



" 3rd. The name of a Geomefra must end in aria, of a Pyralis in 

 alis, of a Tortrix in ana, of a Tinea in ella. 



" Well ! this is creeping into a corner with a vengeance : we 

 begin with a rule general to all branches of Natural History ; to 

 this one objection is raised, applying only to one order of insects ; 

 and here we have another objection, actually applying to only a 

 portion of that one order. Truly this absurdity has no limits ! 



" Now I confess myself at a loss how to argue this last point, 

 for I have in vain applied for a reason for this objection, and the 

 only reply that I have ever yet been able to get is, that it is con- 

 venient by the termination to know at once to what group an 

 insect belongs : then why not apply it to the other groups ? 

 Moreover, if alis implies a Pyralis, what is Bomhycia viminalis ? 

 If anus, ana, implies a Toririx, what are Pamphila sylvanus, Nu- 

 daria mundana and Lithosia cainplana? \i ellus, ella, implies a 

 Tinea, what are Dedej^hila porcellus, Deiopeia pulchella, Cybosia 

 tnesomella and Setina irrorella ? 



