CLOSTERA ANACHORETA. 38 



tunity of breeding it, after its discovery in 1859, must agree with 

 me in saying that it was a most prolific insect, I myself have had 

 three broods within twelve months, and, as mentioned above, the 

 hirvse multiplied to such an extent that collectors grew tired of 

 it, and ceased to keejD up the breed. Now, from about 1854 

 to 1864 was one of the most (if not the most) energetic periods in 

 tlie history of British Entomology (Lepidoptera). At no time, 

 during my forty years' experience, has there been a more 

 numerous or more skilled body of collectors, larva hunters, pupa 

 diggers, &c. And yet I am asked to believe that an " indi- 

 genous" British insect, which has two or three broods in the 

 year, whose larva is easily detected, and whose food is found all 

 over the country, could have eluded the searching gaze of 

 hundreds of keen-eyed collectors before 1859, and finally have 

 turned up in one spot in England, with a reduced family of 

 eleven ! Again, is it credible that an indigenous insect so prolific 

 as anachoreta, and whose larva could so easily be found by a prac- 

 tised hand, should so completely disappear after 1864 (when the 

 home breeding ceased) that no record of its capture, either as 

 imago, pupa, or larva can be found up to the present time, a 

 period of twenty-three years ? This statement is of course subject 

 to correction. But unless it be very considerably modified, I 

 unhesitatingly express my conviction that Clostera anachoreta is 

 not a British insect. It may be asked by some of your readers 

 who may trouble themselves to read these lines, " Is it not a fact 

 that some insects will re-appear after long intervals ?" To which 

 I reply undoubtedly, but not, I venture to think, under the con- 

 ditions above referred to. If it be further asked, " How then do 

 you explain Dr. Knaggs's discovery ?" I answer in one word 

 " importation." Any one acquainted with ray friend and corres- 

 pondent Dr. Knaggs would not dream of even hinting at his 

 taking part in any such transaction ; but that C. anachoreta, in 

 one or more of its stages, was ignorantly or intentionally intro- 

 duced into this country about 1858 or 1859 is my fixed conviction, 

 lience its non-appearance before those years ; hence its dls- 

 appeavance after 18G4. 



Eosti-evor, Clifton, Bristol, January 2, 1888. 



