152 BULLETIN UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY. [VoiYl. 



in many collections under tliat name. I have described, in the Bulletin 

 of the Buffalo Society, Mr. Morrison's specimen returned to me as decolor; 

 but I have my doubts that the form is another species from campestris. 

 I have also illustrated exsertistigma from specimens returned to me by 

 Mr. Morrison, to whom I originally communicated the species as new. 

 I find that a specimen of the related form, ohservaMUs, is labelled as the 

 type of '^ exsertistigma^^ in Mr. Graef 's collection; and, as is the case with 

 ^^ decolor ^\ it is evident that distinct forms have been confounded under 

 one name by Mr. Morrison. I believe also that this has happened with 

 dilucida and Morrisoniana ; the "type" of dilucida, in Mr. Thaxter's col- 

 lection, is the dilucida of my collection and i^apers, while, I think, fi'om 

 the description, that Mr. Morrison has originally included specimens of 

 janualis with dilucida^ and that in collections we shall find "type" labels 

 of dilucida affixed to specimens of januaUs. I also think that Mr. Mor- 

 rison's Morrisoniana, from Texas, Proc. Bost. S. N. H., 214, 1875, is gla- 

 diaria. Of the remaining, one, viz, stigmosa, is, I believe, a valid spe- 

 cies, though very near voluMlis; the remaining three, viz, tennicula, 

 monochromatea, cinereomacula, are unknown to me, and should have no 

 standing as described species. It cannot be thought improbable that 

 Mr. Morrison should have worked carelessly with these descriptions 

 when we reflect that he has redescribed such a commonly known species 

 as Syppa xylinoides as new, under the name Hadena ancocisconensis, and 

 a species of Anarta as Orthosia perpura and Mamestra curfa, thus refer- 

 ring the same form to different genera easily distinguished by the 

 structure of the eyes. He has also described Galgula suhpartita as a 

 new Telesilla, and a species oiEustrotia {Erastria) as a Hadena, and again 

 as a second species of Litliacodia! In an anxiety to find me in error, 

 Mr. Morrison (Proc. Bost. S. N". H., 117, 1875) refers my gilvipennis as 

 the same as Chardinyi, from Siberia, and adds, "there is not even the 

 usual slight geographical difference in color noticed by Dr. Speyer in 

 insects common to Europe and America ". Aside from the fact that 

 Siberia is not in Europe, and that the color of Mr. Morrison's geography 

 is rendered doubtful by his remark, there remains another fact, and that is 

 that the color of the American specimens of Chardinyi varies greatly, so 

 that Mr. Morrison is incorrect also in this respect. Maine specimens have 

 the fore wings and thorax purply brown. Mr. Couper's collections in 

 Anticosti varied from reddish brown to a faded yellowish fuscous tint. 

 The size also shows a considerable range of variation. The hind wings 

 also vary in the depth of the band and the consequent extent of the 

 yellow base. It is possible that Mr. Strecker, who, as we have abun- 

 dantly shown elsewhere, does not understand the structure of moths, 

 and Mr. Morrison, who has made several bad mistakes as to species, are 

 a little hasty in their reference of our single yellow- winged form, but I 

 think that the inspiration has come originally from a European natural- 

 ist who has compared the two, which I have not been able to do, and I 

 adopt here the reference as correct. 



