211 



liad the legs so folded and concealed by the vestiture that it escaped 

 my attention. Tlie publication of any of the species discovered by 

 Mr. Thaxter constitutes a distinct breach of scientific etiquette on 

 the part of Mr. Morrison, who has acted in defiance of Mr. Thaxters 

 request that none of the specimens belonging to him should be de- 

 scribed by Mr. Morrison who received them for inspection. Ma- 

 mesfra illahefacta Morr. is a redescription of M. Ulacina Harvey. 

 I am credited with pronouncing the two distinct, but I did so under 

 limitation, the color of the specimens alone not quite agreeing. Dr. 

 Harvey's type was brighter colored than the somewhat faded speci- 

 men sent me by Mr. Morrison as a new species of " TaeniocampaP 

 Subsequently a specimen intermediate in tone has occurred and the 

 two names undoubtedly refer to one and the same species. Hydroe- 

 cia semiaperta Morr. is referred to Perigrajilia on p. 150, in my 

 opinion " erroneously." The Jtabitus resembles Hydroecia (Apamea), 

 and I regard the insect as intermediate between Neiilielodes and Ap- 

 amea and as the type of a distinct genus. Glaea sericea, p. 151, 

 seems to be based on a specimen sent me as a n. s. of that genus, 

 but which I could not satisfactorily separate from G. apiata. Xan- 

 thoptera nigrocaput Morr., p. 153, is, very apparently, a synonym of 

 X. Ridingsii Riley. I also object to the disposition of the species of 

 Xantlioptera and Prothymia made by Mr. Morrison on page 154. 

 Semicrocea, Ridingsii and fax, belong together ; Semiflava is related 

 to coccineifascia and rosalba. 



Hadena rasilis Morr., p. 158, is a synonym oi EIap)hria grata Hiibn., 

 referred to Caradrina in my List, perhaps " erroneously." It is a 

 common Southern species, plentiful in Central Alabama. I am in- 

 debted to Prof. Snow for an opportunity of examining a $ speci- 

 men determined by Mr. Morrison as his species. 



Although Mr. Morrison does not mention the circumstance, yet I 

 sent him the California specimens described by him as Agrotis cxserti- 

 stigma, determined as A. alternuta, since I regard them as belong- 

 ing to that species. The difierential characters published by Mr. 

 Morrison are not constant, and I cannot consider his species valid. 

 In the same way I cannot separate the California specimens of an 

 allied species, A. clandcsfina, from our own. From the description 

 I think it not improbable that Mr. Morrison's new species of Ha- 

 dena, vulgivaga, is identical with Gucnee's apamiformis. Mr. Mor- 



