WA 
been actually suspended since the time of the great winter of the 
years 
The present distribution of certain representative species, de- 
scendants of a pre-glacial circumpolar fauna, is a matter of interest. 
In 1876, my friend Mr. Jas. Behrens sent me the type and a 
MS. description of his Saturnia mendocino for examination, and I 
determined the moth as absolutely congeneric with the European 
species of Saturnia (see “Can. Ent.,” vol. viii, p. 175). I expect 
this determination to hold. It is one fact in corroboration of my 
observations that the West Coast fauna contains structural types like 
the European, which have not spread east of the Rocky Mountains. 
So the Californian and North-west ocellated Smerinthoid form 
resembles the European 5S. oce//atws more strongly than our Eastern 
species. The occurrence of Sombycia, Parasemia, and typical 
Arctia further illustrate this point. On the other hand, the C7¢hero- 
nitde, a New World family, absent in the West India Islands, do not 
occur in California, nor, so far as I am aware, on the west coast of 
South America. They are found from Canada to Uruguay, east of 
the mountainous backbone of the continent. They constitute a 
peculiarly American element in our fauna, and have apparently 
spread from the tropical region northward and southward. The 
particulars of their distribution in Mexico are not well known. 
The American species of He/zotizs need a more careful study than 
has yet been made of them. I believe it to be tolerably certain that 
FT, scutosus and the American 7. nuchalis are identical species. Also 
that 7. dipsaceus and 1. phlogophagus are different and ‘ represen- 
tative” species. But how about avmzger? I have not yet seen in 
any European collection the equivalent of the pale olive-grey or 
ochreous form I have described as wbrosus, and which is figured by 
Glover. The European examples are dirty ochreous and smaller. 
But are all the American specimens examples of the var. wmbrosus ? 
From recollection I believe I have seen in America examples 
approaching the European form. I think from this we must see that 
it is important to name varieties. Mr. J. B. Smith draws in all 
varieties which intergrade with the type ; but it seems to me that it 
is characteristic of varieties that they intergrade. A non-intergrading 
form would be dimorphic or specific. ‘This method of making mere 
synonyms of varietal names is a virtual covering up of facts which 
nomenclature is intended to lay bare. It can only be practised by 
those persons who believe species to be in nature the insoluble 
entities they conceive them to be—distinct pieces of a puzzle only 
fitted in their categories. When they will not fit, such persons are 
tempted to “ destroy ” them. 
Taking the list of identical and representative species given by 
Mr. Tutt in the “ Stray Notes on the Noctuz,” pp. x1l.—xvi., as the 
standard, the only changes in names there given, necessitated by 
recent comparisons, are as follows :—(1) « Agrotis confilua,”—the 
American examples cited by me under this name belong to A. rudzfera, 
2 
