SOME SPRING AND AUTUMN BUTTERFLIES OF CANNES. 103 
4-dentate. Club without a terminal nipple or spine. Stigmal vein 
ovate, with a short, thick neck. Tibial spurs short, straight, single. 
Habitus like Lathromeroides, but the thorax longer in proportion to 
the abdomen. 
Thoreauia compressiventris, n. sp., genotype. 
Female.—Length, 0°90 mm. Black, the head and thorax (except 
the sides, except ventrad centrally) deep golden yellow; vertex 
dusky, axille black. Antenne dusky yellow. Thorax laterad of 
scutellum dusky. Knees broadly, tibis: except dorsad and the first 
two tarsal joints pallid. Venation dusky, the fore wing subhyaline 
but with a distinct, short, substigmal spot against the apex of the 
stigmal vein. Fore wings with about eighteen regular lines of discal 
cilia, the eighth of which is longest, from apex, curving past the 
stigmal knob caudo-proximad to join the proximal end of the sixteenth 
which curves slightly cephalad to meet it; the seventeeth also meets 
the other two at this point, which is farthest proximad for this cilia- 
tion. Caudal wings not broad, with a paired row of discal cilia a 
little cephalad of middle, their caudal marginal fringes distinctly 
longer than their greatest width. Club longer than the pedicel and 
funicle taken together, conic. Marginal cilia of the fore wing very 
short, sparse at the apex. Scape moderate in length, not as long as 
the club. 
Described from four females received for identification from 
the Government Entomologist, Northern Territory, Australia, 
and said to have been reared from galls on Hucalyptus miniata, 
Port Darwin (1.8.15). 
Types.—Catalogue No. 20005, U.S.N.M., the four females on 
a slide. 
NOTES ON SOME SPRING AND AUTUMN BUTTERFLIES 
OF CANNES AND THE NEIGHBOURHOOD. 
By H. Rowuanp-Brown, M.A., F.E.S. 
(Continued from p. 76.) 
HeEsPERmUIDa (continued.)* 
[Cyclopides palemon.—Does not appear to descend to the 
lower regions of the Department. Milliere says that it is not 
* To my remarks on Pyrgus orbifer (antea, p. 75) I should have added 
that it figures in Cantener’s ‘Catalogue des Lépidoptéres du Département 
du Var.,’ p. 7, Strasbourg, 1833. I notice, too, that Mr. F. 8. Norris, who 
was collecting at Hyéres in 1889, includes it among his captures—“ sparingly 
in May ”—(‘ Entomologist,’ xxii, p. 185). I cannot even guess what these 
Hesperiids actually were, but to my eye this is one of the most easily 
distinguishable of a notably difficult group. Parnara nostrodamus. Four 
examples sold in the Gieseking (Cannes regional) collection. 
