8970 Insects. 
Description of the Larva of Numeria Pulverari.—Some eggs laid about the end of 
May last hatched in a week or two. The larve, kept in a very cold room, fed very 
slowly and did not begin to spin-up until quite the end of August. General colour 
purplish brown, varied with ochreous ; head bifid, light ochreous-brown, especially in 
front ; a broad ochreous stripe, lightest at the upper edge, along the upper part of the 
side of the 5th segment. On each segment, from the 5th (inclusive) backwards, a 
pair of very small points, which are light in front and dark behind; besides smaller 
points just behind the spiracles. A pair of large warts on the back of the 9th seg- 
ment, a pair much smaller on the back of the 10th and 12th, and a pair smaller 
still on the back of the Llth segment. The 10th, 11th and 12th segments have some 
dark arrow-head lines (not however, quite meeting in a point) on the back, margined 
outwardly with ochreous; sides wrinkled, especially of fore part of body; belly 
purplish brown, with ochreous blotches on each side, the claspers underneath being 
dark bluish green, and the space between a pair of claspers yellowish ; sometimes 
a lighter line down the middle of the belly. They fed on sallow, spinning up among 
leaves and moss,—F’. Beauchamp. 
Larva of Cidaria sagittataa—In July, 1855, I obtained some larve from eggs, 
found in a pill-box in which I had an hour or two previously captured a female 
C. sagittata. A description of the larva may be found in the ‘ Zoologist’ for 1858 
(Zool. 6030). I observe in the ‘Annual’ for 1864 another description of larva, said 
to be those of C. sagittata, upon the authority of Mr. Farren, who says that he bred 
the imago from the larve there described. Evidently both descriptions cannot apply 
to the same insect, and I hope that either Messrs. Hellens or Fryer will be fortunate 
enough to rear some of their pupz, and satisfactorily determine whether the larva 
described in the ‘Annual’ is that of C. sagittata—Thomas Brown; 13, King’s 
Parade, Cambridge, January 23, 1864. 
Larva of Cidaria sagittata. — The breeding of Cidaria sagittata has satisfac- 
torily proved that insect to be not only not a Cidaria, but, if it is any relation at all 
to that genus, the cousinsbhip is very distant indeed. Now that being the case, the 
question arises—to what genus does it belong? is there any family that will own it? 
If not, most probably some one of our leaders will set up sagittata on its own account. 
As it is somewhat of a vagrant at present, and as sagittata is evidently an aristocrat, 
judging by beauty of form and colour, the sooner it is put in a more respectable 
position the better. Now I bave a notion that sagittata has near relations—in fact, 
very near relations in a respectable and extensive family, vulgarly termed ‘ pugs” 
(Eupithecia), a family which, if they were little known until of late, are none the worse 
for that; it was not their fault. They were always “at home,” if any one sought to 
make their acquaintance (see the agreeable way in which the Revs. H. H. Crewe and 
J. Greene have made friends with this neglected genus), I am aware that the larva 
and pupa of C. sagittata are not quite the thing for Eupithecie, but are all the larve 
of the Eupithecia stiff, and all the pupa slender? Still they are very like, especially 
in their ways of living, in their markings, &c. They feed at the same time, go down 
to pup# at the same time, construct their cocoons in the same way; and as for the 
imago of Cidaria, surely it must be a Eupithecia, or at least first-cousin to one. 
Why, look at it and any of the “ pugs” side by side: dves it not agree in every 
respect with them—the ample upper wings, and the very small tounded under wings? 
The habits of the imago, too, are just the same as with the Eupithecie. Mr. Bond 
and Mr. A. Fryer both agree with me that, when at rest, it is a Eupithecia to the 
