356 GROTE—GORTYNA AND ALLIED GENERA. [May 4, 
by me in various collections between 1862 and 1883. The Lon- 
don collection found him unprepared, as may be seen by the effect 
upon him of the striking type of afpasstonata, a species, neverthe- 
less, difficult to determine, and the description of which in the 
Revision accords but illy with Dr. Harvey’s original. And from 
the slur thrown upon zecofina, in reality one of the most remarkable 
and easily identified of the series. Nor were his studies there at all 
carefuliy and scientifically conducted, for which there is abundant 
proof, but with a bias and intent to break down at all hazards my de- 
terminations. Here he has neglected to take notes of the type of 
erepta, which he saw in the British Museum (Wash. Cat., 175), but 
now states, with singular accuracy, is ‘‘unknown’’ to him (Rev., 
48). Returned to America, the author of the Revision became really 
indebted for his knowledge of species like purpurifascia, harrist, 
impecuntosa, necopina, to Mr. Henry Bird and Dr. Roland Thax- 
ter. ‘That thus, without sufficient antecedent studies of his own, 
he should have ventured to appear as an authority upon a group to 
which he has certainly contributed doubtful determinations and in- 
ferior and useless redescriptions (as to marginidens he does not 
give the character of the dentate fringe, properly given by Guenée), 
together with at least one or two bad drawings of the genitalia, 
throws a strongly unfavorable light upon his public performances. 
He gives no credit for specific determinations where these are due 
to others, as is here plainly the case. The value of his judgment is 
tested by his statement, that the most distinct of all our species, 
spectosissima, only escaped the sad fate of being put down as one 
sex of our zzguesita, by the accident that both sexes of the latter 
were before him in the amassed collections, which touchingly testify 
alike to the weakness and the amiability of their rightful owners. 
The beauty of several of the species leads me to say a final 
word on the esthetic value of insects like Gortyna. This division 
of the subject should be more seriously studied. Color and form 
are constituent parts of the object, and after the intellectual diffi- 
culties attending structure and nomenclature are surmounted, these 
remain as sufficient reason for our attention. When Science is fin- 
ished, Art takes the matter up. Unless it be the wing of some 
butterfly, or petal of some flower, there is probably no similarly 
sized surface in the world more exquisite than the primary wing of 
Gortyna impecuntosa, when the moth is fresh or bred. It has all 
the depth which comes from a blending of rich dead colors. The 
