THE CANADIAN ENTOMOLOGIST. 321 



unprotected survival during the voyage, that this pupa should produce an 

 unique variety, the capture of the perfect moth on a Church step in Eng- 

 land, its delivery at the British Museum, taken altogther seem enormous. 

 The fact that the hind-wings are unhanded is paralleled in the case of a 

 new species from South America, which I describe here. According to 

 Mr. Tutt's kind communication : There is a place in Southwark, one of 

 the London districts close by London Bridge, called "Horselydown," and 

 there is a church there called St. John's. As this is very near the river 

 an imported insect might be found there if we suppose it to escape from the 

 shipping on the Thames. But there is also a place called " Horsley " in 

 Surrey, and there are some well-known '• Downs " there which have been 

 entomologically worked over from a long period. But there is no St. 

 John's Church there, and under the theory that Walker named the insect 

 from the Church in England, and not, as I had imagined possible, from the 

 St. John's River, Florida, where Doubleday collected, the Surrey locality 

 must be abandoned. We are, therefore, driven to the conclusion that if 

 the label is genuine, the specimen was really captured at " Horselydown," 

 and that "Horsley Downs " is a mistake for the former on the label. If a 

 normal specimen of Eudryas grata had been stated to have been caught 

 in England, while still extraordinary, there would have been nothing so 

 very improbable in the fact, since, according to Wood and other English 

 authors, Drasteria, Eustrotia and other American moths have been so 

 taken (?) ; I myself took a specimen of a South American species of 

 Noctuidse on the Battery in New York. But that this particular specimen 

 should belong also to a very remarkable variety, never observed in America, 

 increases the chances against the story (which may nevertheless be 

 a true one) enormously. Eudryas, we may concede, might stand the 

 voyage as a pupa and also escape as a moth in London, but how a Stce. 

 Joiiannis could have been turned out of a grata caterpillar or pupa owing 

 to the " vicissitudes of the voyage" I do not comprehend. The type 

 which I saw in 1868 differed not only from grata in its unhanded 

 secondaries, but also by its differently coloured and perhaps marked 

 primaries. While I recognized it as allied to grata, I could not help sup- 

 posing it a distinct species, since I had never known grata to vary in 

 that manner. In fact, that it might be a variety did not, I think, occur to 

 me. I did not visit the Museum for the express purpose of studying Stce. 

 Johannis. I took it in rapidly and saw that it was an Eudryas and 

 differed from both our common species, grata and unio, and simply re- 



