206 THE ENTOMOLOGIST ’S RECORD. 
around my lamp, were both numerous and varied, so much so that last 
week, not feeling much inclined to court Morpheus, I spent two nights 
with a net at my hand, and captured everything that was indiscreet 
enough to fly in and investigate my electricity, slaying the captives 
with my fingers or with the nicotine from my most faithful friend, and 
setting them at once on a few boards that I had put together in about 
as many minutes—for I brought nothing entomological with me from 
Stiifa save a net anda few pins. Unfortunately this has necessitated 
my turning out of the net and the window everything that was too 
small and delicate for my rough boards and rougher fingers. Still the 
results of my two “nuits blanches”’ are, I believe, interesting enough 
to be put into cold print—cold indeed if it were a question of describing 
the lazy flight of Urapteryx sambucaria, the mad rush of the different 
Ayrotis and Plusia, the diffident approach of the Spilosome, the blindly 
adoring worship-of-lght of Thaumatopoea, the gentle wooing of the lamp 
by the small Geometrids and Microlepidoptera, and the frightened, 
bullying bluster of the Sphingids. My two nights’ work were sepa- 
rated by four days, in order to enable me to empty the boards and start 
afresh ; the weather was stormy (July 2nd and 7th). I sat, read and 
set from 9 p.m. till nearly dawn, and there are before me 109 moths as 
spoils of the chase. On six of these moths I dare not pronounce my- 
self, for I have neither books nor drawers of insects here for reference, 
but the 103 remaining ones belong to no fewer than forty-one species 
—and I think that the six others are probably Agrotis trua, but then 
again they may be A. segetum, or . . ., . All are fresh, for I 
threw the few disreputable specimens out of the window, but these all 
belonged to species that were already on my boards. 
Here is a list of the spoils, the order is not guaranteed as being 
strictly scientific!  AHylotcus (Sphinx) pinastri (2, beautiful silver- 
grey moths), Sphinx ligustrt (2), Stauropus fayi (2), Pterostoma palpma 
(2), Phalera bucephela (2), Huproctis chrysorrhoea (1), Porthesia similis 
(1), Malacosoma neustria (2), Thaumatopoea pinivora (1) (there are two 
of them nestling on my lamp asl write), Agrotis robusta (1), A. pronuba 
(1), A. signum (2), A. segetum (4), A. triangulum (8), A. ocellina (2), 
Mamestra oleracea (1), Dianthoecia compta (1), Calymnia pyralina (2), 
Plusia chrysitis (24), P. pulchrina (1, a beauty), P. festucae (1, chipped 
wing), Laspeyria flevula (1), Thyatira batis (1), Henithea strigata (1), 
Acidalia nemoraria (4), A. aversata (1), A. congruata (1), Lomasptlis 
margtnata (4), Urapteryx sambucaria (6), Amphidasis betularia (2, very 
white), Cleora lichenaria (1), B. consortaria (2), Phasiana clathrata (2), 
Phibalapteryx aquata (1), Huchelia jacobaeae (1), Spilosoma lubrictpeda 
(10), S. menthastri (2, going over), Hurrhypara urticata (2), Myelois 
cribrella (1), Hyponomeuta malinellus (3), ete.—P. A. H. Muscname, 
Chateau de Lancy, Genéve. July 9th, 1916. 
PSELNOPHORUS BRACHYDACTYLA IN GLOUCESTERSHIRE.— When collect- 
ing with Mr. W. L. Davis in a remote valley of the Cotswolds, near 
Stroud, I was delighted at capturing a specimen of the above rare 
plume. A subsequent visit produced two more specimens each. We 
were evidently late (July 15th) for the insect as it was only in fair con- 
dition. A good many years ago it was reported to have been taken in 
a locality not very far from the above by Messrs. Farn and Sidgwick. 
Our present capture confirms theirs, upon which, for some reason, 
doubt appears to have been caste ‘I'he suggested food plant (Lactuca 
