194 THE ENTOMOLOGIST. 



statement, either as to fact or opinion, and to recite these 

 conditions is, as mathematicians use the word, not significant, 

 and is mere verbiage. It clearly, however, possesses uses on 

 occasion, as I might thereby have avoided ruffling my friend's 

 amiable serenity. 



My position in the matter is, however, more apposite ; it 

 was this : Examining the specimens and taking into account all 

 that Mr. Wheeler has told us about them, I was strongly of 

 opinion that hritomartis (Reazzino) was a form of dictynna, not 

 of course identical with dictynna, but a special form or race. I 

 had doubts about it, founded rather on deference to Mr. Wheeler's 

 opinion than on my own weighing of the facts. I wanted some 

 further evidence, and felt that further evidence one way would 

 strengthen these doubts ; the other way, would do away with 

 them. 



The new item was the structure of the male appendages, 

 and as these agreed with those of dictynna, I was satisfied 

 that, so far as I could form an opinion, hritomartis was a form 

 of dictynna. 



That I was fully justified in my attitude of doubt, pending 

 this reference, may be deduced from the opinion of Mr. Wheeler 

 himself, given to the Entomological Society. He is reported in 

 the 'Entomologist,' vol. xli. p. 94, as saying that "the close 

 affinity with M. dictynna made separation superficially very 

 diflicult, and until all forms were reared from the ovum it would 

 be impossible to determine whether hritomartis constituted a 

 separate species or not." 



There can be no doubt, of course, that definite evidence from 

 the early stages would put the question on a new and firmer 

 basis. 



I was unable to accept, on the facts Mr. Wheeler advanced, 

 that hritomartis is " undoubtedly double-brooded." He took it 

 in June and in July in difi'erent seasons, and considered the 

 June season a late one, and that these were first and second 

 broods. The season 1907 was possibly not so late south of the 

 Alps, as in the Ehine Valley; on the Eiviera, it was fairly 

 average. Assuming it to be double-brooded, this is an impor- 

 tant fact, but far from conclusive as to the specific position of 

 hritomartis. I do not know whether Mr. Wheeler intended to 

 describe the palpi and antennae of the two forms as different ; 

 he uses different phrases, and seems to imply that we have here 

 good specific characters. My observation is to the effect that 

 the antennae and palpi in the two are identical. I might go 

 over the other items ; but this is unnecessary, since the point 

 we are discussing is that they left me fairly satisfied that hrito- 

 martis is dictynna. 



I may mention, however, that in Mr. Lang's series of 

 dictynna, which I have, are several specimens, curiously without 



