232 THE CANADIAN ENTOMOLOGIST. 
65) placed it in Ævagora, to which it makes an approach in some 
respects, but as it could not with strictness be placed in that genus, I 
removed it (v. 4, pf. 192) to Gelechia. But unless Gelechia is to remain a 
miscellaneous waste box, it cannot properly be placed there, and I there 
fore erect this genus for it. See 7.4, Ap. 65 & 102 for the generic and 
specific characters. 
REMARKS ON LIMENITIS PROSERPINA AND ARTHEMIS. 
BY W. H. EDWARDS, COALBURGH, W. VA. 
It seems probable to me that Limenitis proserpina will be found 
related to Z. arfhemis, the two being forms of one species, as in Grapta 
comma and dryas, and I desire to call the attention of Lepidopterists who 
live where these species or forms are found, that they may observe them 
from this point of view. They are alike in size and shape, and so far as 
my experience and that of Mr. Mead goes (confined in both cases to the 
Catskill Mountains), they are always associated. I notice in a late paper 
by Mr. Grote that among a number of arthemis taken in western New 
York, was a certain proportion of proserpina. The under side of these 
two forms, excluding the white band, is essentially the same thing. I 
should like to know the Northern range of froserpina, and whether up to 
the limit of such range it is found wherever arthemis is found; and 
whether it is anywhere found where arthemis is not; and whether it is 
known anywhere to associate with what is undoubtedly wrsu/a. 
I formerly received large numbers of arthemis from high up in British 
America, Slave Lake to Fort Simpson, and with them were no specimens 
of proserpina. Like the black female of turnus, the last may have a limit 
beyond which it does not pass. On the other hand, the range of arthemis 
is limited to the south, and I am not aware of proserpina having been 
found apart from arthemis, while ursu/a swarms throughout the low lands 
of the Middle States, and throughout the South. If proserpina is found 
nowhere but with arthemis, this fact and the several points of resem- 
blance between the two forms, makes the dimorphism probable. But it 
still remains to be proved beyond question by breeding, that these forms 
