^gjj. [Deccmbca-, 



Rare Lepidoptera in the Isle of Man. — Mr. Ilodgkinson having, in tlie Oct. 

 number of ' The Entomologist's Monthly Magazine,' mentioned my name in con- 

 nection with certain Lepidoptera said to have been taken in the Isle of Man, I am 

 reluctantly compelled to send a few lines in reply to his statement. 



Unfortunately, I cannot find Mr. Gregsou's letter in which he mentions the 

 capture of Agrotis spinifera, but I feel conTinced that he did not say he took it 

 himself. I believe he said that it was captured by a resident in the Isle of Man in 

 the autumn, after the collectors, who aimually visit the island, had left. Mr. Hodg- 

 kinson says it was sent to me alive : this is certainly a mistake. I have no recol- 

 lection of ever having seen the specimen, but Mr. G-regson said he did send it to 

 me unset, and that I returned it to him without any remark. I never received this 

 species from any of my continental friends ; and, till very lately, it has been extremely 

 rare. It inhabits Sicily and the South of Spain, and the larva has recently been 

 found near Barcelona. 



I remember seeing the specimen of L. exigua, but it was not alive ; it was dry, 

 and the thorax crushed. 



I wiU give Mr. Gregson's own words about the capture of llicra parva, con- 

 tained in a letter received from him last spring, but with no date : — 



" The Micra was taken and pinned by my late friend, Mr. Potter, at Growdale, 

 " Isle of Man. He never set an insect, but as I gave him pms, and shewed him how 

 " I liked to have them pinned, he took great pleasure in capturing anything he saw 

 " for me, tliis among the number ; and I thought you would like to see it as it came 

 " from his hands, rather than when it had been set after being dry. It was taken in 

 " 1870, after the end of June and before the end of August." — Hkney Doubledat, 

 Epping : Octoler 12tk, 1872. 



N^ote on Crinodes Sommeri and Tarsolepis remicauda. — In the Ent. Mo. Mag., 

 and Ann. Nat. Hist., of last October, Mr. Butler rejects my opinion concerning the 

 synonymy of the above named moths. It is, however, clear that, when he made the 

 description of Mr. Coruthwaite's insect, Mr. Butler was totally unacquainted with 

 Hiibner's Crino Sommeri, and that it was only after the publication of my synonymi- 

 cal note that he compared his new (?) species with Hiibner's figures, and endeavoured 

 to find some differences to justify him in retaining his names. If this be not so, 

 why did he not mention this (to say the least) very similar moth, and add the sup- 

 posed generic and specific diif erenccs to the description of his supposed new species ? 



Mr. Butler considers Crino BescJeei as the type of the genus Crino, because that 

 species is figured before C. Sommeri. But, if attention be given to the characters 

 ascribed by Hiibner (" Verzeichniss bekannter Schmetterlinge," p. 216) to this genus 

 (" Die Schwingen blasssenig, dunkelstriemig, und mit glanzend weissen Fleckcn 

 geziert "), it is evident that he really had in view the species called by him C. Sommeri, 

 and that these characters apply, without any modification, to Tarsolepis remicauda, 

 Butler. As regards C. Besckel, it is clear that Hiibner was not attached to the 

 so-called " type-system ; " and, consequently, we have nothing to do here with the 

 last-named species. I am, therefore, still of opinion that Tarsolepis remicauda, 

 Butler, ought without doubt to be transferred to the genus Crino, Hiibner, = Cri- 

 nodes, Ilerrich-Sehiijfei". 



