32 DR. BRACKENRIDGE CLEMENS' LETTERS. 



any inconvenience, or without having it taken for this pur- 

 pose alone, it will give me much pleasure. 



I was very glad to hear you had succeeded in breeding 

 A. splendor if crella, and am pleased that the species is so 

 interesting in your view. 



In return I have an announcement to make which I think 

 will somewhat surprise you. I have at last succeeded in 

 breeding a Nepticula, and the species is so very like your 

 Ajigulifasciella, both in ornamentation, as given in Vol. I. of 

 the " Nat. Hist, of the Tineina," and in its preparatory 

 states, that I am much inclined to believe it the same 

 insect. Indeed my feeling in this respect amounts almost 

 to a conviction, and yet I have named it Rubifuliella from 

 its food plant, merely, however, because at the time I de- 

 scribed it I had but a single specimen. Since that time 

 another imago has made its appearance. During the present 

 season I will make special search for it and hope to secure 

 specimens in the pupa state for you. You will find the 

 entire history of the species detailed in a paper which I will 

 send to you in July. I enclose in this note a rough sketch 

 of the neuration of the species, in which you will notice that 

 the discoidal cell of the fore-wings is closed by a faint nervure 

 near the base. Will you please inform me whether in 

 Angulifasciella this peculiarity exists? Should these insects 

 prove to be the same, will it not be a very interesting fact in 

 geographical distribution? At least it appears so to my 

 mind when I consider its minuteness and the oceanic interval 

 which separates us from England or the continent of 

 Europe. 



I have been greatly interested in Mr. Darwin's theory of 

 the origin of species, and Dr. Hooker's introductory essay to 

 the Tasmanian Flora. I cannot but admire the boldness 

 of the former and the apparent candour with which he urges 

 his views ; but whilst he succeeds in jostling rudely ordinarily 

 received views, and engendering doubts from his ingenious 

 reasoning, he does not leave on the mind a sense of conviction. 

 This theory of profitable modifications of structure resulting 



