122 THK entomologist's record. 



have used essence of peav, etc., aud have always fared as well as they, 

 and I find sometimes that sugaring the foliage pays far hetter than 

 sugaring the trunks. — A. H. Hamm. 



Aporia crat.egi in Kent. — a few more explicit notes as to my 

 capture of this insect in Kent, last year, will, I think, be looked for, 

 especially by those gentlemen with whom I exchanged specimens, 

 since Mr. Tutt, in his " Ketrospect for 1896," says there is " little 

 doubt but that they are the progeny of planted Continentals."** This 

 I do not think is the case, considering that Aporia cratacgi was at 

 one time so common and Avidcly distributed throughout Kent. I 

 think Mr. Tutt and others, who may at present feel rather sceptical 

 as to the English genuineness of the insects, will, after reading the 

 following notes, agree that they are the progeny of an indigenous 

 colony, which have been for many years breeding in the locality where 

 I captured them. Some nine or ten years ago, an acquaintance of 

 mine told me that he had taken the Black-veined White not very far 

 from Dover, but as he would not tell me the locality, and left the 

 town shortly afterwards, I gave up all hopes of taking it, and began 

 to wonder whether he might not have been mistaken as to the insect. 

 I thought no more about A. crataei/l (or perhaps I should say I 

 thought it extinct) until the autumn of 1895, when an entomological 

 friend of mine told me that, in 1898, a person coming in from the country, 

 knowing him to be a collector, told him there had been such numbers 

 of a large white butterfly in the fields near her house, and as he had 

 at the time a book on butterflies before him, he showed her plates of 

 the "whites," and she, readily distinguishing the insect, pointed out 

 A. cratacai. He was very much surprised, and thought she must have 

 made a mistake. Owing to ill health, he found no opportunity of 

 visiting the neighbourhood in w^hich he had been told they were to be 

 taken. He told me of this incident, and, on June 21st last, I went to 

 the spot, and found large numbers of A. cratoc(/i in a clover field, and 

 took about two dozen (I could have taken two score). The following 

 day I again went and took a few more, and I also watched a female 

 lay some eggs on the extremity of a leaf of whitethorn, of which there 

 was a thick hedge bordering one side of the clover field. The insects 

 wore very sluggish in their movements, and easily captured. They 

 seemed confined to the clover fields, in which grew quantities of the 

 ox-eye daisy {(Jhri/santhenmm leucanthemiun), for which they seemed 

 to have a predilection, and when disturbed soon settled down again. 

 I left home the following day (Wednesday), and did not return 

 until the middle of July, when I thought it would be too late for 

 A.cratacjii, and I have not been to the place, which is some distance 

 from this town, since ; however, I hope soon to go and look for the 

 larvae, which I think I should have no trouble in finding, as I left 

 scores of A. crataefii flying about. I have made enquiries as to the 

 whereabouts of the man who first told me about A. cratac;ii, 

 and find that he caught nine specimens and gave them to his 

 brother-in-law, who is now living in Dover. I called on him a 

 short time since, and saw the nine specimens, which are with other 

 insects, one of the others being no less than a Deilepkila galii (!) , 



* We do not remember having made this statement. We said: — " We have 

 little doubt that this is a colony, the progeny of ancestors that have been set at 

 liberty, and have effected a temporary settlement." — Ed. 



