2S0 [December, 



Mr. Tutt read a vory exhaustive paper. He assumed that the earlier species should 

 be termed T. bistortata and the later one T. crepuscularia, as Mr. Prout asserted, 

 and said that the difference of opinion among entomologists was largely a matter of 

 the definition of a " species." They each had distinct life-cycles, distinct facies and 

 one had seasonal dimorphism, besides which each bred true to its own race. He 

 showed that errors had arisen from statements made on insufiicient data and from 

 too much reliance being placed on various writings, such as those made in Newman's 

 "Moths." He reviewed the discussion which took place some ten years ago in the 

 magazines, and said that the consensus of opinion then was the same as his own. The 

 opinions of the chief opponents were then discussed in detail, especially various con- 

 tributions of Mr. Barrett to the discussion. He showed by quotations that Mr. 

 Barrett had accepted the idea of species until he recently received certain specimens 

 and data from Mrs. Bazett, including some supposed second brood T. hiundularia. 

 After stating that these were undoubtedly T. crepuscularia, second brood, he referred 

 to the evidence offered as to distinctness by Messrs. Porritt, Fenn and Tugwell, who 

 had bred both species and pointed out the differences which separated the two. He 

 showed that parallelism was not a sign of unity of species, nor was it right to 

 compare dates of years like 1888 with 1898. He discussed the Scotch forms and 

 remarked that they more nearly resembled the German specimens. Mr. Henderson 

 said that he had taken T. crepuscularia in the very woods where it was stated by 

 Mrs. Bazett not to occur. His experience and remarks agreed wholly with Mr. 

 Tutt's, and he mentioned that the late J. A. Cooper had reared a second brood of 

 T. hiundularia. The remarks made by the other exhibitors all tended to "support 

 the case as put forth in Mr. Tutt's paper. Mr. de Vismes Kane sent an account of 

 the occurrence of the only species of T. hiundularia occurring in Ireland, together 

 with a typical exhibit. In reply to the vote of thanks proposed by Mr. Barrett and 

 seconded by Mr. Auld, Mr. Tutt said that the idea of species was simply a matter 

 of utility, and as there were two distinct life-cycles, it was more convenient to 

 consider them as two species, although they might be very closely allied. Mr. 

 Montgomery stated that there was considerable doubt about his record on Sept. 

 24th, that N. ditrapezium occurred in Yorkshire. — Hy. J. Turner, Hon. 

 Secretary. 



Entomological Society of London : Octoher 2\st, 1896. — Professor 

 Raphael Meldola, F.R.S., President, in the Chair. 



Mr. J. J. Walker, R.N., exhibited a specimen of Emus hirtiis, L., taken at Gore 

 Court Park, Sittingbourne, Kent, on the 30th May last. Mr. W. B. Spence sent, 

 from Florence, for exhibition, some specimens of a cricket, Gryllus campestris, in small 

 wire cages, which he stated were, in accordance with an ancient custom, sold by the 

 Italians on Ascension-day. Mr. F. Enock, a specimen of the curious aquatic Hymen- 

 opteron Prestwichia aquatica, ? , which Sir John Lubbock first captured in 1862, but 

 which had not been recorded since that date until its re-discovery in May, 1896. Mr. 

 Enock said the male had remained unknown until June last, when he captured 

 sevei-al swimming about in a pond at Epping. The male was micropterous, and, 

 like the female, used its legs for propelling itself through the water. Mr. Tutt, 

 a beautiful aberration of Tephroaia histortala {crepuscularia), in which the ochreous 

 ground-colour was much intensified, and the transverse shade between the median 



