NOTES AND OBSERVATIONS. 49 
I saw but a ragged remnant, which no doubt fell victim to the next 
destroyer. Being on leave I revisited the scene on September 7th. 
Again I quote my diary: “A few still fresh female corydon about 
and very passés males. As the sun never broke out there was little 
flying, but curiously enough the one butterfly captured was syngrapha 
—a good example.’ Search of the grass bents revealed no more ; 
but it is at least reasonable to argue that the form might have been 
over altogether at this date. We now come to 1918. I was away 
for the first half of August, and between July 30th and September 
7th I found no opportunity to return to the Chilterns. On the 
former date I find from my diary: “I saw one syngrapha only ; 
the species is not yet out in force, but I noted one gentleman already 
on the ground with a net the size of a coal-sack—big enough to 
intern the entire butterfly population of the Bucks Chilterns per se.” 
On September 7th the slopes reminded me of a visit paid in 1907 
to the famous Plebeius zephyrus lycidas ground below Berisal. Every- 
where the grass, flowers, and down had the appearance of being 
manceuvred over by a cavalry brigade. ‘I was surprised to find 
two absolutely fresh males. No trace of syngrapha . . . The 
débacle had been thorough—how thorough the experience of 1919 was 
to prove with lamentable conviction. With a view to determining 
the extent of collection in this locality I attended the meet- 
ings of the South London Society in November. The exhibits 
as usual on this popular occasion were many and_ various, 
but it was pitiful to see the cases crammed with the unfor- 
tunate Corydon “from the Bucks Chilterns’”’-—some hundreds, 
and many of them typical or of such trivial departure from 
type that one wondered what they were doing in this gallery. I was 
not in the least surprised, therefore, when I read the report of the 
‘Variety Exhibition ” in the Society’s ‘‘ Proceedings,’ 1919-20, to find 
that, though exhibits included ‘‘ many other interesting forms ”’ from 
the Chiltern Hills, ab. syngrapha was not recorded among them.. An 
extract from my diary reads: “August 15th. Back to Chilterns, 
but found the drought had accelerated everything, and all butterflies 
passés. The syngrapha ground trodden down. I watched two men 
with huge nets who never moved off the slope all day ’—that is to say 
when I returned from afurther investigation on the hills elsewhere, the 
same nets were still where I left them two or three hours earlier. 
Their syngrapha bag must have been meagre, for 1 noted (‘ Proc. 5. 
London Soe.,’ 1919-20), at the meeting held August 25th Mr. 
Newman reported “ that Agriades coridon, on its usual habitat on the 
Chiltern Hills, was this year practically extinct, and that although 
collectors in abundance had frequented the locality in recent seasons, 
he did not consider the scarcity was due to over-collecting. In his 
opinion this was due to the attacks of ichneumons, for out of a large 
number of larve of A. coridon collected in the spring more than 
90 per cent. were attacked.” Mr. Newman’s conclusions were appa- 
rently based on his experiences, or that of his collectors on the 
syngrapha ground only. I agree neither with them, nor the reason 
he advances for the scarcity of the species. The same day 
(August 25th), in the course of my rambles not a mile from 
“the devastated area,’ I note ‘‘a lovely congeries of corydon males 
