THE CANADIAN ENTOMOLOGIST. 215 
On the second point, and one which is minor in theory, but in 
practice more important, we have to say : Mr. Scudder restores obsolete 
terms for sub-divisions higher than genera, and disregards the family and 
sub-family terminations lately rendered common in Zoology, chiefly by 
English writers on insects. On occasion, we think the propriety of this 
restoration doubtful, and that the law of priority does not come into 
question. Where the older author meant by his names what Mr. Scudder 
now declares, the older name should stand without doubt. And here we 
owe Mr. Scudder a debt of gratitude for his bibliognostic information. 
But, if such values are recognized, is it not better to give the usual 
terminations in 24e, ine, and inz to the terms for families, sub-families and 
tribes. Two families in the Latreillean sense (Papilionide and Hes- 
periide,) axe represented by the insects Mr. Scudder discusses, and, while 
we cannot doubt that they contain natural assemblages of genera of sub- 
family and tribal value, we are unprepared to support this view against Mr. 
Scudder’s divisions, which are not explained by diagnosis. And while we 
cannot contest the value of the most of Mr. Scudders genera, we may 
more often differ as to the application of the law of priority in the choice 
_of generic names. The value of Hubner’s Verzeichniss (1816,) and its use 
by Mr. Scudder, is a case in point. Notwithstanding Ochsenheimer’s 
repudiation, Guenee’s sneers, and Lederers contemptuous patronage, 
Hubner’s genera are now in great part becoming recognized, and his 
names available to science. This quiet, unobtrusive man has written what 
has endured half a century of abuse and intolerance, to be found greatly 
true. We have elsewhere (Cuban Zysaenide) written what we thought of 
Hubner and his generic conceptions. Let us see now how Mr. Scudder 
uses him sometimes. On page 59 Mr. Scudder adopts Zerene for a genus 
of which Papilio caesonia is type, and says: ‘‘Since the typical species of 
Zerene of Hubner fall into the much older genus, Colas, the name may be 
retained for the last species, Pap. caesonia of Stoll. That this ought to 
be preferred to AZeganostoma of Reakirt follows from my suggestion in 
1862, that the former should be retained for the two species here cata 
logued.” But Hubner’s Zerene is synonymous with Colas ; no subsequent 
“suggestion in 1862” can alter Hubner’s meaning in 1816. Hubner’ 
does not autoptically know all the species he cites ; hence we must always 
take with him-the first species as his types. If to Zerene we cite Scudder 
: (1862,) the name is logical and, in this case, must be discarded at once so 
as not to interfere with the priority of a well established genus of 
Geometride, of the same name. Meganostoma must be retained. 
