22 THE ENTOMOLOGISTS RECORD. 



ings of that variety, and that therefore his connection of Mr. Baxter's 

 specimen with guencei was unwarranted, and as Mr. South used guefieei 

 as a hnk between Mr. Baxter's specimen and nickerlii, this also was 

 abortive. He then drew attention to Mr. South's description of Mr. 

 Leech's so-called nickerlii from Bohemia. Mr. Tutt said that he would 

 not argue that these specimens were not, as stated by Mr. South, vars. 

 of L. testacea. Probably they were, and further than that, probably 

 somewhat similar to Mr. Baxter's beautiful form. But if so, they could 

 not be Freyer's nickerlii. Mr. Tutt then read a translation of Freyer's 

 original description of nickerlii^ and compared it with Mr. South's 

 description of the Bohemian specimens. How, Mr. Tutt asked, could 

 the specimens in question be referred to nickerlii which Freyer de- 

 scribed as "reddish grey in colour," when the colour in the most 

 distinctly marked Bohemian specimen, was "grey, tinged with 

 ochreous," and in the Lancashire specimens, "pale grey"? The only 

 characters common to fiickerlii, Freyer, the Bohemian specimen de- 

 scribed and the Lancashire specimen, appeared to be the pale edging of 

 the transverse lines and white hind wings ; characters present in many 

 forms of testacea which differ endlessly in other particulars. Herrich- 

 Schaffer's fiickerlii, it was pointed out, is almost red- brown in colour 

 (fig. 565), with distinct cuneiform spots outside the stigmata. These 

 were not present in Mr. Baxter's specimen. When we considered, too, 

 that Mr. South based his conclusion and suggested sinking an European 

 species on this specimen of Mr. Baxter's which agrees with neither the 

 published descriptions or figures, we got a tolerable idea of the value of 

 these conclusions. Mr. South might have suggested the probability of 

 nickerlii being a var. of testacea, but to sink it at once on such slender 

 evidence appeared altogether out of reason. Mr. Clark and other 

 members remarked on the nearness of some of Mr. Hodges' specimens 

 to the Lancashire specimen. 



Mr. Milton exhibited the following species of Coleoptera : — Dichiro- 

 trichus ohscurus, yEdeniera hci-ida, Chrysomela gcettingensis, C. lamina, 

 Donacia sagitiarice, and D. dentipes, all from Needham Market. Mr. 

 Heasler, Cynibiodyta marginellns and Phylliydrus melanocephalus, taken 

 by digging in the banks of streams at Mitcham. He remarked that it 

 was oiten stated that water beetles passed the winter in the mud at the 

 bottom of ponds, and he had iVequently found the carnivorous species 

 in that situation, but the other kinds were usually embedded in the banks 

 above water-line. Mr. Cripps, Lathrobiiini nudtipiinctiivi from Mitcham. 



Thursday, April 2nd, 1891. — Exhibits: — Lepidoptera. Mr. Smith, 

 a pair of Nyssia hispidaria from West Wickham. Mr. Battley, a series 

 of Euplexia lucipara, bred from larvae taken at Stamford Hill. These 

 specimens varied in the intensity of the black and yellow sub-marginal 

 lines, and in the width of the central band. Mr. Hodges, pale forms of 

 Acidalia proniutata {niaf'ginepiinctata) from the Isle of Wight; also, for 

 comparison, specimens from Portland and other localities. Mr. Prout, 

 long and variable series of Btyopliila glandifera, from Sandown. 

 Coleoptera : — Mr. Heasler exhibited a specimen of Antemeles 

 £marginatus from Loughton. The Secretary read a paper by Mr. 

 Ernest Anderson of Melbourne, entitled " A Trip to Corranwarrabool," 

 which gave a very graphic account of an entomological expedition in 

 Victoria. Mr. Cripps proposed that a vote of thanks be given to Mr. 



