CoA THE CANADIAN ENTOMOLOGIST. 
I fear, gentlemen, that I have now completely exhausted your patience ; 
I shall therefore hasten to a close. But before doing so, let me remind 
you that, since our last annual meeting, our Society has lost by death one 
of its most valued members, Mr. B. Billings, of Ottawa, Ont. He was 
one of those devoted lovers of science who do good service by their 
honest, hearty work, but who, from their innate modesty and retiring 
disposition, shrink from all publicity. At times he contributed valuable 
papers to our little periodical, but he could never be induced to make any 
display of the knowledge he had acquired by his patient dilligence both 
at home and in the field. 
Permit me now, gentlemen, to resign into your hands the office that 
you have done me the honor of investing me with. I thank you for your 
kindness and courtesy towards myself and my colleagues, and with every 
wish for the continued success and prosperity of your Society, 
T have the honour to be, gentlemen, 
Your obedient servant, 
CHARLES J.S. BETHUNE, 
Trinity College School, Port Hope, 
September, 1872. 
ON MR. SCUDDER’S SYSTEMATIC REVISION OF SOME OF 
THE AMERICAN BUTTEREDIES: 
BY AUG. R. GROTE. 
We have here before us a paper by an accomplished scholar, on a 
subject dear to us from our own studies. Mr. Scudder’s Revision presents 
two main points for our consideration. The first point affects the sequence 
of the Butterflies in a systematic arrangement ; the second the application 
of the scientific law of priority. As to the first, the considerations which 
have influenced Mr, Scudder to side rather with Ochsenheimer than with 
Boisduval, where the present Revision is not original, are evidently not 
lightly taken. Mr. Scudder’s strong perceptions must contrast agreeably 
with the superficiality of those writers who find an excuse for the most 
heterogeneous linear arrangements on the plea that resemblances are 
diverse (nefsartige verivandschaft,) who stay not to discriminate between 
degrees of similarity. On this first point one shall criticize Mr. Scudder, 
who has a large comprehension of the subject, and whose argument shall 
ignore trivialities. 
