CLASSIFICATION OF BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA. 279 



papering; it dries perfectly white, fills up all holes, and kills all insects. 



Finally, beware of patcMng-up flies. If you have a very rare species, 

 mend it by all means if broken, for fear you should not be able to, or until 

 you do obtain another specimen, but do not attempt to make one good 

 fly out of two bad ones, (vide "Naturalist," old series, "Hints to Ento- 

 mologists," by P. Rylands, Esq., vol. iii. page 249.) Beware of dust, damp, 

 and light; I mean if your specimens are much exposed to light they 

 are liable to fade. Renew your old specimens whenever opportunity occurs, 

 and keep duplicates for the purpose of exchange. A small spud fixed to 

 a walking-stick is a very useful companion at the dead time of the year: 

 by digging close round the roots of oaks, elms, and willows, many a 

 good chrysalis may be found: these should be kept in a box covered with 

 a piece of gauze. If caterpillars be obtained during the summer, they 

 should be kept in the same way, taking especial care to feed them every 

 day with fresh leaves from the plants on which they were found. Some 

 light soil must be placed in each box, an inch or two deep, for those 

 species that go underground for the purpose of change, and they should 

 not bo disturbed when they have once gone down. Excepting in the very 

 cold months, December and January, some species of moths may be taken 

 almost every evening, more especially with sugar, thus affording to the 

 lover of entomology a never-ending source of entertainment and. instruction. 



Rectory, Stvinhope, 3Iay \Oth., 1856. 



ON THE PRESENT CONDITION 

 OF THE CLASSIFICATION OF BRITISH LEPIDOPTERA. 



BY AURELIUS. 



I THINK all British Entomologists will admit that the present state of 

 the Classification of British Insects is most unsatisfactory, and more par- 

 ticularly that branch which has so many students — the Lepidoptera. During 

 the last twenty years we have been continually changing our arrangement, 

 and I much fear we are now in a more confused condition than ever. In 

 1837, Curtis published his ^^Guide to an Arrangement of British Insects," 

 and everybody labelled their cabinets with his names. In 1850, Mr. H. 

 Doubleday published his "Synonymic List of British Lepidoptera," which 

 cut down some of Curtis's families most unmercifully; that of Peronea, for 

 instance, from thirty-six to sixteen species! Mr. D. left out the Tineidce, 

 and a new candidate for fame appeared, and begun where Mr. D. had 

 left ofi". In 1852, we had "The Calendar of British Tineidse," by Mr. 

 Stainton. This turned out to be very imperfect, and therefore two years 

 later we had his Optts magnum — the "Lepidoptera Tineina," being the third 

 volume of the ^'Insecta Britannica," in which I suppose this family have 



