( 98 ) 



LANGIA. 



L. kimsiritio Jloore is not a coocl species ; it was fonnded on a very large 

 and strongly marked female, which bad been so damaged by mites that it was 

 not woudcrfnl that Mr. Moore mistook it lor a new insect : so that the species 

 mnst stand as follows : 



Langia zenzeroides Moore, 

 aberr. Utasiann Moore. 



MARUMB.\. 



Here I have a lot to alter. Mr. Butler has already remarked that many 

 of the named forms wonlil probably turn out mere local races. I have received 

 large series from Cliina, Jaj)an, and the Khasia Hills, and I find that a great 

 many so-called s])ecies are not even subspecies, liut only aberrations, and must 

 stand as follows : — 



Mfirumba yaschkewitscliii (Brem. & Grey), 

 aberr. 1. coniplacenx (Walk.), 

 aberr. 2. roseipennis (Batl.). 

 aberr. 3. eckepkron (Boisd.). 

 Marumia sperchius (Men.). 



aberr. 1. piceipenniH (Bntl.). 

 Mai-umba dyms (Walk.). 



aberr. 1. sinensis (Bntl.). 

 aberr. 2. ceylanka (Butl.). 

 aberr. 3. fuscescens (Bntl.). 

 aberr. 4. silhetensix (Bntl.). 

 aberr. 5. oriens (Butl.). 

 aberr. 6. tnassuriensi.'i (I'ntl.). 



SMERINTHUS. 



S. atlanticus Aust. is a bad species, as all the characters which are said 

 to distinguish it are found in some of my English specimens, and I have carefully 

 compared specimens from Algiers with E\iropean. Eusmerinthus astarte Streck. 

 is identical with Smerinthus ophthalmicus Boisd. 



(JRESSONIA. 



C. rohinsonii Bntl. and C. pallem (Streck.) are not s]ipcies, but merely 

 subspecies of C. jiiylandis (Abb. & Smith.). 



As an Apjiendix to those Notes, T add here "A Sup]ilcmontary List of 

 Sphingidae," by Mr. W. F. Kirby, which, together with the new species 

 described bv m(>, brings tlie Catalogue of the Sphingidae «'iim])lete down to 

 December 23rd, lx'J3. 



