The following descriptions of sawflies belonging to the subfamily Nematinæ include, with one exception, a number of species which have been reared from the larvæ by Mr. H. G. Dyar. Mr. Dyar is anxious to publish the descriptions of the larvæ, and the technical descriptions of the species presented herewith are made to enable him to assign his larvæ to described species and avoid the difficulties which would arise from the description of larvæ before the adult insects have been characterized. The very valuable work which Mr. Dyar is doing in rearing larvæ is resulting in the clearing up of some puzzles in the classification of insects, and has no more interesting outcome than the fact that many of his rearings, at least in the line of sawflies, prove to be of species hitherto undescribed, showing how little we really know of the insects of this group in this country. The adults of most sawflies rarely leave their food-plants, and live but a few days, and hence it is not at all to be wondered at that so many species occurring on common plants have not been taken by collectors. The collected species, in fact, are usually only those which happen to frequent flowers and those taken by random beating, which, with insects of quick flight, like many sawflies, is not a very successful method of collecting.

It might be better to say “what were they?” in an article addressed to readers of to-day, since the name in its old sense will not be found in the most recent writings of Packard, Comstock, Chapman, Grote, and other authors. However, the group is adopted in our latest check-list (Nos. 877–1459), although without its name, Prof. Smith stating that he could not limit the group to his satisfaction. Also, as recently as 1893, Dr. Packard published an “Attempt at a new classification of the Bombyces,” including in the group all the families formerly included, but altering their sequence. Following the arrangement of suborders proposed by Prof. Comstock, and the division into superfamilies which I have suggested and which Mr. Grote has adopted with improved nomenclature, let us see where the families of “Bombyces” fall.

Neonympha eurytris, Fab.—Two. June 23rd and 26th. Both captured in Elm Park, near the City. These specimens differ somewhat from some I have taken near Quebec City. They are also larger.

Carterocephalus mandan, Edw.—Two. June 18th and 20th. The first in Elm Park.

Pamphila hobomok, Harr.

This species exhibits a well-marked local variation. Before discussing this I would correct the account in Journal N. Y. Ent. Soc., II., 168, in respect to the synonymy of confusus. This form is really the same as roseicaput, N. & D., as the description shows. How we were misled into referring the name as a strict synonym, I cannot now recall. It may be well, moreover, to retain a distinct name for the American form until its life-history is known and we can be certain whether it is or is not the same as the European ganna.

The questien asked by Mr. Slingerland in his very interesting paper in the Can. Ent., XXVII, p. 301, is in great part answered by himself. I think he shows very conclusively that subgothica, Haw., is correctly used for our American species, and has given us a very full statement of the evidence upon which he bases his conclusions, thus removing the matter from the domain of unsupported opinion. From the nature of the case, and in the absence of Haworth's actual type specimen, the proof cannot be absolute; but until something more definite is supplied, I think the conclusions of the paper on the identity of subgothica, must be accepted. As to the synonymy, I think Mr. Slingerland is also correct. I have not found the A. O. U. Code clear on this matter, though it is as to genera in the same case; but, after consulting Dr. C. Hart Merriam, a recognized authority on questions of nomenclature, I am assured that Guenée's name jaculifera must sink as a synonym.

This species is described by me in Bull. Buff Soc., N. S., III., 85, not in the Geological Survey, as quoted in the Washington Catalogue. A comparison of the description proves that the insect before me could not have been M. olivacea. Its terms, both as to colour and markings, completely cover the description of M. circumcincta. There can, of course, be no reasonable doubt that the existing so-called “type” of comis is a specimen of olivacea, in which case the type label has been certainly transferred to another specimen after the type of comis was returned to Mr. Hy. Edwards. I do not remember that my type of comis was peculiarly set. The species was so much more vividly coloured that it did not even suggest to me olivacea, a species of which I possessed a long series.

The species included here are of rather short, cylindrical form, sometimes suggesting in shape the Cryptocephalini, though easily separated, so far as our genera are concerned, by the shorter and stouter antennæ. Most of them are Southern or Western in distribution, and the few genera recorded from within our limits may be known among themselves by these characters:—

A. Front coxæ contiguous.

In the March number of the Can. Ent., pp. 81–82, Mr. Tutt falls back upon the writings of Dr. Chapman to support his position for this genus as among the Liparidæ. As Mr. Tutt has thus gracefully retired from the discussion without making a direct answer to my facts, I can only, in reply, briefly notice Dr. Chapman's position.

Length, 3.6 mm.; ceph.: long, 1.4 mm.; broad, I mm. Cephilothorax, sternum, femora i. and ii., blackish; rest of legs i. and ii. pale yellowish; legs iii. and iv. yellow-brown, the femora scarcely darker; abdomen black above, with a narrow white band across the middle and a white spot on each anterior lower side; venter pale. Cephalothorax broad, in ♂ a little narrower; posterior row of eyes procurved, the P. M. E. oval, fully their diameter apart, and about as far from the P. S. E.; anterior row strongly procurved, the A. M. E. fully their diameter apart, and about as far from the larger A. S. E. Sternum oval, pointed behind; legs of moderate length, femora i. and ii. stouter than others, femora iii. slightly excised before the tip behind. Abdomen not constricted, quite broad, somewhat depressed, epigynuin appearing much like M. montana, Em., but the openings are farther apart and more oblique. Tibia of ♂ palpus has short projection at tip on the outer side; the bulb is triangular in side view, the red parallel marks are along the outer edge; near the middle is a short tube.

In Europe and in New Zealand species of the genus Ripersia have been found, which lived in the nests of certain ants. It had always seemed to me singular that nothing of the kind should occur in this country; but Mr. G. B. King has proved that they merely wanted looking for, his researches in Massachusetts having led to the discovery of three species, here briefly described.

Younger specimens dark purple above with pearly markings, lavender or lilac beneath; older ones maroon to almost black above, sides mottled with several shades of purple and brown. Head free, purple, with a broad, white transverse band across the front; oral region whitish; vertex with a distinct, white, sagittate mark from antennæ to prothorax; a black ocellus-like speck on the middle of the vertex; a few short bristles upon vertex and front; eyes dark, close behind antennæ upon a black patch narrowly surrounded by purple. Antennæ longer than the body, except in largest individuals, segments variable in relative length, but approximately in the ratio of 1:6:7:1.5 or 1:7:9:2; basal segments stout, as long as broad, brownish, with short, white bristles; second brownish at base, purple at middle, pearly apically, hairy distally; third purple, hairy, with obscure, whorled subsegments on apical half, broadening towards apex, penultimate subsegment swollen on one side; terminal segment purple, lanceolate in outline with five to seven distinct, whorled subsegments. Body ovate dorsally with a re-entering angle.

Thirty years ago Dr. Leconte described (New Species, Smithson Misc. Coll., 167, p. 100) the Ptinid Trigonogenius farctus from specimens received from San Francisco, Cala. Most specimens in our cabinets come from the same locality, but I have seen others from Alameda and Los Gatos, Cala. The collectors of the specimens never published anything on its mode of occurrence, and I fail to find in the literature a single record of its habits. Quite recently, however, Dr. James Fletcher, while on a visit to Washington, D. C., showed me two species of Coleoptera found living in red pepper, in Victoria, Br. Col. One is Tribolium ferrugineum, a common cosmopolitan Tenebrionid, which has been found before under similar conditions; but the second species proves to be Trigonogenius farctus. Several specimens of this were obtained, thus showing that its occurrence in the pepper was not accidental, and I have no doubt that upon further research the earlier stages of the beetle can also be found in the pepper.

The species of Lepyrus in North America have not heretofore been well understood. The genus has recently been treated monographically by an American writer, several forms being described for the first time: one of these has since been discovered to be identical with the European capucinus, Schall, and geminatus, Say, to be palustris, Scop.

Calliopsis meliloti, n. sp., ♀.—Length, 5 mm.; head and thorax wholly black, abdomen very dark brown, with yellowish-white markings. Head, thorax, legs, and sides of abdomen with abundant long dull white hair. Clypeus prominent, shining, with conspicuous sparse punctures, its upper portion longitudinally sulcate in the middle, its whole surface appearing bare, with only very short, inconspicuous hairs. On each side of the clypeus is a shining bare eminence. Vertex closely punctured. Mandibles brown. Antennæ quite short, the hairy scape not much less than half as long as the flagellum, the last joint of which is truncate and somewhat flattened.

In the course of identifying the Culicidæ in the National Museum collection and those received by Mr. L. O. Howard from various correspondents, for mention in a paper which he is about to publish, entitled, “Notes on the Life-history of Culex pungens, with remarks about other Mosquitoes,” three forms were met with which elearly represent new species; and as Mr. Howard desires to exclude all matter of a purely technical nature from his paper, it was deemed abvisable to publish the new species in one of our scientific periodicals.