On the 29th of June, 1897, I found, in the Gomin Swamp, two Spilosomas, females, lying side by side. One of them was much spotted, and presented the exact appearance of the insect which is figured, with closed wings, in the original edition of Dru Drury's work, and named by him Bombyx cunea. The other was white, but on the median nerve, at the angle of the second fork, there was a small black dot, hardly perceptible. The thorax was clothed with light down; the abdomen was white and spotless. The eyes were black, as were also the under sides of the antennae and feet. The front of the thorax under the head was luteours.

This second moth laid eggs on the 10th of July, and the eggs produced larvae which, in due time, pupated. The moths appeared in the following spring.

Nidularia (?) californica, n. sp.

♀ covered with wax resting on a thin white secretion. Colour orange-ferruginous, shiny, varying greatly in size and shape. The average specimens are about 3 mm. long, 1½ wide, and 1 mm. high; generally pyriform, but it is difficult to give any special form, as the insect adapts itself to the position on the plant.

After boiling in K. H. O. derm is colourless, mouth parts, glands and caudal portion remaining brown. There are indications of antennae, which are very small and very bristly, segmentation not visible. There are four large disklike spiracles on the ventral surface, each disk contains numerous glands. There is a row of thick, blunt spines on each margin, and one on the dorsum. These marginal spines are shaped like a spearhead set in a socket. With these there are several rows of round spinnerets. Rostrum attached to a prominence, which, however, varies with the position the insect adopts.

aspidiotus cueroensis, n. sp..—♀. Scale diam, slightly over 1 millim., circular, slightly convex above and beneath, with the margin somewhat elevated, like an oyster; very pale gray or grayish- white, quite a delicate shade, exuviae more or less to one side, covered, inconspicuous, but appearing as a dark spot on the inside of the scale. ♀. Shape ordinary; black when dry. No circumgenital glands. Anal orifice elongate oval, moderately large, distinct from bases of lobes about 1½ times its length. Only one pair of lobes, these and the area about their base remaining dark brown after boiling; lobes rather large, but short and broad, contiguous at the base, but thence diverging to their rounded apices, whence they slope downwards to the comparatively short outer side, the shape of the lobes being almost as in A. ostreaeformis.

Having prepared for the Ottawa Naturalist a list of the Cerambycidae occurring in this district, I find, among other Canadian material in my cabinets, the following species which appear worthy of record: For the Vancouver Island species I am chiefly indebted to my friend, Rev. G. W. Taylor, who resided near Victoria when the specimens were collected. Other material was collected by Mr. A. J. Hill, of New Westminster, B. C., and by Dr. Fletcher. Several of the species I captured when at New Westminster, etc., in 1888, and a few were received from Mr. T. C. Weston, of the Geological Survey, and from the late Capt. G. Geddes.

The published records of the occurrence of coccids in Massachusetts are so scattered and the number found to exist is so large, that it seems quite desirable that they should be brought together and published in one entomological journal. So far as I can learn from careful search of the literature up to January, 1896, there had been only 13 species recorded. Since then the list has increased to 74. A list of the 13 species is: Aspidiotus perniciousus, Mytilaspsis pomorum, Chionapis furfurus, C. spartinae, Aulacaspis bromeliae, Dactylopius adonidum, Phenacoccus aceris, Gossyparia ulmi, Orthezia insignis, Pulvinaria innumerabilis, Lecanium hesperidum, L. platycerii, and L. filicum. A check-list reference-list of the literature of Massachusetts Coccidae will be published in a supplementary article.

A greater variety of generic types will be found among the Stenopelmatinae of the Pacific Coast of the United States than in any other district of equivalent area in our country. I have therefore throught it well to make a list of them in connection with the description of a few new forms from that region. We owe our knowledge of the Orthoptera of that district mainly to the collections of Messrs. Henry Edwards, Behrens, Crotch, and latterly Morse.

In my Catalogue of Fabrician Diurnal Lepidoptera, p. 173, I (in 1869) unhesitatingly identified examples of a Chrysophanus in the British Museum collection with Cramer's Papilio hyllus, and at the present time I do not see the slightest valid reason for altering that decision.

In his “Butterflies of the Eastern United States,” Dr. Scudder, at the end of his synonomy of Chrysophanus thoe, says, “Not Papilio hyllus, Cram.”; but, in his account of the species, I find no reason adduced for this assumption, though I can readily believe that the incorrect locality, “Smyrna,” given by Cramer, and the somewhat careless drawing of the spots across the disk of primaries, may have influenced him.

One of the most worrying things an entomologist has to put up with is that after carefully making a collection his most valued specimens are nearly eaten away, either with mites or the Dermestes beetle.

For the benefit of my brother enthusiasts, let me give briefly my personal experience. Last June captures at light were very good and numerous. Many rare insects were taken and set out. The settingboards were placed on a shelf. By the morning the contents of three boards were literally eaten away by large black ants, house flies, and the little black and orange beetle. If my thoughts had been candidly expressed I am afraid my reputation would have been irretrievably lost, so I hunted around for a remedy and was soon successful in finding one.