<5 . /'J o . 18 FEB.9/ ( ® r a t t 0 a c t i 0 n ® OF THE v CITY OlY LOIsTICOISr ENTOMOLOGICAL & NATURAL HISTORY SOC I ETY. 1W FOR THE YEAR f-i 896. Published by the CITY OF LONDON ENTOMOLOGICAL SOCIETY, THE LONDON INSTITUTION, FINSBURY CIRCUS, E.C. V e. no. CITY OF LONDON ENTOMOLOGICAL it NATURAL HISTORY SOCIETY. ESTABLISHED 186 H. VOVNCIL FOS THE YEAH 1897. J. IV. Tutt, k.k.s. F. J. HaNBURY, K.L.S., K.K.S. J. A. Clark, m.p.s., k.k.s. •J. S. Sequktra, bi.r.c.s. T. Huckett. C. Nicholson, k.k.s., 202, Evering Road, London, N.E. D. C. Bate. L. B. Prout, k.k.s. A. F. Bayne. Capt. B. B. Thompson. L. J. Tremayne, 61, Buckley Road, London, N.W. lion. Secretaries ■ H. A. Sauz£, 4, Mount \ illas, I Sydenham Hill Road, S.E. ' AND A. Bacot, T. Gurney, E. Heaslkr, H. H. May, C. Oldham. P resilient Vice-Presidents Trustees Treasurer Libra riit ns Curators ' TRflNSflCTIOHS OP THE City of London Entomological AND Natural History Society, 1895-96. REPORTS OF MEETINGS. THE SOCIETY’S ROOMS, LONDON INSTITUTION, FINSBURY CIRCUS, E.C. REPORTS OF MEETINGS. December 17th, 1895. — Exhibits: — Rev. C. R. N. Burrows: a specimen of Chanclea umbra infested by a hair worm (Gordius aquaticus), a creature parasitic on Crustacea, fish and insects (both land and water), at various stages of its existence ; also a preserved larva of Ptilo- phora plum it/era, showing a bifurcated structure on the second segment in a corresponding position to that occupied by the transverse slit in Dicranura rinula, through which the larva ejects an acrid fluid when annoyed ; this was retracted when the larva was quiescent. Mr. Tutt said that this structure was popularly known as the “ chin-gland,”, and was very common in larva? belonging to very divergent groups of the Lepidoptera. He suggested that it was probably of service in protecting the larva from its enemies, and he suggested the possibility of its having once been more distinctly functionally active than it appeared to be at the present time. Mr. Mera : a specimen of Saturnia pavonia, which was principally female, but the wings on the left side were shaped and coloured like male wings, though somewhat paler ; the right wings were just tinged here and there with male coloration, and the left antenna was decidedly more pectinated than the right. He also showed two bred examples of ( 'ularia silaceata, from Morpeth ; both were very pale, and the markings were very indistinct in one of them ; part of the brood emerged in August, and were dark, the rest came out in the following May, and were mostly light. Captain Thompson (on behalf of Dr. Buckell) : a long series of Orrhodia lipula ; they were bred from a batch of ova laid by a Hereford¬ shire female, found by Dr. Chapman. The moths, as soon as their wings had dried after emergence, crept under a piece of moss in the breeding-cage, and remained concealed during the daytime. Mr. Sauz6 : male and female specimens of Anthidium manicatum (the Hoop-shaver bee) from Deal. Mr. Tutt exhibited, on behalf of Mr. W. F. de V. Kane, some specimens of Melitaea aurinia, illustrating the var. praeclara, Kane, and the ab. hibernica, Birchall, and read the following notes, which Mr. Kane had forwarded with the specimens : — “ The specimens sent consist of (1) Three specimens of M. aurinia from Cromlyn, part of the batch out of which Mr. Birchall named his ab. hibernica. Of these the 3rd is the nearest to his description. As to the ? , Mrs. Battersby has none in her collection two inches in expanse, much less two inches three lines. Mr. Birchall says in his descriptions:' $ Fore-wings black, etc.’ ; 1 ? Fore-wings fulvous’ and no mention of black on the wings. The damaged third is an authentic specimen given by Bircball to the late Mr. S. R. Fetherstonhaugh, of Dublin, apparently a ? var. scotica, and No. 1 is a $ of the same.’ (2) ‘ Four specimens of M. aurinia of my own capture. No. 1 is from Wicklow, the best ab. hibernica I have ever taken. Nos. 2, Band 4, my var .praeclara from Wexford, Kerry and Waterford.” Mr. Tutt, remarking on the specimens, said : — “ There is no doubt from Birchall’s remarks in the hint. Mo. Mat/., vol. x., p. 154, that he was not very conversant with the forms that M, aurinia takes, for he 3 considered the Scotch specimens to be the same as var. vieropc oi the Continent, on the strength of Staudinger’s short diagnosis of the latter ‘ alpina, minor, obscurior.’ In the general information he appends, he states that in Irish M. aunnia ‘ the fulvous spots on the upper surface are largely replaced by white or cream-coloured blotches, giving the insect at first sight the appearance of Melitaea cyntkia $ . It is larger than English, and very much larger than Scotch specimens of arteinis , the wings of the female frequently reaching 21- inches in expanse.’ So far as the remarks relating to size are concerned, we must take Birchall’s statement unless we charge him with untruth. He gives, besides the general information mentioned above— ‘ Expanse of wings, $ 1 inch 4 lines— 1 inch 8 lines ; ? 2 inches — 2 inches 3 lines.’ The specimens from many localities vary almost as much as this. The following is Birchall’s description of the male hibemica : — Abe superne nigra', anticre maculis seriatim dispositis fulvis ad marginem posticum, aliisque in medio plurimis albis vel stramineo-albidis ad marginem interiorem coalescentibus, lituram f orman tibus ; posticse fascia lata, fulva secus marginem posticum (exemplorum typicorum maculis fulvis margine postico nigro angusto obsitis in varietate vel indiscretis-simis vel nullis) ornatfe ; subtus pallide-fulvre, signature simili at indiscreta.’ ‘ 5 Ahe anticfe fulvae, seriebus macularum albarum vel stramineo-albidarum duabus, interdum confiuentibus fasciasque formantibus, fascia exteriore trans alas posticas products, notatae ; posticas ut in typicis, sed maculis stramineo-albidis nec fulvis ornatfe.’ It will be observed from this that Birchall gives the coloration of the males as ‘ nigr®,’ of the females as ‘ fulvae.’ It will be also noticed that, of the three Cromlyn specimens exhibited, the male is much the blacker and the females the more fulvous. As to . the criticism of Mr. Kane ( Ent ., xxvi., p. 141), that Birchall makes the hind- wings ‘ ornamented neither with pale straw-coloured nor fulvous patches,’ it appears to me that Mr. Birchall says : ‘ the posterior wings as in the type, but ornamented with straw-white, not fulvous patches,’ Mr. Kane having added a ‘ nec ’ to the original to get his reading. In the Ent. Mo. May., x.,. p. 154, Mr. Birchall refers to a coloured plate obtainable from him privately, in which var. hibemica is figured with the English, and what he considers the Scotch form. I have never seen this plate, but Mr. Kane, referring to it, writes : — ‘ The plate shows clearly that * fulvis ’ should be ‘ stramineis ’ in the Latin description of the male. That of the female does not agree with the plate in the latter having the straw-coloured patches.’ This, I take it, makes the figure agree with the description. The Cromlyn male is very dark, and would do for Birchall’s hibemica, but hardly satisfies Birchall’s statement that ‘ there are many other whitish-yellow spots in the centre of the wing ; ’ it srikes me, indeed, as being an exceptionally dark aberration, even of the race Birchall described, with which, how¬ ever, it agrees in the ‘ very inconspicuous ’ extreme marginal spots of the hind-wing. In the females, the fulvous colour is much better developed than in the var. scotica. From an examination of these specimens, and careful consideration of Mr. Kane’s remarks, we must assume that var. praeclara, Kane, is in Ireland (as the type, which is of a less brillant colour, is, in England) the commonest form ; and that the ab. hibemica is a form more nearly approaching var. 4 stotiea, differing from the latter mainly in the great development of the reddish fulvous areas. The C'romlyn male must, I think, be looked upon as an aberrant specimen of the same race.” January 7th, 1896. — Exhibits: — Mr. Prout : Continental types of species and varieties of the Caradrina quadripunctata group, viz.: C. xelini (Germany) ; var. anceps (Syria) ; C. menetriesii (Siberia) ; C. albina (Russia), and C. infuxca (Central France). With the exception of the typical ( '. xelini, all the specimens bore a very great resemblance to some of the forms of C. quadripunctata. Mr. Bate : a very dark specimen of Luperina textacea from Dulwich. Mr. Sauze : Melanostoma quadnmaculatum (Sydenham, March, 1895), and Oxycera trilineata (Deal, July, 1895) amongst other Diptera. Mr. E. Heasler : 4 $ Selidoxema ericetaria, Pxeudoteipna pruinata (three specimens, unusually green, considering that they had been captured) ; two extreme forms of (inophox obxcurata (deep black and ash-grey, respectively), and Acidalia straminata, one of which had a distinct dark band, generally considered to be the distinguishing mark of A. circellata; all from the New Forest. Mr. Frost: two Enodia hyperanthus, with xanthic blotches ; a very dark Hadena dissimilis var. confluenx, closely resembling the dark purplish forms of H. oleracea , and a short series of Noctua ylareosa ; all from Ipswich. January 21st, 1896. — Exhibits: — Rev. C. R. N. Burrows: a long and variable series of Calamia lutoxa taken at Rainham during the past year, and photographic enlargements of some of the specimens showing special characters, to which he referred in a paper which he read on the species. Messrs. Bate, Heasler, Prout and Tutt, also exhibited C. lutoxa from various localities. Mr. Tutt exhibited on behalf of Miss Elizabeth Miller, Spring Villa, Coval Road, Chelmsford, a cluster of cocoons of Aphomia sociella, and read the following notes from her : — On a cluster of cocoons of Aphomia sociella. — “ In October, 1894, a man working for us, whilst removing a quantity of wood from a corner of the garden, found what he thought was the nest of a mouse. He tried to open it, and, partly succeeding, discovered that it contained a number of caterpillars about halFan-inch long, and of a bright yellow colour. He gave it to my father, and we put it in a box in an outhouse without damping it the whole of the time it was in our possession. We kept it until May, 1895, when a large number of moths emerged from it, of which we only kept nine. The moth turned out to be Aphomia sociella. When found the cluster was covered with the heads, thoraces, and wings of Humble-bees. It was placed under the wood, which was on a grassy part of the garden, in a little excavation in the ground, apparently lined with dead grass mixed with leaves and some woolly substance. It was our first idea that it was a bee’s nest, and we are quite sure that it was some kind of nest before the moth took possession of it. We see that in the Entom. Record, vol. vi., pp. 76-77, Mr. W. P. Blackburne-Maze describes and gives a plate of a similar nest, but throws some little doubt as to the larvae feeding in the nests of Humble bees, and suggests that, in the instance he records at least, the larvae probably feci in a wasp’s nest. However that may be, there can be no cloubt that the cluster we record was formed in the orthodox fashion, in a Humble-bee’s nest, as it was placed in an exactly similar position to that in which Humble-bees generally build, and also, whereas there was not even the remains of one wasp to be seen, there was an abundance of the remains of Humble-bees.” Mr. Tutt also exhibited, on behalf of Mr. W. E. Butler, of Hayling House, Reading, two specimens of Ar . Also a specimen of Agrotis segetum, Avith the costal edge toAvards 22 the apex of both fore-wings, quite white in colour. A specimen of Leucania pattens, exhibiting aberrant neuration. A specimen of Mamestra brassicae, having a ruddy tinge all over the fore-wings. Two female Agrotis puta, strongly suffused with red. A specimen of Tnjpliaena pronuba, with dark longitudinal lines on the fore-wings. Mr. Tutt remarked, with regard to the red form of A. puta, that this was Hiibner’s type. He had captured a male, richly tinted, at Deal, and recorded the same in Brit. Noctuae and their Varieties. Captures in Suffolk. — Mr. Bloomfield exhibited Catocala sponsa, Dianthoecia cucubali, etc., from Bures, Suffolk. Food-plant of Papilio machaon. — Mr. Tutt, referring to a remark made concerning the food- plant of this species in the Alps, said that it was undoubtedly Daucus carota and the allied umbellifers, which were exceedingly abundant at pretty high elevations. It occurred up to 8,000 ft., and he referred to a fact, first noticed by Mr. Lemann, that the species had, in the high Alps, a habit of flying about the grassy knolls which surmounted many mountains at a considerable elevation. Spread of species. — Mr. Frost drew attention to the fact that he often caught an odd specimen of TJnjas paphia in localities where it did not usually occur, and often somewhat later than is usual in the New Forest, and other localities where it was regularly abundant. He asked whether the members thought it was due to an attempt to spread its area. Mr. Tutt said that he had no doubt there was a tendency in many insects to do this. He had observed both sexes of Aporia crataeyi at Lautaret, above the tree limit, and where there was no trace of any of their food-plants, unless “ Cotoneaster,” a food-plant mentioned by Frey and which he did not know, occurred there. He believed the specimens observed at high altitudes, were all stragglers from the lower valleys. Egg of Pamphila comma. — Mr. Tutt exhibited eggs of I’, comma which had been obtained by Mr. Hamm. He stated that the egg had been described by Buckler, but that a description of the larva was a great desideratum. There was considerable uncertainty even as to the food-plant. He also referred to the fact that this species hybernated in the egg stage, and that a description of the egg of Tlujmelicus actaeon was still wanted. Alpine Aglais urticjE. — Mr. Tutt also exhibited specimens of A. urticae, the larvie of which had been obtained at Lautaret, where they were abundant, on a patch of stinging nettles, near the Hospice. The larvie pupated in a large chip box. A very large percentage, however, was infested with dipterous parasites — of two species. The imagines emerged on August 30th, after a journey from Lautaret to London via Grenoble. He called attention to the fact that the usual deep red hue of the Alpine specimens was wanting, and that they were very little different on their upper sides from those of southern England, but on the undersides there was a considerable contrast between the pale and dark areas of the fore-wings, the central transverse band was very marked, and the blue spots parallel to the outer margin of the hind- wings were very strongly developed. He also showed the pupa-cases, and drew atten¬ tion to the mode of dehiscence. October 6th, 1896. — Sirex juvencus at Eltiiam. — Mr. J. A. Clark exhibited a specimen of S. juvencus, captured the preceding day 28 (Oct. 5th), at Eltham. Dr. Sequeira remarked that he had taken it some years ago in the month of August, in the Warren, at Exmouth. Second brood of Hemerophila abruptaria. — Mr. J. A. Clark exhibited a specimen of a partial second brood of Hemero¬ phila abruptaria, that had emerged a few hours before the meeting. He had, up to the present, bred five specimens out of about 80 pupae. Boletobia fuliginaria. — Mr. Tutt exhibited a specimen of B. fuliyinaria, which had been sent to him to name by Mr. Boult, and which that gentleman stated had been captured just previously at Hull. It was noticed by the members that the insect was loose on its pin, and appeared to have been re-set. Calltmorpha dominula ab. rossica, Kol. — Mr. H. May exhibited bred specimens of Callimorpha dominula, the larvae having come from Deal and Plymouth. Two had the hind-wings somewhat suffused (approaching ab. persona ), and one had orange-coloured hind-wings. The latter was dwarfed and somewhat crippled. Intermediate Dryas paphia-valesina and an aberration of D. paphia. — Mr. Bayne exhibited a $■ aberration of D. paphia, with the spots joined so as to form longitudinal streaks crossing the wing, and with the black spots at the end of the nervures much enlarged. He also exhibited a grand $ paphia, much suffused with the valesina tint, and which Mr. Tutt remarked reminded him of Dryas pandora. Also typical ab. valesina, and one very dark one, suffused with tawny. All were captured in the New Forest. Aporophyla australis ab. ingenua. — Mr. Prout exhibited two specimens of this aberration from Sandown, one taken in 1895 and one in 1896, and drew attention to its great rarity, both here and on the Continent. Mr. Tutt drew attention to the close superficial resemblance between this aberration and Epundalutulenta. Dark aberrations of Tephrosia bistortata (crepuscularia) . — Mr. Prout exhibited, on behalf of Major Robertson, some dark aberrations of T. bistortata, and one specimen of the second brood, also one specimen of the extreme melanic form of T. crepuscularia, and drew attention to the fact that the dark aberrations of T. bistortata always showed a strong brown tendency, whilst those of the allied species, T. crepuscularia (Jdundularia) were black. He also drew attention to the remarkable statement, made re¬ cently by Mr. C. G. Barrett, that the second brood of T. bistortata was obviously T. crepuscularia. This view, he said, was quite untenable. Mr. Tutt agreed with the remarks made by Mr. Prout, and described the differences existing between the second brood of T. bistortata and T. biundularia ( crepuscularia ). Although the ground colour of both could be called “ white,” the dead-grey white (almost with a trace of lead-colour in it) of the second brood of T. bistortata was very different from the purer white (or creamy white) of the May- June species. Zyg^ena carniolica from Bourg d’Oisans. — Mr. Tutt exhibited Z. camiolica from Bourg d’Oisans, and read the following notes: — “ The type of this beautiful species has the red spots of the anterior wings surrounded with broad creamy-yellow rings, and the abdomen has a red ring surrounding it, but the insect is so variable that many aberrations have been named, a summary of which may be found in Notes on the Zyyamidae. These Bourg d’Oisans specimens are peculiar (1) in having scarcely any creamy rings to the red spots, and (2) in having the bodies entirely black =ab. diniensis, H.-S. Sometimes 24 the first character is carried to the extreme, and no creamy rings are present at all. This form is the ab. berolinensis of Staudinger. A combination of these two aberrations comprise almost 90 per cent, of the sum total of the specimens of this species observed atBourgd’Oisans. I would also call attention to the union of the central and basal pairs of spots in many specimens.” Carsia paludata ab. imbutata and Melanippe montanata. — Mr. Oldham exhibited Carsia paludata ab. imbutata, from Manchester Mosses, and remarked on the gradual restriction of the mosses by drainage and cultivation. The Melanippe montanata were from Cambridgeshire, and some were very white, witn very distinct bands. Triphaena fimbkia ab. vihescens. — Mr. Iieasler exhibited a specimen of T. fimbria ab. virescens, Tutt, from Wimbledon. In the Mew Forest, he said, it was generally looked upon as being very rare. Mr. Tutt thought it was a generally distributed form. Vauiation of Eupithecia sobhinata. — Mr. Tutt exhibited a picked series of Eupithecia sobrinata, captured by Mr. and Mrs. Tunaley, at Aviemore. He said he believed the Scotch race as a whole was named var. scotica, by Dr. F. B. White, but the name was generally restricted to the pale variegated forms, which did not appear to occur in the South of England. The series showed that there was considerable variation among the Scotch specimens, the indi¬ viduals arranging themselves into two parallel groups, one running through a series of brown forms, until the species became almost unicolorous brown. The other through a series of grey forms, until they culminated in an almost unicolorous fuscous form. Scotch forms of Emmelesia ericetata. — Mr. Tutt then exhibited a series of Emmelesia ericetata, also captured by Mr. and Mrs. Tunaley, at Aviemore. These showed considerable variation: — (li In depth of ground colour, some being much whiter, others greyer. (2) In the amount of ochreous tint. (3) In the width and completeness of the central band (forms with this central band broken just below the centre were very rare). Abkrra- TtoNs of Abraxas grossulariata. — Mr. C. May exhibited a marvellous series of aberrations of A. grossvlanata (about 180 specimens). They had all been bred during the last two years under identical conditions, and showed every phase of variation, from being almost devoid of black markings to being exceedingly suffused, and almost entirely black. A few specimens had lost all trace of the yellow markings, and others were of the semi-transparent suffused character, so well-known to breeders of this species. Banded form of Hybkrnia auhantiaria. — Mr. May also exhibited a form of H. aurantiaria, with two dark bands very distinctly marked, owing to suffusion of the outer and basal areas. Dark aberration of Plusta gamma. — Mr. C. May then exhibited a very suffused aberration of P. gamma, the ground colour being of a dark reddish-brown. Mr. Tutt said that a similar aberra¬ tion was described in The British Noctuae and their Varieties (vol. iv., p. 32). Second brood of Arctia caia. — Mr. Bate exhibited specimens of a second brood of A. caia, which had been bred from eggs laid in June last. The specimens had a tendency to assume a yellowish coloration in the hind-wings, due, perhaps, to the rapidity of feeding- up, and the rapidity with which they came to maturity. Hairs of Leucoma samcis and Psiuira monaciia. — Mr. Bacot exhibited drawings 25 of the hairs of the larvre (in first skin) of these species. Heliothis armigera from imported tomatoes. — Mr. Southey exhibited a long series of H. armigera, bred from larvae obtained in North London, from tomatoes, which had been imported from Spain and Teneriffe. Second brood of Acidalia dilutaria (holosericata). — Mr. W. G. Pearce exhibited a living specimen of A. holosericata, bred from a Bristol larva which had come from an egg hatched last June. Mr. D. C. Bate read a paper “ On the early stages of Psilura monacha and its allies.” In the course of the discussion that followed, Mr. Bacot made the following remarks. — “ The larva? of Psilura monacha and Porthetria dispar develop within the egg before the winter. I examined some last January, and found the larvaa fully developed, even to the thorns and bulbs on the hairs. In the ova of Orgyia antiqua, no apparent develop¬ ment had taken place until spring. In the 1st skin of the larva of P. monacha, the 3rd thoracic segment is weak, the tubercles on it smaller than in other segments ; this feature is not present in P. dispar. I he anterior trapezoidals very small, only bearing one hair ; posterior pair very large, bearing numerous hairs ; this is also the case with P. dispar, while with L. salicis it is questionable if the anterior pair are present, as I have, up to the present, been unable to find them. There are, at least, two distinct kinds of hairs present (1) Short spines, with slight traces of thorns, and a bulbous swelling, about up from base (the small hairs arising from anterior trapezoidals have this bulb). (2) Long and more slender hairs, many of them very thorny. The hairs in P. dispar are identical, but there is no trace of the bulb on hairs of Leucoma salicis, or any other species that I have yet examined. They are present in P. monacha and P. dispar in the 1st skin only. The upper part of the bulbed hairs is frequently bent at a sharp angle, just above the bulb. In the 2nd skin, I noticed that the 5th abdominal segment is weak, both it and the 3rd thoracic are pale and have smaller tubercles than the other segments ; this is not the case with Z . dispar. In 3rd skin, the head becomes grey mottled with black. The anterior trapezoidals still very small, but bearing five or six small hairs. In the 4th skin, the tubercles and hairs smaller, in proportion to the size of the larva. In the 5th skin, as in the fourth. I could trace no further moults in P. monacha, but I think P. dispar sometimes has a fifth moult. There is a tendency for the eversible and small glands on the abdominal segments, 1 to 4, to dwindle in the later stages of P. monacha, but this does not occur in P. dispar. Larv/E of P. monacha vary greatly in coloration. In one of my ’94 broods (all from same parent) they varied from a form with a laro-e amount of white in its coloration, to nearly black with hardly a trace of white. I consider that the larvre when young are protected by their resemblance to a bird’s dropping, and in later stages by their lichen¬ like coloration, the darker forms being difficult to detect, even on the smooth bare bark of cherry twigs from a London garden. Porthesia stmilis. — This species spins a large thin transparent cocoon, in which it changes its skin ; it then spins a smaller and much denser cocoon occupying about half, or not quite half, the space of the old one, and in this inner cocoon it passes the winter, leaving its cast skin in the outer chamber.” 26 Oct. 20th, 1896. — Aberrations of Crocallis elinguaria and Himera pennaria. — Mr. Oldham exhibited a very pale specimen of Crocallis elinguaria, and a female specimen of Himera pennaria, with the transverse lines very strongly marked. Hypsipetes ruberata from Cambridgeshire. — Mr. Oldham also exhibited a bred series of H. ruberata from Cambridgeshire, which Mr. Tutt said appeared to be identical with the Wisbech form. Rhyssa persuasoria from Norfolk. — Mr. Oldham then exhibited a specimen of this Hymenopteron, taken in Norfolk. Selenia tetralunaria. — Mr. D. C. Bate exhibited a female specimen of the summer brood of Selenia tetralunaria, which, although it pupated in June with the rest of the brood, did not emerge until within a few days of October 3rd, when it was found alive in the cage, which still contained the pupae of that brood. Suffolk captures. — The Rev. C. R. N. Burrows exhibited— (1). A male aberration of Epione apiciaria, orange in colour, without reticulations, and with an entire dark purple marginal band. (2). A specimen of Acidalia subsericeata, taken in August (1896), and presumably belonging to a second brood. (3). A specimen of Agrotis nigricans, without markings. (4). Dyschorista suspecta, one without spots, but with transverse lines. All were captured in Suffolk in August, 1896. Syrichthus malv^e (taras) and Pyrameis atalanta. — Mr. T. W. Jackson exhibited a specimen of S. malvae with a whitish central blotch on each fore-wing (ab. taras, Meig.), from Horsham, and also a bred Pyrameis atalanta, with two of the white apical spots large and suffused, and a small white dot near apex of hind-wings, the spots in the red band on the latter being absent. The food-plant of Carpocapsa saltitans. — Mr. T. F. Clarke exhibited a sprig of the species of Euphorbia which bears the seeds known as the “Jumping Beans,” showing the “beans” in position. Captures at Sandown. — Mr. Prout exhibited five specimens of Caraclrina ambigua, captured this year at Sandown. Mr. Tutt remarked that the species would appear to occur further west than was generally assumed, as Mr. Woodforde had taken it at Exmouth this year. Mr. Prout further exhibited two specimens of Leucania albipuncta, one very red, the other quite grey — ab. grisea, Tutt; also a strongly marked aberration of Hadena abjecta of the variegated form, approaching in superficial appearance to H. genistae or A. gemina ab. remissa. All the specimens were taken at Sandown. Resting habit of Nisoniades tages and Spilothyrus altHjE^l — Mr. Bayne asked whether any of the members had seen Nisoniades tages at rest at night. He said he had noticed that, when the lantern-light fell on them, they immediately dropped their wings from the orthodox butterfly position of rest to that described as the “ penthouse ” position. Mr. Tutt, referring to Spilothyrus althaeae, a Continental species, said that he observed that a very fine specimen rested naturally with outspread wings, much after the fashion of a Geometrid moth, and continued to do so for several days, but that a worn specimen of the same species rested in quite orthodox butterfly fashion. Mr. J. W. Tutt (President) read a paper on “The Antenna1 of Lepidoptera ; their Structure, Functions and Evolution.” November 3rd, 1896. — Insects from Wisbech. — Mr. Oldham ex¬ hibited Plusia iota, P. chrysitis (larger and darker than usual), and 27 Euchloe cardamines, with the central spot very small, all from Wis¬ bech. Aberrations. — Mr. H. H. May exhibited Boarmia repandata, ab. conversance (3 $ and 3 2 ), taken at Lyndhurst, June, 1896. Also a male Himera pennana, having the wings suffused with smoky brown, and the apical white spot rather larger than usual ; and a $ Agrotis exclamation is with confluent stigmata. Egg of Pamphila comma. — Mr. Bacot said he had opened an egg of Pamphila comma on October 11th last, and had found the young larva fully developed within. Pup>£ of Papilio machaon. — He also read the folloAving notes on pupae of Papilio machaon-.—-11 During the past season I had some larvae of Papilio machaon. They were fed up on carrot-tops, in a hat-box, with a small muslin-covered opening in the lid to admit light and air. Three or four fastened themselves upon carrot stems, and produced green pupae. Three attached themselves to a red terracotta flour- pan (exhibited), and turned to grey pupae, strongly shaded with dark brown. The remainder (seven) pupated on the white sides and top of the box, and were in every case of the grey form, though varying greatly as to the extent and depth of the brown shading, one being dirty white rather than grey, with hardly a trace of darker shading on it.” Mellinia ocellaris in Essex. — Mr. Tutt exhibited a specimen of M. ocellaris, and read the following notes : — “ The specimen exhibited was captured by Mr. F. Whittle, in September, 1894, who writes : — ‘ I send for your inspection a fine specimen of M. gilvago. I suppose it is gilvago, not ocellaris, although its superior wings are sharply falcate, and there is a conspicuous white spot at the base of the reniform. M. gilvago was not uncommon at the time.’ There is no doubt that it is M. ocellaris. The fact that the British individuals of Mellinia ocellaris are almost always taken where M. gilvago occurs, leads me to refer to a quotation from The Brit. Noctuae and their Varieties, vol. iv., p. 122. This relates to a statement by Fuchs, who says : — ‘ My own captured gilvago and ocellaris, however, lead me to believe in the identity of these species, as I have one gilvago with the tips of the fore-wings acutely pointed as in ocellaris. All my specimens, both of gilvago and ocellaris, have been taken in the noted poplar avenue of Hamburg, where gilvago is the rarer, and ocellaris the commoner species. The freshly-emerged specimens were taken on the trunks of poplars during the afternoon ’ ( Stett . Ent. Zeit., vol. xliv., p. 264).” Mr. Tutt said that, in his opinion, the species were abun¬ dantly distinct, and he exhibited a typical specimen of Mellinia gilvago for comparison. Isle of Man insects. — Mr. Tutt exhibited, for Mr. H. Shortridge Clarke, a box of insects from the Isle of Man, com¬ prising, among others, Hipparchia semele, a male specimen of the ab. addenda, Zygaena trifolii, Agrotis corticea, A. vestigialis, A. tritici, Pseudoterpna pruinata, Helotropha leucostigma , Epunda lutulenta ab. sedi, Haclena contigua, Caradrina taraxaci, Ancliocelis rufina, Porthesia similis, etc. ; also an aberration of Abraxas grossulariata, with very strong black and orange markings, and a female aberration of Amphidasys betularia, in which the usual black peppering was absent, the whitish ground colour, with only the traces of the ordinary trans¬ verse lines, giving the specimen a strange appearance. The type occurs in the Isle of Man. Bombyx quercOs and Bombyx callun^:. — Capt. Thompson re-opened the discussion on these insects, and said 28 that he had, since he read his paper in May last, looked up the Zoologist, 1847, for Palmer’s description of B. callunae, but found that, although there was a very complete description of the early stages, there was no mention of the imago. The antennae, however, were somewhat fully dealt with. Mr. J. C. Warburg stated that the data given by Palmer did not prove to be correct when a number of specimens were carefully examined. Mr. Warburg exhibited a very long series of Bombyx quercus and Bovribyx spartii, from Cannes. He stated that he had separated the larvae by certain markings mentioned by Milliere, Constant and Guen6e, as being characteristic, but that certain larvae might be classed with either group, and, as a result, he failed to find any clear distinction between the imagines bred from the larvae thus selected. Mr. W. Hewett, of York, sent a very interesting series of specimens, consisting of— (1) nine female callunae, all bred specimens, selected from a great number of females, and including a very striking pale aberration, another without the whitish band on the hind-wings, also a male with the bands suffused with olive colour ; (2) eight male callunae, bred, and two male quercus, one from Beverley, Yorks, and the other from York ; also a half-grown larva of callunae, and two cocoons of callunae. Mr. Hewett notes : — “ I do not possess any cocoons of B. quercus, but those that I have seen have been lighter than those of B. callunae Mr. Nicholson exhibited a series of 1 $ and 6 J , undoubted quercus, bred from a female, taken, newly emerged, on a gate-post on top of the cliff's, at Overstrand, near Cromer, 26th July, 1894 ; 4 males, attracted by her, were also shown ; also a pair of Yorkshire callunae, and a specimen taken flying over a heathy bit of land at Bingwood, Hants, probably in August, 1880. The date of this capture was uncer¬ tain, but Mr. Nicholson remembered that Hipparchia semele was on the wing, and in good condition, when the specimen was taken. This specimen united several of the characteristics supposed to distinguish quercus from callunae. Also a series of one $ and six $? , undoubted callunae, bred from a female, captured at dusk, while ovipositing, flying along a grassy, herbage-covered bank between two fields, at Pwllheli, N. Wales, July 17th, 1895. There was no moorland or heathy ground near, and the land round about was only a foot or two above sea-level. The larvae of both broods were hatched about the same time after the eggs were laid, and were treated in exactly the same way, being kept indoors in a warm room, and fed at first on willow, bramble, and hawthorn, and afterwards on privet and ivy, till full fed. The quercus pupated during January, 1895, and the first imago (a female) appeared on June 4th, 1895. The callunae had all pupated before Christmas, 1895, and the first imago (a female) emerged April 4th, 1896. A good many larvae of both broods died, and only about a dozen cocoons in each case were produced ; the quercus which did not emerge were found to be all males, and were apparently unable to escape from the pupae ; the callunae which did not emerge were found not to have pupatod at all, the larva) having dried up in the cocoon. The cocoons of both broods were exactly similar in colour, but in each brood they varied from dark brownish- black to greyish ; none were yellow. Mr. Nicholson did not notice any difference between the larva; of the two broods in any stage ; 29 there was certainly no marked difference, and the ova were similar. Commenting on the material exhibited, Mr. Nicholson said that there did not seem to be a single character in the imago sufficiently con¬ stant, as far as he could see, to infallibly differentiate quercus from callunae, or callunae from spartii, although, generally speaking, the two latter seemed, on the whole, darker than quercus, and more closely allied to each other than to it. It seemed to him that the three so-called species were, in all probability, simply local or racial varieties of one species, and Mr. Tutt’s remarks would appear to con¬ firm or, at any rate, strengthen this view. Mr. Prout stated that he had found a female callunae (?) drying its wings on a plant of heather ( Calluna ), at the end of July, 1894, near Lyndhurst. Mr. Horne (of Aberdeen) sent for exhibition a representative series of Aberdeenshire callunae, consisting of eight males and ten females. Two of the males were of a dark buff colour, with the usual markings rather darker buff. These were justly admired. Mr. Bayne asked if anyone knew whether there was any form corresponding to callunae found in mountainous localities on the Continent. Mr. Warburg said he thought Milliere would have described it, if such a form existed. Mr. Tutt, however, stated most distinctly that B. callunae occurred in the mountainous districts of Southern Europe. He said that he captured a larva in August, 1894, on Mont de la Saxe (above Courmayeur), that it spun in due course the following month, and produced a fine typical female callunae the following summer. Mr. Bacot exhibited specimens, and read the following notes : — “ 2 ^s. Pupae received from Aberdeen Nov. 1894, emerged June, 1895, as typical callunae. 2 2 s. Larvae taken on Exmoor, Aug., 1890, hybernated as pupae and emerged May, 1891, one a cripple, the other a pale callunae form. 1 $ . Taken on Lundy Isle, Devon, Aug., 1887 (typical quercus). lj. Larva taken at Folkestone, Aug., 1891, hybernated as pupa and emerged the following year, in 1892 (? June), as typical quercus. 1 $ . Taken at Lyme, Dorset, July, 1893 = typical callunae upper side, tends rather to quercus coloration underneath. 1 $ . Larva received from St. Anne’s-on-Sea in May, 1892 ; emerged same year, and resembles the last. 1 $ , 2 J s. Larvte taken in Essex, May, 1894, emerged July, 1894, as typical quercus. The basal patch is probably a remnant of the inner or basal band, B. trifolii, representing a transition form between callunae and B. rubi. It (the basal patch) appears to be present in nearly the whole of the callunae exhibited, and is absent in all the quercus, save one specimen, exhibited by Mr. Prout, from Southend, and others from St. Anne’s-on-Sea ; none of Mr. Warburg’s South of France quercris and spartii showing the slightest trace of this marking.” Mr. Garland exhibited two female Bornby.v quercus, bred from pup* found at Eastbourne; one of them was nearly colourless in the hind- wings, but somewhat crippled ; also two female Polyommatus icarus, in one specimen taken at Riddlesdown, 1896, the wings were of a brighter blue than usual ; the other taken at High Beach, 1896, having the fore-wings splashed with streaks of white and of a bright blue colour. Nov. 17th, 1896. — Insects fbom Wisbech. — Mr. Oldham 30 2 ChoeVocampa elpenor, taken with other insects, flying round the flowers of Cerasus lusitanica (Portugal laurel) and honeysuckle, at Wisbech ; also Bombylius major (the Bee-fly), from the same locality. Spilosoma fuliginosa. — Mr. S. J. Bell : a hred series of Spilosoma fuliginosa, from Yorkshire ova, one slightly malformed specimen showing a tendency towards yellow, instead of red, on the hind-wings. Second bkood of Arctia caia. — Mr. Bate : specimens of a second brood of Arctia caia, bred by himself and Mr. Shields from eggs laid by a female, taken at Woodford, Essex ; in most of the specimens the red on the hind-wings was more or less tinged with yellow, and in one female the red was almost entirely replaced by yellow. Ennomos autumnaria.— Mr. Garland: 3 $ and 2 ? Ennomos autumnaria, bred by himself from lame obtained from Messrs. J . and W. Davis, of Dartford, who reared them from eggs laid by a Deal specimen ; also cocoon, pupa-shell and eggs of the species ; the latter strongly resembled those of E. quer cinaria as regards shape, colour, and manner of deposition. Tephrosia crepus- cularia (biundularia) and T. bistobtata (crepuscularia). — Mr. Tutt exhibited a very fine series of T. biundularia, captured by Dr. Corbett, in the neighbourhood of Doncaster, in May and June (1893-1895). The specimens exhibited a very wide range, from the whitish typical form, to the dark ah. delamerensis ; also, for comparison, a series of Tephrosia bistortata var. abietaria, Haw., taken by Mr. Mason, of Clevedon, Somerset, in March, 1894-1895, and a series of the second brood form of 1 . bistortata, var. consonaria, St., bred in June last, by himself, from Clevedon eggs. Orrhodia vaccinii, ab. obscura. — Mr. Tutt exhibited, on behalf of Dr. Riding, some dark specimens of O. vaccinii, and pointed out how parallel the variation appeared to run with that of 0. erythrocephala ah. glabra. Plusia bractea bred IN autumn.— Mr. Tutt then exhibited a series of Plusia bractea, bred by Mr. J. Finlay, of Morpeth, from eggs laid in July last, the lame having been forced in order to procure autumnal specimens. He also exhibited a specially dark aberration of Polia chi ab. olivacea, taken at Morpeth, by the same gentleman. New Zealand Psyciiid. — Mr. Tutt also exhibited some cases of a Psychid ( Liothula omnivora ) which he had received from Mr. W. W. Smith, of Ashburton, New Zea¬ land. This appeared to be the nearest approach to the “ basket worms ” (described in Knt. live., vol. vii, No. G) found in that country. Hybrid Smerinthus ocellatus-populi. — Mr. Bacot, on behalf of himself and Mr. J. A. Clark: 3 hybrids between Smerinthus ocellatns and S. populi, bred by them ; also the parents, and typical specimens of each species. Mr. Bacot read, “ Notes on hybrid Smerinthus ocellatus-populi,” illustrating his remarks by means of the specimens exhibited, and drawings of the genitalia, prepared by Mr. F. N. Pierce, of Liverpool, and kindly lent for the occasion. The following gentlemen were nominated as Council for 1897 • _ President, Mr. J. W. Tutt; Vice-Presidents, Messrs. J. A. Clark and F. J. Hanbury ; Treasurer, Mr. J. A. Clark or Mr. C. Nicholson • Librarians, Mr. L. B. Prout and D. C. Bate ; Curators, Captain Thompson and Mr. A. F. Bayne ; Secretaries, Messrs. L. J. Tremayno and II. A. Sauze ; and five other members to be selected 81 from the following : Messrs. A. Bacot, T. Gurney, E. Heasler, H. H. May, E. A. Newbery, C. Nicholson, G. Oldham. December 1st, 1896 (Annual General Meeting). Exhibits Dr. J. S. Sequeira : lepidoptera recently captured in the New Forest, in¬ cluding a specimen of G 'atocala promissa, in which the upper wings were of a rich dark brown, with ochreous shadings— a style of colora¬ tion frequently found in its congener, C. sponsa. Mr. Bacot : short bred series of Trie /dura crataegi and Orggia gonostigma. A short discussion ensued as to the double-broodedness of the latter species in a state of nature. The gentlemen, nominated at the last meeting as officers for 1897, were duly elected, with the exception of Mr. J. A. Clark, who resigned his office as Treasurer. The ballot for the five other members of tbe Council resulted in the election of Messrs. A. Bacot, T. Gurney, E. Heasler, H. H. May and C. Oldham. One of the Secretaries, Mr. C. Nicholson, then read the following : — SECRETARIES’ REPORT. It was suggested in the Secretaries’ report for last year, as you may remember, that 1895 would probable be memorable in the annals of this Society for three separate reasons, viz. : the conversazione ; the revision of the rules, and the fact that the Society’s exchequer had, for the first time in its existence, been able to meet all demands made upon it. We would suggest, in this Report, that the present year also will probably linger in the memories of not a few of us ; but for a sadly different reason. We may remind you that the balance-sheet for 1895 showed that the previous debt to the Treasurer, of £8 9s. 8d., had been reduced to £5 10s. 5d., thereby seeming to promise brighter days in store. The present balance-sheet, however, reveals the deplorable fact that the Society, instead of profiting by the new leaf which it turned over last year, has ignominiously turned it back again, and miserably yielded to its evidently innate tendency to wallow in financial mire. In other words, it has allowed itself, apparently without any resistance, to become involved in a debt of £16 5s. 8d. The reasons for this disgraceful state of affairs are numerous, but the principal one is easily stated. It is the old, old story. A large proportion of the members seem to think that the Society can be carried on without their subscriptions. The members who seem to share this delusion are far too numerous, unfortunately, to permit of this Utopian con¬ dition of things. If all the arrears and outstanding subscriptions were paid up to date, the Society’s coffers, instead of being in a starving condition, would be actually overfed to the extent of about 5s. In view of the fact that Mr. J. A. Clark has resigned the Treasurership, after holding it for so many years, it would indeed be ungrateful of us to forget that the Society's past needs constantly proved the “ Open, sesame ! ” to its Treasurer’s pocket. Is it to be wondered at, though, that even he at last began to be weary of these perpetual encroachings on his private purse ? Not at all, we think. On 32 the contrary, if he had been a little lesss generous, and if his patience had given way sooner, we are strongly of opinion that it would have been a very good thing for the Society’s morals. Mr. Clark, however, on the eve of his retirement, so to speak (that is, when he had seen the present balance-sheet completed), performed a crowning act of benevolence which heaps coals of fire on the head of this devoted Society, and should inspire every member of it (every defaulting member, at any rate) with mingled feelings of shame and admiration. Listen, gentlemen ! As if regretting his former apparent severity in permitting himself to admit that the Society owed him anything at all, Mr. Clark, at one fell swoop, actually, hut not. morally, annihilated that part of the debt due to him by paying £5 of it for a life membership, and presenting the balance of £1 11s. 2d. as a donation ! ! What can be said of generosity like this ? The least we can do is to accord him our most humble and heartfelt thanks, and show our appreciation of such an act by going and doing likewise. The remainder of the debt, £9 14s. 6d., is due to Mr. Nicholson for secretarial expenses. The number of members on our books (76) is identical with that of last year ; but we fear that the Council will be compelled to erase several names from the list, which will in that case again show a slight decrease over the previous one. We once more earnestly desire to impress upon you the necessity of doing your best to prove to your friends and acquaintances how necessary it is for their future welfare that they should join this Society. The attendance at the meetings during 1896, compared with 1895, has remained in statu quo. The total attendance of members and visitors was 446, giving an average for the 24 meetings of just over 19. The highest number present at any one meeting was 29, on 20th October ; the lowest on 4th August — 7. There have been 11 papers read before the Society this year, as against 10 in 1895 ; and, in addition, we have had the discussion on Bomby.v quercus and B. callunae, which occupied two meetings. Although, in the majority of cases, the subjects of the papers have been of an entomological nature, we have endeavoured to create a little variety by introducing one on Astronomy and one on Botany. This innovation seems to have been well received, so it will be continued during next year. The following is a list of the papers : — “Genera” ... J. W. Tutt, F.E.S. “ Calamia lictosa” Rev. C. R. N. Burrows. “ The Lepidoptera of Dulwich ” ... ... D. C. Bate. “ The Planet Mars ” ... C. Nicholson, F.E.S.' “ Entomology, Evolution and Romance ; a plea for a new departure ... ... F. W. Frost. “Ferns” ... ... R. W. Robbins! “ Mcdamppe fluctuuta ” ... ... L. B. Prout, F.E.S. “ The Genus Hybemia ” ... ... ... A. F. Bayne. “ Notes on the early stages of Psilura monncha and its allies ” . ... .. D. C. Bate “ The Antennae of Lepidoptera ; their Structure, Functions and Evolution ” ... ... J. W. Tutt, F.E.S. 38 “Notes on hybrid Smerinthus ocellahis-populi ... A. Bacot. The pocket-box Exhibition, which was fixed for 21st April, has been unavoidably postponed till next meeting — 15th December, when we trust there will be a good muster of members and friends, and a multiplicity of exhibits. In addition to the usual magazines, the library has been enriched by the following gifts : — “ British Moths ” (by our President), from Mr. G. B. Routledge. “ British Butterflies ” ,, ,, ,, the Author. “Proceedings of the Entomological Society of Ontario” (in exchange). “ Transactions of the South London Entomological and Natural History Society ” (in exchange). “ Report of Rugby School Natural History Society ” (in exchange). The cabinet has also received attention, the following welcome donations having been made : — 8 Miana literosa, from Mr. L. B. Prout ; 10 OrrJiodia ligula and 1 Tethra retusa, from Dr. F. J. Buckell ; 2 I no rjlobulariae and 2 I. gertgon, from Mr. D. C. Bate. The exhibits during the past year have been, if anything, rather superior in quality to those of previous years. This is due in great measure, we think, to Mr. Tutt’s kind invitation in the Record, to correspondents and strangers in the country, to send up rare, local or otherwise interesting specimens for exhibition at our meetings. In conclusion, gentlemen, we would once again earnestly impress upon members (especially our new friends in this capacity) the advisability of giving the Reporting Secretary lists of their exhibits at the close of each meeting, in order that the minutes may be as accurate and complete as possible. It is not only necessary in such cases to give the names of the species exhibited, but also date and locality of capture, and any other interesting details announced in connection therewith. Finally, brethren, we desire to tender unto you our best thanks for the support you have given us and the clemency with which you have treated us during the past twelve months. As part of us is retiring from the secretarial office, we fervently trust that you will extend to the moiety your kind consideration and encouragement during the coming year ; and we commend to you the favoured individual wrhom you have selected to fill the vacancy created by the promotion of the aforesaid part to a more exalted position. C. NICHOLSON, L. J. TREMAYNE. TREASURER'S ACCOUNT. 94 - 3 I CO 05 00 0$ kq CQ 8 E*q Cl to 05 00 jfflOOONOooin u r-i •OSOOOCOaOOCO© 03 i-l i-H i-l CjjOOOQOCDCOHCOlO 05 rH CO CO o «8 ® o a cO a 00 a g a .5 ffl m kO 05 00 o CD Q aS u 6 g m C o3 r? ® .2 o -u ^ ® 02 ,3 TJ oT © ext w c3 Q ■gj CB « O tj 'E ffl o e8 ^.S u o u * e3 Mtf cs Pm ^ o ui g _ ✓ a o MO “ m . gO' 2m .2 ► -S o .2 i m ffl nj O CO GO •H« X5 OJ 05 3 &q Q 45 J qj l> O CO a oB MO nd I • © t-4 %4 » a -2 a £ ® o «s s ® E .a o S S a S 2 3 MO a MO C3 O cS o - - H ~ ~ CO CO C* London, November 25th, 1896. Audited and found correct, November 25th, 1896. J. A. CLARK, Honorary Treasurer. C. NICHOLSON, H. H. MAY. 35 Mr. J. W. Tutt then read the following : PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS. Gentlemen, I have arrived at the termination of my year of office as President of your Society, and have reached that point of time when it is customary for the retiring President to address a few words to you on the subject which interests us all so deeply. There is no need for me to refer in detail to the present position of the business affairs of the Society. This your Treasurer and Secretaries will already have done, I trust, to your satisfaction. One regret only occurs, viz., that we have not admitted into our ranks anything like the number of new members that one might reasonably expect, had every member done all in his power. I wish to lay stress on this, because our power as a scientific society is crippled for want of funds, due to our small membership. But, leaving aside the purely business aspect of the question, I have to congratulate you on the position your members have taken in the scientific work of the year. It will, perhaps, not be deemed out of place if I specially mention the efforts made by our members, Messrs. Bacot and Prout, in the more technical branches of entomological science. I would also refer to the general advance in the quality of the scientific remarks made in connection with ordinary exhibits. In the early days of my connection with this and similar societies, it was customary to find members exhibiting strange aberrations, or their captures, with a gratified smile, but with no remark whatever con¬ necting the said captures with any scientific fact, or with any explanatory notes as to the probable cause of the strange aberration. This rarely occurs now-a-days, and, when it does occur, one feels almost the same thrill of respeot in the presence of the exhibitor that the early naturalists must have felt when they knowingly examined the palaeontological remains of their early ancestors. Still, there can be no doubt that there is yet room for improvement in the quality of the notes offered, and one could well wish that when a striking aberration of a species is exhibited, that the exhibitor would take the trouble (1) to describe the aberration carefully, and (2) to look up the records of similar aberrations in the magazines, and thus give us food for reflection in a more generalised way, than the mere exhibition of an odd aberration can possibly do. This leads me to call your attention to another matter, viz., the evident ignorance sometimes displayed about the contents of the current magazines, and an ignorance of what has been previously written about special work under discussion. There are evidently mem¬ bers of scientific societies who still think that they can keep abreast of entomological science without reading either the current magazines or studying the work published in the transactions of our leading societies — men, who still tell us Newman’s and Stainton’s opinions of matters entomological, and know nothing of the alteration of opinion that these author’s published after their books were written, nor the corrections of their errors by a later race of entomologists. On this head I would offer a word of advice, and that is, that our young members who would make a set of the back volumes of the entomo¬ logical magazines their first purchase when setting about the formation 36 of an entomological library, would be well equipped for the work to which they have set their hands, and would do some good in helping forward the cause of our favourite science. I may be told by some that they take up entomology as a hobby, and not as a science, but all amateur entomologists do that, and it is usually but a poor excuse for doing in a slip-shod manner what a little reading would enable to be done more thoroughly. When a man excuses his ignorance by referring to entomology as his “ hobby,” I am always afraid that his next statement will be, that those who keep themselves abreast of the times are professional entomologists. The cost of the three leading entomo¬ logical magazines combined is a little over a half-penny a day. Will those who buy a half-penny daily paper bear this in mind ? One point, too, which touches rather closely some of the members of this Society, and which I cannot quite pass over in silence, is the attempt that was made in the early part of the year to extend the sphere of our operations. It will be remembered that my sympathies were distinctly with the object, but when it came to practice, I must confess, I failed to see its practicability. We are at present a scientific society, cramped for want of funds, largely dependent for our very existence on the sympathy and generosity of friends. We are busy men, devoting such leisure as the exigencies of wage-earning leave us, to our favourite pursuit. It appeared to me that, as a society, we had neither the money nor the time to organise an extension on the lines suggested, and I am in agreement with Dr. Corbett, who stated that “ the man in the street ” knows nothing, and cares less, of science in any shape or form. I would make a still more sweeping assertion, based on my own observation, and suggest that not only “ the man in the street,” but ninety-nine out of one hundred of the middle classes care nothing for education at all for its own sake, and put up with it simply because it has a money and social value, and because ignorance would prove detrimental to their advance in life. It is the practica¬ bility of the step suggested that wants demonstrating. It is well to have ideals ; it is not always possible to reach them in our every-day life. Of matters which have stirred the entomological horizon this year, and which will leave their mark on the entomology of the world, the paper by Dr. Chapman on “The Eggs of Lepidoptera ’’(Trans. Ent. Soc. Land.), that by Professor Enzio Reuter, on “ The Palpi of Lepidoptera,” and that by Dr. Packard, on “ The Notodonts,” may be mentioned. Probably, also, Professor Grote’s publication on “ The Saturnikke,” may be included in the same category, whilst Professor Fernald’s “ Monograph of the Gipsy Moth (Portlietria dispar) ” is a remarkable and excellent production. Of purely British matters, the excitement which has occurred as to the specific distinctness of Teplirosia bistortata and Tephrosia crepuscularia (biundu- laria), and Bombyx quercus and B. callunae is very remarkable, and appears to be out of all proportion to its scientific value. Probably, however, it has more value scientifically than I am inclined to grant. If so, it must bo because such subjects as these are the means of causing some of our young recruits to give that dotailod observation to a definite and specific object, which is tho ossenco of all scientific training. One is inclined, howover, to bo astonished at tho older 87 entomologists, who have heard it all before, and apparently have no higher wish than to hear it all again. With regard to work of a purely British character, but little has been done, and that largely connected with matters of detail — matters connected with life-histories, habits, variation, etc. Our British fauna has been so well worked that nothing striking is likely to be discovered. The material connected with our moths is now waiting for some one to arrange and classify in the light of our modern views of classification, that relating to the butterflies having been recently dealt with. The moths, being more comprehensive and complicated, may have to wait some time yet. One other thing has stirred the entomological world in Britain to its depths. This is the gradual extinction of rare British species by the pure collector— the man who collects with no other aims than to kill something and to make a collection worth so many pence or pounds. The condemnation of this individual has been general and sweeping. All our leading London and provincial societies are in arms against him. The Entomological Society of London has formed a strong central committee, serving upon which are the President, Ex-President, and Secretary of the Society, the Editors of The Naturalist, The Entomologist’ s Monthly Magazine, The Entomologist, and The Ento¬ mologist's Record, as well as several other influential naturalists. At least two provincial societies are inclined to exclude these amateur ex¬ terminators from membership, and the Central Council asks for detailed information respecting local species, and their exterminators, on which to act. When it is asserted that, in spite of the warnings as to Lycaena arion, some 1,500 specimens were captured by less than a dozen “ amateur entomologists ! ” in one restricted district ; when it is asserted that another amateur entomologist has given a standing order to the professional collectors in the New Forest, to take all the Apatura iris (larvae, pupae and imagines) they can capture at so much per specimen, it appears high time that we made a stand to save our fauna from these murderous destroyers. I may say that the Earl of Darnley has put into the hands of the central committee the power of vetoing the pass granted to anyone to collect in Chattenden Woods who abuses his permission, and the hope of the renewal of a permit there for those collectors who go every year to exterminate Scoria dealbata, and a few other species, will, unless they exercise considerable discretion, be a distant one. So much for general matters. We may now turn to more genial work. THE PHILOSOPHICAL ASPECT OF ENTOMOLOGY. It is difficult to know exactly on what branch of their subject to address a body of specialists, when there are so many questions before them awaiting solution. Perhaps the consideration of the advance of our subject on its philosophical side is as satisfactory a text as any that can be mentioned, and, as this advance is so constant and so marked, it is always possible to refer to something which is comparatively new, even if one also repeats, in part, what has been said before. Probably the most marked feature of the year, in this respect, is the distinct public recognition which has been given to the philoso¬ phical branches of our science. Slowly and surely the pioneers of philosophical entomology have pushed their way through an over- 88 whelming mass of conservatism and contempt, and have emerged victorious from the ordeal. Probably some of our young entomologists do not know with what contempt The origin of species was received by entomologists. If they would like to know, we would recommend a perusal of kind-hearted Stainton’s remarks in The Entomologist' s Weekly Intelligencer, vol. ix., pp. 78-79. Here, reviewing a work in opposition to Darwin’s views, he says, “ Occasionally, Mr. Darwin’s propositions are held up to ridicule : we believe that this will give great offence to the followers of Mr. Darwin, but is it really possible altogether to avoid doing so ? ” whilst the cynical ditty, “ The origin of species,” from Blachcood's Magazine for May, 1861, is reprinted in full in the Intelligencer, vol. x., pp. 78-80. Evidently the entomologists of the day enjoyed slating Darwin. VALUE OF CORRECT AND INTELLIGENT DESCRIPTION OF SPECIES. The turn of the tide with regard to philosophical entomology has been most marked, and one observes, with a little regret, a tendency to underestimate the plodding work of the men who have gathered the facts which we can now manipulate for our generalisations, and one frequently notices a tone of contempt towards those workers, who are contemptuously described as “ species-describers,” by their fellow- workers in the more intellectual branches of our science. In the course of the year, we have noticed in a scientific contemporary,0 a reference to the description of species as “a most unprofitable kind of work,” whilst another contemporary, f referring to a well-known work on mammalia, says “ This work, which consists in enumerat¬ ing and describing species, which is within reach of the most mediocre intelligence, this fastidious care, which should be left to those who are not capable of ideas, is this the only work that tempts American zoologists ? Are there not other occupations for their scientific activity ? ” I am inclined to look upon such criticisms as these as rather out¬ side the province of the critic. Every author is aware that every irresponsible critic knows better than he himself, what he ought to have written, and how he ought to have written it, but, when all is said and done, I venture to think that the author is the man who knows best what he can do, and what work he can do best, and so long as species have to be described, the work must be done by competent men, by intelli¬ gent men, by men of wide knowledge. It may be true that the more mechanical toilers at our work may be capable of describing species, but whether these men, with “mediocre intelligence,” who are “ not capable of ideas,” would do the work so well as an intelligent man with ideas, and with a wide knowledge of his subject, is open to question. We, in Britain, have suffered much from the description of species by men of “ mediocre intelligence,” and men “ not capable of ideas,” and we still suffer for their want of ability. Surely our philosophical work must be built on as solid a foundation of fact as it is possible to construct, and, if this be so, it appears to me to be useless to complain that the quality of that foundation is too good. It appears to me, also, that those “ hotspurs of biology,” as Weismann terms them, wish to advance rather too hastily. Eestina lente should be the naturalist’s motto. They also overlook the fact * Natural Science, t Le Revue Scientifique, 39 that the puzzle still underlying all our evolutionary enquiries is the “ origin of species.” We know that species may be, and often are, indeterminate quantities, and incapable of exact definition, but this only intensifies the necessity for having the mo3t intelligent men to define, as near as may be, the species and the various forms that the species assume, for it is only by an exact knowledge of species and their various forms that we can ever hope to obtain even an approxi¬ mate knowledge of the origin of species. Every educated man and woman knows that we do not look upon entomology as an exact science. We cannot go to our living insects and ask for a straightforward answer — yea or nay — to our questions, as the chemist can go to his test-tube. It becomes, therefore, the more necessary, owing to this inexactness, this uncertainty, that our facts should be defined in the best manner possible. Whilst, however, I disagree with those who are inclined to scoff at the value of the exact and correct determination of species, I recognise that there is a substratum of method in the peculiar form of criticism that such scoffers adopt. It is obvious that for physiological study, and for histological or anatomical details, the question of species is not of great importance, and, therefore, to those to whom the specimens have nothing but physiological importance, the exact description and correct knowledge of species may be more or less unnecessary, but to the true philosophical student, who wishes for exactitude in the data from which he draws his deductions, the matter presents quite another phase. Species appear to him to represent, so to speak, the ultimate result of whole ages of evolutionary effort, and, if this be granted, what possibility of correct reasoning is there for those who take up the intricate lines of the study of the evolution of any special species, or even of any special structure or organ, if he does not know the species whose origin, or the origin of some particular structure of which he is trying to explain. The species- describer, if he does his work intelligently and carefully, is giving the evolutionist the exact material on which alone any stable conclusions can be drawn with precision, and, if his work is thus valuable, we must still recognise, nay, welcome those, who give their best powers to the unravelling of the species in their multitudinous forms, since these form the basis of all advanced evolutionary study. SPECULATION IN ENTOMOLOGY. Whilst acknowledging, then, the value of species description, we would urge the other side of the question with equal force. We would ask the conservative entomologist, who still believes that all ento¬ mological science begins and ends with the description of species, as well as the un-understandable individual who simply collects, year after year, the species that others have already described, and account it science, to remove the incubus of their weight against any intelligent speculation in natural history subjects. All evolutionary work must be at first more or less speculative, because it is all more or less of a general character, wide in its operation, although based on considerable detail. The great point of objection, brought forward by those who would shut out all theory in entomological work, is the incompleteness of the facts at our disposal. Many of those who are not inclined to object to speculation per se, yet insist that speculation in biological matters 40 is usually unprofitable from the same cause. It becomes, therefore, largely a matter of personal opinion as to what quantity of facts should be available before a generalisation is formed. Some would insist that no generalisations should be indulged in until all the facts are at our disposal. This appears to me to suggest a finality of knowledge that is impossible, and to put off the explanation of facts for ever, in other words, to rule the subject out of consideration. At the other extreme are those who think that a few facts, carefully co-ordinated, form often sufficient ground to generalise upon, recognising, of course, that the theory adduced must be in accordance with the facts, and that, if additional facts show the theory to be untenable, it must be at once rejected and a new one formulated. “We do not make progress,” Weismann asserts, “ by blind experiment, but only by experiment having a purpose in view ; and for this we require an interpretation of the immediate facts.” I quite agree with this view of the necessity of an immediate explanation, even if, later on, new facts necessitate its alteration or modification. One sees, of course, there must be a vast accumulation of what Dr. Hicks has described as “ wreckage ” floating about every theory of importance which has been formulated. The deduction of the cause of any phenomenon based upon the facts which come within the range of of our senses, is a slow and laborious process. It is only by the rejection of theories found to be untenable by fresh accumulations of facts — that is, by the manufacture of such wreckage — that a theory nearer to the truth can be formulated, and advance can be chronicled ; but, because of this, are we to fear to produce the wreckage, and allow our science to become stagnant for want of energy to carry it forward ? There are those who consider that true science only begins when an attempt is made to draw conclusions from facts, and would rule the mere accumulation of facts out of the definition. Professor Meldola, in his address to the Fellows of the Entomological Society, in January last, said : — “ All science necessarily begins with observation or experiment, i.e., with ascertained facts, and it is, perhaps, unnecessary to assert that no mere collection of facts can constitute a science. We begin to be scientific when we compare and co-ordinate our facts with a view to arriving at generalisations on which to base hypotheses, or to make guesses at the principles underlying the facts. Having formed the hypothesis, we then proceed to test its accuracy by seeing how far it enables us to explain or to discover new facts, and, if it fails to do this to our satisfaction, we conclude that our guess has been a bad one, and requires modification or replacing by a better one, that is, by one more in harmony with the facts.” This brings me to another important point, viz., the process of theorising, or rather of hap-hazard guessing indulged in by irresponsible and uninformed individuals, and when one comes across a more than usually conspicuous example of this kind, one is almost unconsciously reminded of the second of the two objections formulated by Elwes, in his Presidential Address to the Fellows of the Entomological Society, 1894, against entomological speculations. The first was, that “ tho knowledge we have of the actual facts is, in many cases, quite insufficient to bring such speculations to a definite end.” Tho second 41 was, that “ the number of persons whose talents are sufficiently great to enable them to steer a straight course through the numerous difficulties, and contradictions, and doubts which constantly surround such inquiries, is very limited.” The first objection we have already dealt with. The second is an important one, but apt to be over-stated and over-estimated, for there can be no doubt that the great attention that has been given to these subjects during the last few years, the great amount of what one may call educative material on these lines, which all who care to read have had brought within their reach, has given even our younger workers an excellent groundwork on which to base their studies. Besides this, all such speculative work is quickly submitted to criticism by competent experts, and if the hypothesis brought forward does not really enable us to explain the facts for which purpose it has been formulated, it soon joins the vast mass of wreckage, and is heard of no more. There can be no doubt that theory often helps us to discover new facts. We wish to see the time and energy of our active workers utilised in the best way for the advancement of knowledge. This being so, it appears to be infinitely better to encourage speculation in scientific entomology, even in young students, rather than to discourage it, remembering that their chances, if they are well-read men, of arriving at a mature judgment early, have been so much greater of recent years, and that often most valuable suggestions are made by young and energetic workers. I have previously referred to the distinct public recognition which has been given to the philosophical branches of our science during the year now drawing to a close. I here refer to Professor Meldola’s address to the Fellows of the Entomological Society, which he styles “ The Speculative Method in Entomology,” and to Professor Poulton’s address to the Zoological Section of the British Association. The former fortifies himself by the personal encouragement with which Michael Faraday used to stimulate himself : — “ Let us encourage ourselves by a little more imagination prior to experiment,” and then goes on to prove what advantages have already accrued to biological science by speculation. The latter enquires into the theories of physicists and mathematicians as to the probable age of the habitable earth, and after discussing their disagreements and probable errors, considers that we are “ free to follow the biological evidence fearlessly ” on this point, and then enters fully into the general evolutionary principles underlying modern zoological classification. In his address, Professor Meldola, after stating that we “ have passed beyond the fact-collecting stage,” proceeds: — “It appears to me that, in entomology, we have arrived at a state where we are suffering from a plethora of facts ; if we are not in a position to explain everything connected with the development, life-histories, instincts, classification and distribution of insects as a class of animals, we are, at any rate, in a position, speaking paradoxically, to know what we want to know, and I do not see how we are going to advance unless a more generous use is made of hypothesis as a scientific guide.” He afterwards points out that, if we compare the results arrived at in the taxonomy or classification of the Lepidoptera under the old empirical, fact-amassing method of work, which, after a century and a half, brought us no nearer to a natural classification of the Lepi- 42 doptera than at first, with the modern inductive method, the difference is remarkable, it is only during the last few years that specialists like Chapman, Comstock, Dyar, Hampson, Packard, and others, have, by adopting the theoretical method, made a distinct advance in this line of work. “ I take the view,” he says, “ that we have been waiting rather for method than for additions to the lists of species ; that we have hitherto too much disregarded the spirit of the speculative method in our taxonomic work, and that we have now, happily, found a band of workers who refuse to submit to the plea of inability, because all the existing species of Lepidoptera have not been collected and named.” In this I fully concur, and yet we must not be misled into the belief that all the work of our predecessors has been wasted, for there was a good deal of solid truth arrived at in their results, which our new methods have not essentially shaken. One other note, sounded by Professor Meldola, should not pass un¬ noticed. At the end of an appeal to practical workers to give more consideration to those who indulge in philosophic speculation, he urges the biological theorist to put forward his theories with more explicit caution than is necessary in the physical sciences, where experimental evidence is more easily obtainable. He urges this, because of “ the tendency on the part of the public to mistake tentative hypotheses for established theories.” No doubt in formulating this suggestion, Professor Meldola had in mind the ordinary educated public, not the purely entomological public. I would extend the learned Professor’s reason, and urge it, because a certain section of the entomological public often “ mistake tentative hypotheses for established theories.” It is impossible, either in this or any similar society, to open the most elementary discussion on mimicry or similar subjects without observing that the rank and file of entomologists are as apt as the ordinary public to run away with the mistaken notion that a tentative hypothesis meant to explain the facts, is intended as an established theory of the facts. It is an easy pitfall into which most of us are apt to fall. “ Moisture and Melanism ” is even now like holding a red rag at a bull, to some of our old conservative lepidopterists, and some of you will remember that when I first brought forward, a few years ago, the suggestion that moisture, smoke, etc., by darkening the surfaces on which insects rested, tended to produce melanochroism in certain insects that rested on such surfaces, by the influence of natural selection, and, further, that external factors (moisture, etc.) which acted on an insect prejudicially might produce physiological changes in the insect, resulting in the production of melanochroic aberrations, the ideas were scouted by a certain class of lepidopterists, who, by bringing forward special cases to which the hypotheses were never intended to apply, were unwilling to see in the idea a working hypothesis as to the explanation of the phenomenon in a large number of special cases. An exactly parallel line of objection was taken to the conclusions drawn from Merrifield’s early temperature experiments. Yet, these are likely now to take their placo as one of the most advanced pieces of work done in experimental entomological science during the present century. In this case, ignorance of the vital processes relating to histolysis, histogenesis and the formation of tho scales in the pupa, 48 obscured the processes and made explanation difficult, but modern enquiry has opened up a most fruitful series of suggestions relative to the results arrived at in these experiments. VARIATION OF COLOURS IN INSECTS. This leads me to bring before your consideration again, a matter connected with speculative entomology, which is always of the greatest interest to me, viz., the causes of the variation of colour in insects. This phenomenon occurs under a multitude of different conditions, and is presented to us in an infinite variety of ways. The causes of these variations are probably equally varied. The principle of the theory of mimicry by which certain species of butterflies which are nauseous as food to insectivorous birds, reptiles, mammals, etc., are mimicked by other species that are not nauseous, and which are there¬ fore much preyed upon by their enemies, is surely old ground to you all. You have all, of course, read the papers by Bates, Wallace and Trimen on the subject, and are conversant with the facts. Neither can any one, with the least claim to be considered a scientific amateur entomologist, have missed Dixey’s later papers on the same subject. I have recently brought under your notice, in a series of short articles in the Entomologist's Record, vol. viii., Weismann’s latest views of the protective resemblance exhibited by the “ leaf butterflies ” of the tropics. Now, although the value of the protective resemblance of Paralekta inachis and its allies to the leaf of a tree, and the advantage of the similar coloration of the unprotected Pierids to that of the nauseous Nympha- lids, were patent at once to everyone — entomologist or not — yet, satisfactory explanations of these phenomena were not for some time forthcoming. Muller and others attempted various explanations, but it was not until quite recently that Dixey and Weismann gave really scientific explanations as to the probable modus operandi by which these resemblances were actually brought about in the insect. The explanations of Dixey as to mimicked species, and those of Weismann as to protective resemblance, leave us, however, quite in the dark as to one important factor, viz., what are the physical changes in the organism, which have brought about the change in the colora¬ tion in each instance? We want to know what change the pigment- factor, the ornament material, as it were, has undergone, or in what way the scale structure has been altered to bring about these changes of colour. The difference in the colour of lepidoptera is due largely to one of three things, (1) a modification of scale structure, (2) a change in the scale-contents (pigment-factor), (3) a change in the pigment-factor of the basement-membrane of the wing. So far back as January, 1892, in the Introduction to Vol. ii. of The Bntish Noctuae and their Varieties, I published a number of observations on the physiological basis of the variation in the colours of insects, and on the genetic sequence of the development of these colours. Among other facts, I proved the possession, by certain “ white ” butterflies, of an unstable white pigment in their scales. In 1894, this white pigment was isolated and examined by Dr. F. Gowland Hopkins, and the same experimenter showed that, under certain conditions, the white pigment- factor could be readily changed to yellow. It happens that the white 44 Piends which have become mimics of the orange Nymphalids, have really changed their colour from white to orange. The chemical change, Dr. Hopkins has shown, is easy. How has the change been bi ought about ? It is in this direction, among others, that we are waiting for information. Since my early papers on these subjects, I have supplemented my previous crude ideas by the publication of other papers _ “Pupal development and the colour of the resulting Imago” (Ent. Rec., vol. iv., pp. 311—315), “Variation considered biologically” {Ent.’ Iiec., \ol. vi., pp. 181 et set].'), etc. In these I have attempted to show how the physical condition of the pupa, its vitality (in excess or defect), and external influences affecting the pupa, may act on the colour in process of formation, and Prof. W eismann appears in part to have adopted this view, for I read ( Seasonal dimorphism of Lepidoptera p. 10 : Translation by W. E. Nicholson) “The cause of the seasonal dimorphism of Chrysophanusphlaeas is not a question of the suppression of one of two schemes of development, but of a modification of the chemical processes in the colour formation of the scale.” But our view of the nature of insect colours has been largely helped by the discovery of the course of development of a lepidopterous scale and its contained “ pigment- factor ” as defined by Dr. Kidim*. The observers, who have given special attention to scale development' have laid down the course of evolution as follows : — (1) Transnarent’ (2) White. (3) Yellow. (4) Matured colour of the scale. The white stage would appear to be that in which the scale is distended with air, and before the pigment- factor enters the scale. Dimmock (Psyche 1883, p. 66) stated that the white scales of Pieris rapae contain air’ and no appreciable colouring matter. In cases like this, it would appear that the scale never gets beyond the second stage.. The yellow stage is that in which a deposit of “pigment-factor” takes place witlun the scale. Here, evidently, we have an explanation of the xanthic patches, pallid wings, etc., of Satyrids, Argynnids, Lycienids and numberless other lepidoptera. The arrest of the scale in the first stage would produce transparency, a phenomenon not at all uncommon m aberrations belonging to certain families. The application of these principles, too, coupled with the changes which we now know can be accomplished by rapid metabolism plus heat, must provide a broader groundwork for the explanation of certain of Mr. Merrifield’s tem¬ perature phenomena. The part that the wing membrane itself plays in ornament must not be overlooked. . Until I insisted (1892) on this point (British A octuae, ii., pp. iii.-iv.) it was generallyassumed that the wing membrane was not pigmented, but that the whole of the colour was due to the scales. When, therefore, some two years later, Dr. F. Gowland Hopkins succeeded in isolating certain pigments from the membrane, I was much gratified, as it was a direct proof of my previous contention. ihe paper of Dr. Hopkins, which 1 have here (and once previously) referred to, was entitled, “ The pigments of the Pieridas : a contribu¬ tion to the study of excretory substances which function in ornament ” ( Loyal Society,. 1894). In this ho demonstrated that the pigment lactor in the wings of the Pieridae was of an excretory nature, con¬ taining uric acid, and that the same substance (or a derivative of it) 45 was found in the scales of the white and coloured Pierids. The production of the yellow Pierid pigment by heating uric acid with water in sealed tubes at high temperatures, suggests two important ideas : — (1) That we have here the reason of the frequent yellow aberrations of white species of Pieridae, and the general tendency for tropical Pierids to be more richly coloured. (2) That temperature, acting directly on the pigment-factor of the scale at the time of its formation in the pupa, may exert a direct influence on the coloration of the scale, however normal the life of the insect may have been up to the point of scale-formation, that is, throughout the egg, larval, and early pupal stages. We learn, too, that this Lepidotic acid, as the yellow Pierid pigmentary matter is termed, is closely related to a red product, easily obtainable, and, since these three tints are the chief colours that function in the ornament of the Pieridae, it is evident that the matter is of considerable importance. The various work that has been done recently in the directions here indicated, is of the greatest value in explaining the development of insect colours. As I have before pointed 0ut, any abnormal external force or condition, which acts upon an insect in any stage, and reduces its normal conditions of health, or, in fact, alters the normal conditions of existence at all — whether that force be heat, cold, or any other factor — will result in the production of an abnormity in some form or other Avhen it reaches the imago state. It is well-known that larvae, kept under unhealthy conditions, frequently produce crippled, ill-shapen, poorly scaled, and ill-pigmented imagines. We have now, as I have just indicated, a reasonable explanation of the transparent and pale patches sometimes found on insects’ wings, for we see that if the development of the scales be retarded when in the (1) transparent, (2) white, (3) or yellow stage of development, the imagines will present aberrational characters in these various directions. We have now simple explanations of phenomena, for which no satisfactory explanation was offered until recently. Another point worth referring to in connection with this subject is the recent evolution of our knowledge concerning the processes of histolysis and histogenesis. That histogenesis took place within the pupa was well known, for it was evident to everyone who studied insects at all, that the perfection of the imaginal tissues took place within the pupa ; but of the process of histolysis, by which the pupal tissues were first broken down before being rebuilt into the imaginal tissues, very little was known, and, even now, some points in the process are somewhat obscure. Had I been fully aware of the value of these processes when I wrote my Melanism and Melanochroism in British Lepidoptera, many references to Mr. Merrifield’s temperature experiments which occur would probably have been much modified. The fact that, during the actual process of scale-formation, you can retard or hurry, not only the formation of the scale, but also influence the nature of its contents, is evident, and, allowing the larva to have been brought up under the most normal conditions, the fact that you can bring direct external influences to bear on the developing imago, and mark the result on the emergence of the imago, must give us evidence of the most powerful kind, especially in the case of sea¬ sonally dimorphic insects (affected by heat and cold), as to the part 46 that temperature has played in the production of such seasonal dimorphism. Even when the characters of insects, as exhibited by their markings and coloration, are so firmly fixed that the direct influence of temperature has little effect on them, the action on more amenable (less fixed) allied species may give us valuable clnes as to the evolution of the colours of the more fixed species. These experiments suggest, too, that they may aid in the elucida¬ tion of facts connected with other lines of inquiry. One of these at once suggested itself to me on looking over Mr. Merrifield’s material. This was that a clue might often be obtained as to the geographical origin of many species. It is found that under these experiments a high temperature has an advantageous effect on some species, a dele¬ terious effect on others. Conversely a low temperature produces fine, well-developed specimens of some species, whilst it stints and destroys the pigment of others. Here is a suggestion that the insects which are advantageously affected by a high temperature reach their point of greatest vitality in, and probably spread to us from, lower lati¬ tudes ; whilst those which are advantageously affected by a low tem¬ perature probably reached us from higher latitudes. If this idea can be worked out, it will be seen that Mr. Merrifield’s experiments may have a direct influence in answering some of our questions as to geographical distribution. A practical application of this occurs to me. Mr. Percy Bright (Ent. Rec., viii. , p. 307) referring to the abundance of the dark aber¬ rations of Limenitis sibylla in the New Forest, during the last summer, says : “ The characteristics of the weather from March to the middle of August, were a great excess of sunshine and a lack of moisture. I do not know whether these were the causes. It would be very interesting to know if, in dry, hot climates, this particular insect showed this tendency to melanism.” It would appear, from what I can learn of the geographical distribution of this species, that it is nowhere an inhabitant of hot climates. It appears to be confined to Central Europe, and not to extend even into Southern Europe. The dark aberrations appear to occur sporadically, and to be nowhore common. One cannot therefore say that it does show a tendency to melanism in hot climates. It happened, fortunately, that this was one of the species upon which Mr. Merrifield had recently experi¬ mented, and it was evident, from an examination of the specimens which be had bred, after subjecting the pupae to a high temperature, that the latter had acted most prejudicially upon them. The ground¬ colour was pallid, the colour ill-developed, but there was no trace of the narrowing of the white bands, nor a tendency to melanism in any of the specimens. Another explanation, besides the high summer temperature of 1896, will probably have to be found to explain the peculiar melanic development which took place in the New Forest specimens of this species this year. Another suggestive point presents itself. I observed, in looking over Mr. Merrifield’s specimens, that various species of Saturnia and Bombyx showed a common tendency, when the pupae had been exposed to a high temperature, to assume, in the resulting imagines, a ruddy hue. The alliance between the Saturniids and true Bombycids is still a moot point, but this change to a common tone under the same cir- 4 1 cumstances of environment may suggest an alliance. Of course such conclusions should not be taken for more than they are worth, but, on the other hand, it would not be wise to overlook them altogether. I have spent considerable time in pointing out to you the effect that temperature experiments have been shown to have on various lepidoptera, and the special interest which these experiments have when connected with those insects which have marked seasonal dimor¬ phism, such as Vanessa prorsa, Chrysophanus plilaeas (in southern latitudes), Selenia illustraria, etc., in which pupae, that should have produced individuals characteristic of one emergence, have pro¬ duced, under special temperature treatment, individuals with the character of the other emergence, is, of course, patent. It must not be forgotton, however, that just as some of our Palsearctic butterflies produce normally two seasonal forms — often called the winter (spring) and summer forms — so, in tropical regions, seasonal forms known as “wet” and “dry” are quite common, presenting different facies, sometimes of colour, more often of ocellation. Our climate, of course, is not suitable to the production of this class of seasonal forms, as it does not afford the necessary conditions. Yet, since it is so common a phenomenon in tropical countries, and it must be conceded that moisture is an effective external factor in these instances, it cannot be gainsaid that in a moist climate like ours the general effect of this factor may be considerable. Referring to this subject of dry- and wet-seasonal dimorphism, Mr. W. Doherty, in the Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal (vol. lviii., pt. ii.. No. 1, 1889), records that he succeeded in the early part of the dry season, in the island of Sumbawa, in breeding both Melanitis leda and M. isrnene, from the eggs of M. leda, by keeping a wet sponge in the box in which the form M. leda was being reared from larvae. The wet-season form is ocellated and feebly angulated, the dry-season form is non-ocellated and angulated. These, strange to say, are exactly the differences between the wet and dry season forms of the Nymphalid Junonia asterie, the latter being the ocellated wet-season form of the non-ocellated dry-season form J. almana. It would be useless to wade through the various records of this phenomenon as described by Moore and others. I have, however, recently been much interested in a perusal of L. de Nic^ville’s Butterflies of Sumatra, and was much struck with the fact that he found many species which produced dry and wet seasonal forms in India and Ceylon, not to do so in Sumatra. Thus, he records, among the Satyrids, that Mycalesis medus never develops the dry-season form runeka, Moore, which is found in India ; the Indian dry-season form M. perseus is not known in Sumatra, only the wet-season form, blasius, occurring there, neither is there any dry-season form of M. minem in Sumatra. Another interesting fact is that the Pierids, Terias hecabe and Catopsilia pyranthe, both of which species produce distinctly dry- and wet-season forms in India, have the dry- and wet- season forms occurring together in Sumatra, and without reference to the humidity of the atmosphere, whilst another Pierid, Huphina nerissa, the Indian forms of which are generally known as H. phyrne , exhibits considerable variation in some localities, the aberrations separating off into dry- and wet-seasonal forms, in all localities where 48 the climate exhibits well-marked wet and dry seasons. Sometimes the matter is more complex, for we find that Myoalesis fervida and M. surka represent dry-season forms, and M. ustulata and M. oroates, the wet-season form of the same species. Closely related to this form of variation, are the phenomena described by Mr. W. W. Smith,0 as occurring in Aryyroplvinya antipodum and Chrysophan as boldenarum in New Zealand. The fact that the finest and best marked, and best developed specimens of A. antipodum are evolved in humid seasons, especially if such succeed wet winters, is possibly due to atavic causes ; since New Zealand, like the British Isles, was much wetter at one time than now. The case of the slightly ocellated Coenonymplia tiphon, as it occurs on the northern moors of the British Isles, and its strongly-ocellated var. philoxenus, occurring chiefly on wet, low-lying marshes in the North of England and South of Scotland, is worth investigating with precision, as to the com¬ parative condition, so far as regards humidity of the atmosphere, in the various localities which the species inhabits. This is a matter which should not be beyond the power of some intelligent entomologist living in our northern counties. When I first mooted moisture as a possible and probable factor in the determination of melanic forms, the difficulty of how to apply moisture tests in a satisfactory manner, so as to produce definite results, appeared very considerable. Mr. Merrifield attempted some, but the results were negative. This may have been from two reasons : (1) The insects selected were not such that moisture was a determining character of possible aberration in the particular species. (2) The application of the moisture may not have been in the particular direction in which it could make itself felt. Seasonally dimorphic insects must be, from the very nature of their dimorphism, more or less susceptible to differences of temperature. These differences of temperature being easily applied to the imago at the actual time of its scale formation, the results are marked on the wings in various ways. It is clear that seasonally dimorphic forms — i.e., insects with a definite winter, and a different summer form, are much more likely to be effected then by differences of temperature than by differences of moisture, and I should expect that, even where moisture is a determining factor in producing aberration, it would be more active in the larval than in the pupal state. Although Merrifield’s experiments have been without result in this direction, the effect of particular experiments by Standfuss are most marked. The only explanation probably is, that the examples chosen by the latter experimenter lent themselves more readily to treatment, and are more readily affected by moisture than the species selected by the former. The experiments of Standfuss are described as follows : — “ Largo numbers of Satumia pupse kept very dry for 7-10 weeks, from June to the end of September, were then freely and repeatedly moistened, and about 1 per cent, of the moths emerged from these pupa) 10-20 days after the damping. The fully-developed moths mostly show a departure from the ordinary form of the species, which may be characterised as follows : the elements of the pattern are not sharply outlined, but more or less washed-out and confused.” Standfuss * Melanism and Mclanochroism in British Lepuloptera , pp. 18-19. 49 adds that, as he has “ frequently repeated this experiment with this result, it cannot possibly be a matter of mere chance.” He does not attempt to explain this, but it appears to me that the moisture acts here in the direction of setting free the latent power of hybernation in the pupa, and that the imago then goes on to develop under abnormal conditions. The failure of colour, etc., is a physical process, and is brought about, probably, by the abnormality of the environment, which refuses, as it were, to allow the formation of the pigment under sufficiently satisfactory conditions to produce a normal result. I had intended to make a few critical suggestions on Dr. Standfuss’ experiments in 1895 (translated by Dr. Dixey), and Weismann’s “Seasonal dimorphism of Lepidoptera ” (translated by Mr. W. E. Nicholson) during the present year. Our obligations (or, rather the obligations of those of us to whom the reading of German is a toil and trouble) to these gentlemen are very great, for they keep us in touch with experimental scientific entomology abroad, and make science really, what it is always assumed to be theoretically, cosmo¬ politan. I have, however, spent too much time on other matters to do more than thus casually refer to these important papers. This meeting brings to a close another year of the already long existence of our Society. I feel a tinge of regret that one of our old officials, Mr. Gurney, is retiring from the post of Librarian, which he has held so satisfactorily and so long. He was the Librarian when I joined this Society, and has remained so ever since. Other changes have taken place, the most important of which is that Mr. J. A. Clark ceases, after many years, to be our Treasurer. These changes are unavoidable in a society like our own. We can only hope that the new blood will prove as faithful to our aims and aspirations as the old, and there is every reason to believe that this will be so. That you have elected me President for another year is more than gratifying to me personally, and perhaps sufficient proof that I have, in a small measure at least, earned your approval of my general action in the conduct of your meetings during the past year. Success, of course, is only possible when one has the goodwill and ungrudging support of the officers and members. That I have had this goes without saying, and for the unvarying kindness I have received, I can only offer to you all my heartiest thanks, and wish that the year which commences with our next meeting will be more satisfactory than the last, financially, and as successful, both as a means of enabling us to know one another more intimately and of promoting the best interests of the subject we all have at heart. 1 8 FEB. 97