If it were necessary to emphasize the need of revision in the Geometrina, the genus Venusia furnishes an excellent example. It has established by Curtis, an English writer, in 1839, with cambrica, Curt., as its type. Since that time, three additional species, according to Mr. Meyrick, from New Zealand have been placed under it. In our own fauna, Dr. Hulst placed three species as its representatives—cambrica, Curt., comptara, Walk., duodecimlineata, Pack.

In my former paper a preliminary discussion of certain genera in Geometridæ made plain the need for a general rearrangement of this group. But this cannot be done as regards all of the species without much close study and comparison of types. Therefore, I venture at this time only to outline what seems to me the most rational method of arrangement into sub-families and genera—to include new material and to correct many errors in definition, and in some cases identification of generic types, as given by Dr. Hulst (Trans. Am. Ent. Soc., xxiii., 245, 1896). I claim nothing original in my work, for I consider the general scheme, as devised by Dr. Hulst, the best that can be produced, nor do I need to add to his introduction of it, as given in the article referred to, except to say that I am strongly in accord with him when he states that this family are most nearly related to the Noctuidæ. In my arrangement of genera I place, therefore, Paleacrita at the head of the series.

My last paper, npholding Dr. Hulst's determination that E.perlineata. Pack, is the above species, was intended also to convey the idea that until we knew positively that he was wrong it was better to accept his decision. Nor was it my desire to belittle the judgment of Mr. Prout, as I expressly stated.

Since any work in this group must of necessity be a review of that done by the late Dr. Geo. D. Hulst, I want to state in this begining of mine, that it is not to be regarded as a criticism.

Dr. Hulst made (for him) some curious errors, which will be noted later on, but the immense work he did in untangling the synonymy of this variable group, and in his two trips across the ocean to study the types, cannot be overestimated, and by it mine is rendered easy.

Since the above investigations was begunm I have received, under date of Jan. 31, a letter from Mr. L. B. Prout, whose lively interest in solving these vexed problems is as great as my own, and much more unselfish. I acn best show this by quoting it here, with apologies to him for so doing without permission.

In a paper written not long since (Can. Ent., Vol.XXXVII., p. 344) I stated that in examining the type of Dr. Hulst's genus Talledega (Lobophora montanata, Pack.) the male was possessed of characters which would place it in genus Lobophora, Curtis, and that in consequence the genus Talledega would fall.

Full-grown larvæ were taken on wild cherry (Prunus) in the latter part of September, 1901. Placed in a box over earth, they fed but a day or two, truned a deep green, and entering the earth two to three inches, formed rounded cells, in which they remained as larvæ all winter, transforming to pupæ just before emergence. They are gregarious, remaining in their web, filled with its mass of exuvia, untill full-grown, when, as their growth is completed, individually they drop from it and enter the ground. One which was kept under observation formed a pupa on April 28th, and emerged eight days thereafter. The pupal skin is very thin, showing distictly the parts of the enclosed imago. This brood commenced emerging April 25th, and a few individuals are still coming out, May 31st. In the eariler days the males predominated, later the females, Altogether, 134 males and 123 females have appeared. Copulation took place at once, the pair remaining in coitu from three to five hours.