112 THE ENTOMOLOGIST S RECORD. 
world. Attempts to communicate with home by telegraph were destined 
to be failures, and worse than all money was not circulating and no 
change could be obtained. Some 200 or 300 visitors remained in St.. 
Moritz, many of them each day henceforth endeavouring, but in vain, 
to get change at one or more of the banks when or if they opened for 
one short hour. No one, not even the wealthy Americans, could get. 
the necessary “coppers”? to use the tram between the Bad and Dorf,. 
which henceforth usually ran empty. 
Pieris brassicae was to-day out in abundance, and all the tall thistles: 
on the steep banks along the upper Campfer road were well tenanted 
by them with a few P.rapae only. Colias phicomone were well out, and 
one could now get a few CU. palaeno in the Alpina, where I rarely went for 
at least three weeks without seeing it, although netting a specimen was 
another thing. A nice white form of the female fell to my net this 
day, and shortly afterwards a single specimen of Brenthis euphrosyne,. 
somewhat small. Agriades thetis was met with, but I have never come 
across this species at all common in any part of the Alps. Adscita 
geryon var. chrysocephala was now very common. One of the Brenthis- 
pales taken had a very red underside hindwing, but although somewhat 
suffused it could not be called isis. A species | was always looking for 
was Pieris napi, but not a single specimen was seen during the whole: 
of my stay. A specimen of Nemeophila plantaginis was a very nice 
form. The black area was much extended on all the wings and the 
usually yellow areas were almost pure white and much restricted, that 
on the hindwing consisting of only the large zigzag submarginal band. 
There was just a slight suggestion of yellow on the costa of the fore- 
wings. 
it the afternoon I strolled down to the little lake near Campfer, 
end after some time secured a few more of the arsilache form of B. 
pales. Practically nothing else was seen again on this visit, except: 
that several species of dragonfly were careering wildly over the lake. 
(Lo be continued.) 
The Disappearing Pararge aegeria. 
Rev. C. R. N. BURROWS, M.A., F.E.S. 
I have been much interested in the note in the issue for March of 
this year, on the disappearance of Pararge aegeria from the London 
district. I have somewhat carefully collected such records as are ayail- 
able to me, and find that not only in the London district, but in other 
localities also, the growing scarcity of this species has been noticed for 
many years. Harwood (Hntom., 1874, p. 129) writes of the Colchester 
district, “‘ This species is quite rare in this part of the country now,” 
and questions whether the general impression conveyed by books of that 
era, that the insect was ‘‘common everywhere’’ was ever justified. In 
the same magazine (1875, p. 20) Clifford tells the same story, mention- 
ing, it would appear, Middlesex, Kent, and Hertfordshire. He says: 
that even at its best, ‘“‘in point of plentifulness it would be far below 
such a species as A. euphrosyne.” 
Jenner Weir (Hntom., 1887, p. 71), in a paper, ‘‘ Notes on the com- 
parative rarity of Rhopalocera once common in the neighbourhood of 
Lewes,” says, ‘‘ This species is yearly becoming rarer. Mr. Stanton 
Hillman, of Lewes, informs me that he has not seen one for years. Im 
er 
