VAKIATION. 45 



possible they are only a variety, but at any rate they are what are 

 called bn'i'icdllix, and in view of Dr. Sharp's remarks on this species, 

 we were bound to retain it in the cataloc:ue. 



I'dli/di-Ksiis scriccKs, Schal. — There are eit^ht specimens of Pnli/- 

 ilnisiis st'ricriis in the Tnites' collection all labelled Lymington Salterns, 

 and taken since the original record, and, therefore, again there was no 

 necessity of waiting until Dr. Joy had recaptured the species before 

 deciding to retain it in the catalogue. 



On/u'strs sparaiis, Fahr. — In our answer to I\Ir. Newbery's former 

 paper {Kiit. Record, 1904, p. 290), we pointed out that though he 

 considered the specimen in the Power collection to be small ilirU, 

 M. Drisout named it uparstis, and, therefore, we could not reject it on 

 a difference of opinion. Since we wrote that paper, one of us has 

 recorded it from the New Forest {Knt. Ih-cord, 1901, p. 826), more- 

 over, we consider the formerly unique British specimen in the Power 

 collection to be the true .s7»«yN(/.s-, for differences, i'(;c., see Knf.Mn. Mni/., 

 1905, p. 20. 



Of course we fully recognise Mr. Newbery's desire to make the 

 Uritia/i Catahunic as accurate and reliable as possible, and we share 

 equally in this desire, but we must protest against species being 

 rejected or placed in doubtful lists simply because one coleopterist has 

 doubts as to the authenticity of records, especially when he has not 

 had an opportunity of personally examining the captures upon which 

 the records are based. When a record, or several records as in most 

 of the above cases, existed-— records also by men who hold a high 

 position in the ranks of British coleopterists — it would have been 

 presumptuous on the part of any author publishing a catalogue to 

 reject and refuse to acknowledge such records, unless he had undoul)ted 

 evidence that the specimens upon which the records were based had 

 all been examined and definitely proved to l)elong to another species. 



W" AR I A T I N. 



Black i.arv.t: of Abkaxas orossulakiata. — Concerning ]\Ir. Walker's 

 note (fl»^'</, xvi., p. ;->01) referring to Abra.ras (jmssulaiiata, my experience 

 in breeding from black larv;e has been most disappointing. One of 

 the most unsatisfactory lots of black larva' I ever bred came from an 

 f)ld bush growing in a densely smoky district, close to the Thames, in 

 London, where bushes were scarce, and the race no doubt localised, 

 and from which, this year, many hundreds of larvtc did not yield a 

 single decent aberration. — B. W. Adkin, F.E.S., Trenoweth, Hope 

 Park, Bromley, Kent. (htoheilHth, VdOi. 



Macauia i.itukata ah. NKiHoFiLVATA, CoLLi.NS. — At the meeting of 

 th(^ Lancashire and Cheshire Entomological Society, held October 4th, 

 1901, I exhibited and read a description of a melanic form of Maraiia 

 litinata. The ollicial report reads: "Mr. J. Collins exhibited and 

 described a line melanic form of Maioria litinata from Delamcre, for 

 which he proposed the varietal name iiiiim/iilrata.'' The description 

 of the form ajjpears not to have been sent out by the secretary, in his 

 report, to the entomological magazines, with the result that no de.scrip- 

 tion of the form has been published. It may be well, therefore, to 

 publish such description, so that no doubt may occur in the future as 



