In my last paper (see page 32) I unfortunately repated the erro made by Provancher in giving Vancouver as the habitat of Ecihrus provancheri. I overlooked its correction (Can. Ent., Vol. XVII, page 160) by Mr. Brodie, who obtained the insect from Muskoka.

Having recently restudied and rearranged my Ottawa collections of Phyllphaga and Xylophaga, so as to prepare for publication in the Ottawa Naturalist a complete list of the local species, I have made some notes which may be of more general interest. There are also several species, apparently new, which I prefer to describe here, as I think that all new species should be described (or at least redescribed) in some publication devoted entirely to Entomology, and accessible to all students.

Since my last article ont his group Can.Ent., Aug.,1891), I have obtainded quite a number of forms; some of the new ones are described in this article. Two genera, new to the U.S., are recorded, both of which occur in South America. Chelifer alius, described by Leidy in Proc. Phil. Acad. Sci., 1877, agrees, as far as description goes, with Chelanosp oblongus, Say and with no other form known to me, therefore I consider it a synonym of C. oblongus.

In the following pages I describe the new Bracondis bred by Prof. A. D. Hopkins, of the West Virginia Agricultural Experiment Station, as recorded by him in Insect Life, Vol. IV., pages 256 to 259.

Dioctria parvulus, n. sp. ♂.

Wholly black, shining. Pile of head light yellow, that on sides of face very sparse, extending to base of antennæ. First two joints of antennæ subequal in length, the third joint as long as the first two taken together; style one-sixth as long as the third joint, thick and blunt. Pile of thorax rather abundant, that on abdomen very sparse and short, bright yellow. Base of wings to beginning of fifth posterior cell yellowish-white, beyond this blackish; all posterior and the anal cell open. Length, 4 mm. Los Angeles County, Cal. Two specimens.

May 1, 1889, the Entomological Department of the Cornell Agricultural Experiment Station set sixx trap lanterns, at considerable distances apart, on the University farm for the purpose of determining their value as an insecticide. Each trap consisted simply of a common lantern set in a pan of water whose surface had a thin film of kerosene upon it to facilitate the destruciton of the insects caught/ The lanterns were kept burning every night until Oct. 15, 1889, or until no more insects were attracted.

Driving from Hudson to Como on the 23rd of Septemberm, 1892, about 8 p.m. the night being warm and damp, I was much surprised to see on the hard road something luminous, emitting quite as strong a light as the glow-worm in England. We stopped quickly, but before I could get back the few yards it had disappeared. Some half mile further we passed another, which also, before I could get to it, disappeared. Can any of your readers say what these were? Their sudden disappearance and our failing to find them, though we struck a mathc in both cases, would lead me to think they were some sort of earth worm, as these draw themselves quickly into their holes when disturbed. How else is their sudden disappearance to be accounted for?