264; THE entomologist's record. 



erroneously considered the wrong animal the one meant, as in the case 

 of Lepm titiiidiis, which is now known to be the blue hare, whilst our 

 animal has had to take the name of L. europaeiis. Personally I was sorry 

 to see that in Messrs. Staudinger and Rebel's last Catalntj they use 

 some of the names in Billberg's Enumeratio, a work that from pub- 

 lished accounts seems of no value. I see small hope of the vexed 

 question of nomenclature ever being satisfactorily settled, except by a 

 conference of some of the principal zoologists from the chief nations of 

 the continent and America to agree — (1) On all the authors to be 

 accepted for reference, and (2) on the dates of their respective works, 

 which might aid in attaining this result. — T, H. Briggs, M.A., F.E.S., 

 Rock House, Lynmouth, R.S.O., N. Devon. Septemher 14th, 1904. 



The Linnean type of Phragmatobia fuliginosa. — Mr. T. Briggs 

 has been kind enough to send me the copy of Linne's original descrip- 

 tion of PJirai/irmtobia fnli(/inosci from the Si/steiiia Xatnrae, ed. x, p. 509. 

 It reads as follows : 



Fuliginosa. P. spirilinguis laevis, alls deflexis fuliginosis puncto nigro ; inferi- 

 oribus rubris nigromaculatis. It. Wgoth. 141, Koes., Ins., i., Phal. 2, t. 43, Uddm., 

 Diss., 76, Wilk., Pcqi., 23, t. 3a, 14. 



This proves Aurivillius' contention to be right, and my notes want 

 revision in this direction. I felt so certain that I should be safe in 

 accepting the more extended Fauna Succicae description as that of the 

 type, that I did not even carry out my own elementary rule of taking- 

 nothing for granted if it be possible to make the reference. Besides, it 

 makes my own criticism return on me with double force. — J. W. Tutt. 



:^OTES ON COLLECTING, Etc. 



Lepidoptera at Oxton. — The season being now well advanced I 

 am writing a few notes in extension of those already published {antea, 

 p. 240). On the whole it must be classed among the bad ones, one of 

 the worst, I should say, though hard work has, of course, produced 

 several useful things. Glancing through my diary the following facts 

 appear worth noticing. In spring, sallows were most unproductive and 

 light the same, very few of even the common Tteniocampids putting 

 in an appearance, and Lohophora carinnata,Vi%w.dl\y fairly common, being 

 entirely absent. Larvte, too, were scarce, and I found, as already noted, 

 the greatest difficulty in getting any Ai/roti.s aijatJiina, although they 

 are usually plentiful, and I only obtained one Xactiia nt'i/lecta. Arctia 

 caja never turned up at all, and Cosmotric/ie potatoria was very scarce. 

 Among butterflies, Picru brassicae seemed commoner than usual, and 

 so was P. 7iapi, but Kuchlo'e cardamines and Brenthis eiipJirosyne were 

 very scarce, and I only saw two Ct/aniris anjiolus and two or three 

 Sijrichtlms nialvae (one of the ab. taras). Paianje egeria was entirely 

 absent, and I only saw a few P. )iie(jaera, which was disappointing, 

 as I specially worked for them, wanting 5 s for a friend. I was also 

 unable to find any larvte of Vanessa io, usually fairly plentiful on the 

 nettles here. I turned up a few Coccyjc siibsequana at end of April and 

 in early May, getting thirteen (mostly worn) on May 4th, which was one 

 of the few bright days we had when a hurricane was not blowing. 

 Light continued unattractive, only a few Peridea trepida and Anticlea 

 nit/rofasciciria (usually fairly common) occurring. Perhaps Xola confu- 

 salis was rather commoner than usual, and later on (and still) Xndaria 

 mnndana. Xotodonta triniacida was scarce and in poor condition, the 



