236 THE CANADIAN ENTOMOLOGIST. 



ON EUDRYAS STAE. JOHANNIS, WALK. 



BV A. R. GROTE, A. M. 



I saw the type of this species in the British Museum and considered 

 it to represent a distinct species, aUied to E. grata. Prof. Smith says, 

 Can, Ent., 134, " I have no hesitation in referring the species (?) as a 

 suffused aberrant grata" Now the hindwings want the band and are 

 immaculate, hence there is no " suffusion " on the secondaries. The 

 forewings resemble grata, but the markings differ. I could see no 

 " suffusion." The specimen seemed larger to me than grata. The 

 specimen may be an extraordinary variety oi grata, but not a " suffused '' 

 variety. Prof. Smith says : — " The type is marked ' Taken on the church 

 door at Horsley Downs.' " And further : — " It is probable that in some 

 way the pupa of the insect was transported to England and through the 

 vicissitudes encountered an aberration was produced." This explanation 

 does not seem reasonable to me. I do not know what is meant by 

 "the vicissitudes encountered." Pupee oi grata transported to England 

 would probably produce typical grata, just as pupae of other species 

 produce the typical form when they emerge on tiiis side of the water. 

 The voyage could not change a grata to a Stae. Johannis. I think thig 

 is certain. And, now, what did Walker mean by the name ? He 

 evidently supposed the specimen was taken at the St. John's River, 

 Florida, and probably by Doubleday. He did not then believe in the 

 authenticity of the label now attached to the species. Or is the church 

 at Horsley Downs named in honor of St. John ? The specimen is at any 

 rate evidently American, as the genus Eudryas is found nowhere else. 

 It is, as it stands, one of the most curious of the uniques in the British 

 Museum collection. The improbability that it should have been taken 

 on a church door in England (?) is very great. That the label might 

 have been wrongly attached, or changed from some other specimen, seems 

 less improbable when we consider the chances of its being so taken. If 

 a variety o^ grata, or a distinct species, it seems likely that our collectors 

 in Florida may throw some light on the subject in the future. If grata 

 varies in this manner, the conditions will probably occur again and the 

 variety be produced. It may be even that the specimen represents a 

 South American species unknown to us. As the case stands, it cannot 

 be called a " suffused " variety I should say, and the mystery is certainly 

 not cleared up by the statements of Prof Smith. We must find other 



