236 THE ENTOMOLOGIST. 



by my statement that was published in Mr. Tutt's Nat. Hist. Brit. 

 Lap. V. 497 (1906). It runs as follows: — "Although Drosera rutnndi- 

 folia, from its well-known peculiarities of structure, &c., and carni- 

 vorous habits, seemed so unlikely to be the food-plant of Buclderia 

 pidudam, I had suspected, ever since 1890, that it might be so, from 

 having then noted it as apparently the only possible food-plant which 

 was common to the spots known to me for the insect. A thorough 

 search, however, on this and other plants, in 1891 and subsequent 

 years, produced no result, doubtless owing to the great abundance of 

 Drosera and the scarcity of the larva." It is obvious that, if my sus- 

 picion that Drosera was the food-plant had been "dismissed at the 

 time as untenable," I should not have taken the first opportunity, 

 after it had been aroused, of thoroughly searching that plant in the 

 hope of finding the larva, and have renewed the search thereon in other 

 years. — Eustace R. Bankes ; Norden, Corfe Castle, August 26th, 1907. 



Increase of Butterflies in Mauritius : a Correction. — In the 

 June number of the ' Entomologist,' Captain Tulloch, when writing 

 on the above subject, refers to a letter of mine, in which I had stated 

 that I had captured Zizera maha in Mauritius. The insect was not 

 as I supposed, Z. maha, but Z. nutanossa, Mabille. My excuse must 

 be that, at the time, I had no collection or books to refer to, and was 

 speaking from my recollection of Z. maha. The point of the correc- 

 tion, however, lies in the fact that Z. maha does not occur in the 

 Ethiopian region, and its reported capture in Mauritius might lead to 

 the faulty inference that Mauritius, so far as its butterfly fauna is con- 

 cerned, had some connection with the Oriental region. — N. Manders, 

 Lieut.-Col. R.A.M.C. ; Glastonbury Abbey, August 23rd. 



Notes on Lyc^ena argiades, Pall. — Under the above heading, in 

 the number of the ' Entomologist ' for September, 1907, Mr. N. C. 

 Rothschild (p. 201) says he "should be interested to know to which 

 form the few known British examples of L. argiades belong " ! These 

 forms are detailed and discussed in the previous portion of his paper. 

 As I possess two out of, as I believe, the only three authenticated 

 British specimens of this insect, perhaps it will be sufficient for Mr. 

 Rothschild's purpose if I offer the following remarks on my two 

 specimens. The male has two orange spots beneath the hinder 

 extremity of each hind wing. The female (almost entirely black 

 above) has a small dull orange spot (in connection with a small black 

 one) just above the base of the little tail on the upper side of each 

 hind wing. The third British example I have alluded to was taken at 

 Bournemouth on August 21st, 1885, by a Mr. Tudor, then a pupil at 

 the " Forest School," Walthamstow. This specimen was thus cap- 

 tured practically at the same time as the two on which I have given 

 the above information, and subsequently I examined it myself in Mr. 

 Tudor's collection at the Forest School. The only other examples, so 

 far as I am aware, that have laid any claim to British origin are two 

 (both males) recorded by the Rev. J. S. St. John in the November 

 number of the 'Entomologist,' 1885. I had some correspondence 

 with Mr. St. John on the subject of these two specimens, the result of 

 which was my conviction that their origin was Continental, not 

 British. They passed out of Mr. St. John's possession, and subse- 



