496 Queries and Answers. 



Polyoimnatus Argiolus, further Queines regarding. (Vol. IV. p. 477. 558., 

 and Vol. V. p. 109.) — Sir, Two of your correspondents have kindly sup- 

 plied ready answers to my question, in Vol. IV. p. 477., whether Polyom- 

 matus Argiolu5 is to be considered a double-brooded insect. These answers 

 are, as I expected they would be, in the affirmative. That of Mr. Newman 

 (Vol. IV. p. 558.), relating to the above insect, as well as to Melitae'« 

 Euphrosyne, and Selene, appears to be the result of minute personal 

 observation, and carries with it such an air of truth, that there can be no 

 doubt of its accuracy. Mr. Jordan also states (Vol. V. p. 109.) that the 

 " species [P. Argiolu*] is, without doubt, double-brooded ; " that he has 

 " seen living individuals in April, and again in September this year" 

 (1831). September, I may remark, is rather a late period of the year for 

 these insects j and when Mr. Jordan describes them, as " spreading their 

 azure wings, and flitting from flower to flower," these latter remarks strike 

 me as more applicable to the habits and manners of the common blue (P. 

 Fcaru^), which is abundant in September, than to those of P. Argiolu^, 

 which generally disappears before that time, and is, moreover, a vapouring 

 restless fly, seldom settling except upon bushes (holly, ivy, and other ever- 

 greens), and then, for the most part, remaining with its wings closed. May 

 not, therefore, Mr. Jordan have mistaken specimens of the common blue, 

 seen in September, for those of P. Argiolu* ? I should not have presumed 

 to cast a doubt on the accuracy of this gentleman's statement (which, on 

 the whole, corresponds pretty nearly with the facts observed by others and 

 by myself), were it not that he candidly avows himself to be " not an ento- 

 mologist ; " and, to such a person, one blue butterfly may, very possibly, 

 be mistaken for another. I know, by experience, that when persons who 

 are " not entomologists " have been shown specimens of some of the rarer 

 blues, they have confidently affirmed that they have seen the same abun- 

 dantly in this or that neighbourhood ; and I have sometimes found it next 

 to impossible to convince them to the contrary. Mr. Jordan will, I trust, 

 excuse the freedom of these remarks, which have been called forth solely 

 by his own honest confession, that he is " not an entomologist." I feel 

 obliged to him, however, for his answer ; and not the less so, on account 

 of its coming from one who, if not an entomologist, must at all events be 

 (what is, perhaps, better) an observer of Nature herself. The remarks of 

 such a person cannot but be valuable, coming, as they do, fresh, as it were, 

 from the fields and wood ; smelling (if I may so speak) of the open air, 

 and consequently less likely to have been biassed on either side by mere 

 book-learning, or the influence of high authorities. I hope Mr. Jordan 

 will attend to the subject of the present notice next season, and communi- 

 cate his remarks through the medium of your pages. Let me not be here 

 understood to express any doubts as to the insect in question being double- 

 brooded ; it appears undoubtedly to be so, at least in some districts (I saw 

 it on the wing, myself, on the 4th of August last, between Dartford and 

 Gravesend). But, again, I would ask, whether anyone can assign a plau- 

 sible reason why the species proves only single-brooded in some parts of 

 England, as it unquestionably appears to be here (at Allesley), where, as 

 I have before said, it occurs in more than usual abundance in the early 

 spring ? Is it only in the more southern counties that it appears twice in 

 the season ? Kent, Hampshire, Somersetshire, and Devonshire, are, I 

 think, the principal counties in which I have yet either seen or heard of 

 the aestival [summer] specimens. I regret that, in figuring the species 

 (Vol. IV. p. 477.), a representation was not also given of the under side of 

 the insect, which would have precluded all possibility of confounding it 

 with the common blue (P. Fcarm). Yours, &c. — W. T. Bree. Allesky 

 Rectory y January 6. 1832. [See p. 490. of the present Number. — .7. Z>.} 



