Mr. Hulst has been at the pains of taking a sentence of mine as the text of a discourse as to the value of genitalic characters in classification, in the January number of the Canadian Entomologist. Whether this sentence will really bear the edifice Mr. Hulst has erected upon it, is a matter which hardly concerns me. Before either Mr. Smith or Mr. Hulst wrote, I had pointed out the value of the genitalia in generic groupings, in this following Lederer, as an accessory character. My opinion had been (but this is only an opinion) that morphologically the characters drawn from the male anal appendages were of similiar value to those drawn from the antennæ