104 THE ENTOMOLOGIST’S RECORD. 
thickish brown stripe, right hindwing brown with a broad central 
white stripe, thorax and abdomen pale, latter thick. No. 2 has two 
big white patches on the left forewing, a big blotch of white on right 
forewing, covering about 1 of the wing, four fantastic white stripes 
cover about 4 of the left hindwing. Nos. 47, 58, 76, 79, and 80 have 
all four wings with a few brown spots and stripes, 76 being a fine 
large moth with a very thick white abdomen and thorax. No. 50 is 
a most variegated moth. Left forewing white stripes and patches on 
grey ground, right forewing white and abnormally large, the two 
hindwings are covered with alternate stripes of white and dark brown. 
Abdomen and thorax whitish brown, considerably thicker than normal. 
When the white colouring occurs at the apex of the forewing this is 
sometimes pulled out to a point, as it were, and thus becomes 
abnormaily long, as in Nos. 10 and 65. No. 59 is a pigmy with no 
white patches or stripes, but with all the scales so pale that several of 
the females are dark by comparison. Four are badly crippled, one 
very badly. The whole series look very much like a partial patch- 
worky reversion to a prehistoric form of dispar male rather than 
examples of partial gynandromorphism spread over a whole family, 
though, indeed, when one has read through Dr. Schweitzer’s excellent 
article, one is quite convinced that they are really pure cases of gynan- 
dromorphism. But what is gynandromorphism? Does it display an 
unsettled struggle between male and female cells occurring in occa- 
sional insects? Is it not rather in this as in every isolated case a 
question of predominance of either the male or the female cells which 
should exist in every single insect, or indeed in every living thing born 
of male and female parents? A negro girl marries a white-skinned 
man and bears him a mulatto son and daughter, either of which may 
be either a simple mongrel, or “ favour” either parent, irrespective of 
sex. The son is as much his mother’s son as his father’s child. In 
his cellular construction there should be, normally, a fairly equal pro- 
portion derived from either parent. Weare not at all astonished when 
we find a female child resembling her father in all but sex. The male 
or female cells would seem to dominate according to an undiscovered, 
but probably not undiscoverable, law, and not necessarily in the same 
measure in every part of the organism. As a general rule certain 
primary and secondary organs are found in combination, generally 
because they are more or less dependent'on one another; but this is 
evidently not a rule without exceptions. 
Tutt (British Lepidoptera, vol. ii., p. 46), says that the modification 
of the sexual organs is the primary cause of the secondary sexual 
appearance, and whenever the organs are modified the secondary 
sexual characters as represented by wing shape, antenne, colour, etc., 
follow as a natural response to the stimulus afforded by this modifica- 
tion of the actual sexual organs. Now what Tutt has said here is 
true in many, if not in most, cases of gynandromorphism that I have 
had the pleasure of examining; but it does not seem to be true in 
certain cxses, and if collectors were more ready to sacrifice their cases 
of gynandromorphous insects on the altar of the microscope, would 
possibly prove false in a very fair percentage. May I refer to a case 
of gynandromorphism about which I wrote in these pages (vol. xxvi., 
p. 242-8, vol. xxvii., p. 155 and plate vi., fig. 5a), the case of an 
Epinephele lycaon. Now the wings and wing structure in this butterfly 
