characterized species of British Moths. 119 
amongst long grass in young plantations. I have taken it near 
Glanville’s Wootton, Dorset, the 18th May. 
Genus 1028. Telea, Step. 
44. 2. subfasciella, Step. Ill. iv. 247. This I met with the 
30th June at St. Martha’s, near Guildford; the 9th July on 
Turk Mountain, near Killarney; and the 11th August at 
Mickleham. 
45. 8. Curtisella, Don.; cenobitella, Hib. It is now believed 
that the black 7. obscurella of Hiibner and the T. picepennis of 
Haworth are only dark varieties, but I have not seen any inter- 
mediate ones. 
46. Genus 1030, 2. Ypsolophus, Persicellus, Haw., I find is 
not a variety of his Y. bifasciatus, the T. sylvella of Hiibner ; but 
a distinct species. 
Genus 1031. Cerostoma, Lat. ; Curt. Brit. Ent. fol. 420. 
47. 4. C, Xylostella, Linn. I have a specimen expanding 
72 lines, with the stripe on the inner margin of the upper wings 
nearly concolorous with the rest, but I believe it is only a variety 
of this common species. 
48. 5. C. Dalella, Stain. Syst. Cat. p. 11. This species was 
first given to me many years since by Sir C. Lyell, who took it 
at Kinnordy, and the beginning of August 1825 I discovered it 
amongst heath on the face of a rock in the Isle of Bute. As it 
agreed pretty well with Hiibner’s fig. 164. pl. 24, I gave it as 
his 7. vittella in my ‘ Guide.’ 
Genus 1031. Acrolepia, Curt. Brit. Ent. fol. & pl. 679. 
This is a very remarkable group, so greatly resembling the 
Tortricidae, that a careless observer, omitting to examiue the palpi, 
would at once include it in the wrong family. In 1888 this ge- 
nus was established in my ‘ Brit. Ent.’ by dissection and elabo- 
rate definitions, and as Zeller did not publish the group until 
nearly two years after, his name and not mine must fall by the 
law of priority, which Mr. Stainton very justly recognises to its 
fullest extent. 
49. 1. A. autumnitella, Curt. B. E. ib. I should not hesitate 
to adopt Mr. Stainton’s opinion, that my species is the Tortriz 
pygmeana of Haworth’s ‘ Lep. Brit.’ p. 439, if he did not give 
4 lines as the expanse of the wings, for my examples measure 
from 54 to 53 lines. Wood’s figure 1136 of Kupacilia pygmeana, 
as he calls it, after Stephens, is apparently identical with my in- 
sect, as well as Duponchel’s Hamilis Lefebvriella (v. 11. p. 141. 
pl. 290. f. 11). Since this genus was published in the ‘ Brit. 
Ent.’ I have seen specimens of A. autummnitella, flying m the day- 
