116 THE ENTOMOLOGIST. 



recently emerged, and was the only one seen. Sugar attracted a Uirge 

 number of common things, Caradrina alsines absolutely swarmed. Among 

 other species were Noctua hnt.nnea,N. triaiigulum, Aplecta prasina, A.nebu- 

 losa, Leucaiiia turca, L. cotiir/era, L. comma, Trj/phama fimbria, Epunda 

 riminalis, Nola coiifusalis, CJaiH(jenia wiiiiiita, and Macaria altertiatci (one 

 example). Neither Cutocala piomissa nor C. aponaa had put in an appear- 

 ance before our departure. Although many Liivse were abundant in ttie 

 Forest in June, it was not the case Irom the middle to the end of July, as 

 laiva-beating turned out very unprofitable. The only species worth men- 

 tioning which fell by our united exertions were Amphidnsijft strataria, 

 Knnomos erosaria, Psilura inonacha (very commonly), Notodoiita trejnd/i 

 (one specimen), N. triniacida (three examples only), Asphalia Jtaiucnrins, 

 A. rideiis (nearly all ichneumoned), and Hoporiiia croceaijo. By digging 

 jiupse, Xyliiia rhizoUtha and Petasia sphinx were obtained, yemeopliila 

 rnssula (both males and female^) were freely taken on the heath. The 

 dearth of Geometers on the wing at dusk was particularly noticeable. 1 

 liave omitted to mention the capture of a very large dark form of Boarmia 

 abietaria, a specimen of Epinephele ianira, with partially bleached hind 

 •wings, and a dark variety of Aryi/nnis adippe. — Alfkkd T. Mitchell ; 5, 

 Clayton Terrace, Gunnersbury, W., January 12, 1889. 



Lepidoptera of Portland — Courections. — Kindly make the follow- 

 ing corrections in " A Year's Work in Portland" (Eutom 56) : — Instead of 

 Phycis ornatella, read P. adornatelia. Instead of Acidalia ochrearia, read 

 Aspilates ochrearea. For A. trigeminata, read A dimidata. For S. 

 phceoleuca, read mercarella, var. j^ortlandica. Erase 0. parvidactylus, add 

 Cr ambus salinellus and L. microdactylus. — C. E. Partkidgk ; The Castle, 

 Portland, March 15, 1889. 



"Mimicry" AND "Protective Resemblance" in Insects. — The 

 various guises which insects develop in relation to their surroundings is one 

 of the most interesting of their characteristics which can occupy the atten- 

 tion of otiservers in the field. Mr. Scudder's article in ' The Atlantic 

 Monthly Magazine ' for February, 1889, entitled ' Butterflies in Disguise,' 

 bears testimony to the increasing popularity of the treatment of such sub- 

 jects. Without being too technical for the general reader, Mr. Scudder has, 

 as might be expected, presented a thorougbly reliable account of some of 

 tlie more remarkable devices, by means of whicb butterflies secure greater 

 immunity from tlieir foes. It is, however, rather to be regretted that he 

 omits to distinguish between the two different kinds of protectiot! to which 

 they have resort. Althougli it may be true that the means by which the 

 end is attained is primarily the same in each case, there is so marked a dis- 

 tinct difference practically, and also in idea, between the active conditions 

 which, in the case of mimetic species, permit certain species to assume the 

 appearance in outer garb of species of quite different genera, and the 

 passive conditions under which, with the operation of natural selection, 

 many other species acquire so close a resemblance to their usual lodgment, 

 that a distinction should always be made, by the employment of different 

 terms of expression. The distinction has always been maintained by such 

 writers as Wallace and Bates, — the first discoverers of these forms of 

 protection, — Meldola and Poulton, but it is still quite usual, as I have 

 frequently noticed, for writers on the subject to confuse the ideas, to the 



