As considerable doubt appears to exist with regard to the three species or races of Physonota described by say, Randall, and Walsh and Riley, and as I had in former years found a species of this genus to be rather common in the vicinity of Montreal, I endeavored during the past season to find it again, and, as far as my opportunities would permit, work up its life history.

Early in May I made a careful search in the locality where I had previously found it, but at this date its food plant had not yet appeared above ground. I tried again in June, the time at which I had formerly taken the first brood.

The past season was remarkable, in our locality, for the general scarcity of diurnal Lepidoptera, and also of many of the Coleoptera, especially among the Scarabeidæ, Cerambycidæ and Buprestidæ. Many species of these, usually plentiful, seemed rare this year, and even Lachnosterna fusca was not nearly so abundant or injurious as it is generally. Perhaps, with the exception of Colias philodice, the most common butterfly was D. archippus, which I have never seen so common. I do not think I saw a single specimen of P. cardui, although it was very abundant last year. Pieris rapœ was less numerous and appears to be decreasing in numbers every year, largely owing, no doubt, to the attacks of the parasite Pteromalus puparum. The birds also, especially the Fly-catchers, do not get full credit for the good work they do. Insects of all other orders seemed to be about as abundant as usual, and several species proved to be more than usually numerous and destructive.

I. Argynnis Semiramis.

Male.—Expands about 2.3 inches.

Upper side bright fulvous, very little obscured at base; the black markings much as in Adiante, that is, slight on primaries, and still nore so on secondaries, the spots on disk and to base being scarcely more than streaks.

Under side of primaries cinnamon-red at base and along inner margin to median, the upper two median interspaces more or less buff in middle; this red also crosses basal half of cell, and borders median to the arc; the remainder of cell and the discoidal and costal interspaces buff; a brown sub-apical patch, and hind margin brown; the sub-marginal crescents brown, and near apex lost in the ground color, from upper branch of median containing imperfectly silvered spots, the others without silver; the two spots on the patch well silvered.

The Lomatina may easily be distinguished from the other Bombylidæ by the following characters:

Front very large; antennæ shorter than the head, the third joint at least twice as long as the first, taperirg to the tip, or suddenly contracted near its base, the terminal portion styliform; terminal style minute. Proboscis never projecting more than one half its length beyond the hyperstoma. Front and face when viewed from the side form a gentle curve, never greatly produced at base of antennæ. Wings with two submarginal and four posterior cells; furcation of the second and third veins occurs before the small cross-vein at a distance of at least twice the length of that cross-vein. All of the tibiae bristly.

The late Professor L. Agassiz, in 1867, requested of me a detailed plan for the development of the entomological department of the Museum, Among the different collections proposed was a biological collection similar to my own for Neuroptera and Pseudo-neuroptera, but extended to include all Arthropoda. The Professor in a marginal note stated that this collection should be commenced immediately, and developed as rapidly as possible. In my collection the alcoholic objects were included in vials placed horizontally near the pinned dry objects, so that all belonging to one species were together and presented a clear view to the observer. I used vials closed with cork stoppers, which for a small collection and by a continual supervision, proved sufficiently safe. Nevertheless experiments were made with several substances, hoping to prevent the evaporation of the alcohol and the necessity of refilling a large number of vials every six months.

This very carefully written pamphlet brings us quite a step forward in our knowledge of the structure of our Hawk Moths. In the first place, it may be doubted whether the divisions of the Sphingidæ, first laid down in their present shape in Grote & Robinson's Synonymical Catalogue (1865), are not of lower rank than sub-families, but as all our divisions are based on comparative characters, this point need not detain us long. I had diligently searched the literature for older terms for these groups, finding them in part, but they were not adopted by Butler, and the terms of our Catalogue of 1865 with a sub-family ending seem to be preferred. I commenced with the Macroglossinæ, because these genera more resemble the Hesperidæ in their frequent diurnal flight, pupation on the ground between leaves with a few threads of silk, and in the more prismatic antennæ, Our genera are Hemaris, Aellopos, Euproserpinus and Lepisesia, with entire wings. I never was so fortunate as to possess any specimens of the genera Lepisesia or Pogocolon.

I am indebted to my esteemed correspondent, Prof. C. H. Fernald, for a copy of his recent Synopsis of the Sphingidæ of New England. I have been greatly pleased with it, and trust that it will meet with that general distribution among the students of our beautiful science which it deserves. In the following lines I wish to present a few observations which the perusal of Prof. Fernald's book suggests.

Hemaris Tenuis, Grote.

Prof. Fernald remarks of this species: “The early stages and food plants are unknown.” Presuming that the statement of the learned Professor is warranted by an exhaustive search through the literature of the subject, I shall venture to supply from my own observation what strikes me as a surprising deficiency, since Hemaris Tenuis is one of our most abundant species in Western Pennsylvania.

C. Sappho, Strecker.—Last season five specimens of this rare species were taken near here, and it was found about ten miles further north than before. It is as constant in its markings as any species.

C. Retecta, Grote.—Both the pale and the dark forms of this species were taken last year, with intergrades. I should probably have taken them this season, but I was away from home at the time they were flying. In the woods the habits of the two forms are alike.

Everybody now-a-days has books, even if he never reads them. It has become an acknowledged fashion—the more books the larger the wisdom, the finer the culture. The climax is reached in France, where you can buy as decoration for fine rooms large libraries, where all the prominent classic authors are represented only by the handsomely lettered backs of the volumes, stored in cabinets with glass doors. The key of the cabinets is invariably mislaid; in fact, the cabinets do not open at all. But even where book-cases contain real volumes, it is interesting to observe which authors are never taken out. In German private libraries, the binding of Klopstok's masterpiece, the Messiah, is almost invariably as fresh as possible, and in England and here I have often seen Paradise Lost in a very fine condition. As an instance of the contrary, when I was a young man, an older prominent naturalist singled out a volume from my library in a condition best to be described by book and binding in tatters, and then exclaimed, “That is just how I like to see books.” It was on bugs, and my scientific digestive organs were at that time in excellent condition. Later I was always interested in picking out books in similar condition in libraries, in order to have an idea of the taste and favorite studies of the patrons.

Nothing has been known of the history or earlier stages of this butterfly till quite recently, except what Boisduval and LeConte (1833) gave, both plate and text having been copied from Abbot (about 1800). On the plate the mature larva is represented as lying on a leaf of Hawthorn, and the chrysalis is attached to a stem of same. The larva is green and white-striped, and neither in coloration nor shape resembles the real larva, and the description in the text is made up from the figure. The chrysalis is a little better. The larva (according to Abbot) “lives upon Cratægus, and the species is very scarce.” We also read that “this butterfly is plainly quite unlike the true Polyommati in its caterpillar and the shape of its chrysalis. Godart, who knew this species only by the description of Fabricius, wrongly believed that it was an Erycina.” Boisduval puts it in Polyommatus with Phleas.

Egg.—Conical, broadly truncated, the flat top covered with a low network of irregular meshes, very fine about the micropyle; the lower part rounded, almost hemispherical; the upper part of side and to about two thirds the distance to base ribbed vertically,—about forty low ribs, with fine transverse lines between them; below the ribs there is an irregular network; color yellow-green. Duration of this stage about 13 days.

The following are some notes on a dozen of the more interesting species of Staphylinidœ which I have found in this vicinity. Two of the species, which will be duly given, were determined by M. Fauvel. All the others were identified by Dr. Horn.

Falagria dissecta Er. Numbers of this almost minute species were taken 8 Oct., 1884, in, on and under decaying and rain-soaked fragments of a large, reddish-tinged fungus growth, which I had previously plucked and broken to pieces to obtain Phenolia grossa Fab.

This species was abundant from the middle of June to the end of July, and I observed the females ovipositing on our shade trees (maple) in various parts of the city. It appears to prefer trees which have been recently transplanted, and which are naturally not so vigorous as those which grow undisturbed. My next-door neighbor set out several young trees, from one to two inches in diameter, and upon these I took several specimens. On the other hand, I observed them, beyond the city, ovipositing in quite large and old maples, and even upon the limbs of an old tree which had been broken and blown down.

In the preparation of the present paper I have used articles by myself which have appeared in the “Popular Science Monthly,” in the pages of “Silliman's Journal,” and elsewhere. I have also noticed what has been printed bearing on the subject by other writers. I have tried to present the whole subject as it now appears to me, at the risk of repeating myself in part. Ihis seemed at times excusable if not unavoidable, but as it is my own writings that I have chiefly borrowed from, the use of quotation marks is unnecessary, the more so as I have here gone freshly over the subject, digesting my previous observations and adding new ones before preparing the present chapter in a history of our North American Lepidoptera. Some of my views, as here stated, were put forth in a lecture I held in 1885, before the Bremen “Naturwissenschaftlichen Verein.” I shall be glad if this paper adds to the interest naturally evoked by this field of study in Natural History.

Egg.—Conoidal, somewhat rounded at base; truncated, nearly flat, a very little convex, at top; the sides a little convex, and marked by about twenty-two sharp vertical ridges, which start from edge of base and end at rim of summit, the spaces between these ridges deeply and roundly excavated; the summit is covered with shallow cells, irregularly five and six-sided, in four rows, not concentric, but somewhat spiral, about a central rosette of rhomboids. Very like the egg of Alope, but there are a greater number of flutings on sides. Color lemon-yellow. Duration of this stage about 12 days.

Egg.—Elongate or oval, .03 of an inch long by .025 of an inch wide, ribbed longitudinally like a muskmelon by about 15 ribs; color pale yellowish green. Duration of this period 8 days.

Young Larva.—Length .10 of an inch; cylindrical, with 10 legs; grayish white, without marks except a bright scarlet transverse line across the posterior part of joint 2, jaws the same color, legs concolorous, the six thoracic slightly pink tinted. Duration of this period 6 to 7 days.

The following tables contain a partial resumé of the species common to Europe and North America, and also of what are technically known as representative species. I have intended to include only species which I have myself examined and which are with some certainty accurately compared. But the term “representative” species is in itself perfectly elastic, as I have elsewhere shown; in the present case the species compared are believed to have had a common ancestor in the Tertiary. With regard to the introduced species no historical data are accessible to me, and I doubt if any exist; it is a case for the operation of reasonable surmise. I think these tables are of preliminary interest and value; I first commenced to publish similar observations in the Bulletin of the Buffalo Society of Natural Sciences. In a comparison of European and American species we are chiefly indebted to M. Gueneè and Dr. Speyer.

We have found a caterpillar which lve cannot identify, nor can any one to whom we have shown the description and a water-color drawing.

“Papilio,” Vol. iii., No. I., p. 14, has a description which is nearest it, but is not exactly like our larva, as ours has no tufts.

Our first specimeu was found Sept. 12th, 1883, and our last one Aug. 13th, 1886. Between these we have three others; all of them pupated, but none emerged.

The larva is 1½ inches long; the head is brownish-green with a whitish bloom over it; mouth parts dark; no marks or hairs.