1895.] The Classification of the Lepidoptera. 249 
Properly to estimate the value of these subordinal charac- 
ters it may be necessary for systematists to acquaint them- 
selves with the position of Professor Comstock regarding sys- 
tematic work. His point of view may differ from that of 
some. The essential feature of it is the insistence upon the 
constant recognition of the theory of descent in systematic 
work, no matter how circumscribed the group which is being 
studied. “ The description of a species, genus, family or order 
will be considered incomplete,” says Professor Comstock, 
“until its phylogeny has been determined so far as is possible 
with the data at hand.” 
The purpose of this paper, which is merely to add a few 
notes of observations which seem to be confirmatory of the 
most conspicuous feature of this new classification of the Lepi- 
doptera, makes it impracticable to refer at all adequately to 
the method proposed by Professor Comstock for phylogenetic 
studies, but it is necessary to call attention here to the follow- 
ing paragraph from the essay referred to. 
“Tn attempting to work out the phylogeny of a group of 
organisms, there will arise, I believe, the necessity of distin- 
guishing between two kinds of characters: first, characters in- 
dicating differences in kind of specialization; and second, 
characters indicating differences in degree of specialization of 
the same kind. The former will indicate dichotomous divis- 
ions of lines of descent; the latter will merely indicate degrees 
of divergence from a primitive type. Thus, to draw an illus- 
tration from the following pages, it is shown that there are 
two distinct ways of uniting the two wings of each side in the 
Lepidoptera ; they may be united by a frenulum, or they may 
be united by a jugum. These are differences in kind of speci- 
alization, and indicate two distinct lines of descent or a dicho- 
tomous division of the order. Among those Lepidoptera in 
which the wings are united by a frenulum, great differences 
occur in the degree to which this organ or a substitute for it is 
developed ; such differences may merely indicate the degree 
of divergence from a primitive type and may need to be corre- 
lated with other characters to indicate dichotomous divisions.” 
