174 MR. A. G. BUTLER ON INDIAN LEPIDOPTERA [Apr. 3, 



tint, and the pattern where I am able to compare it, agrees, as also 

 the structure. 



TiNEITES. 



147. TeGNA HYBL^EliLA. 



Tegna hyblceella, Walker, Cat. Lep. Het., Suppl. v. p. 1810 

 (1866). 



"Mhow, September 1881 ; scarce."— C. /8. 



148. Gelechia, sp. 



A black species, apparently nearest to G. infernalis ot Europe, 

 but too much broken (only half a palpus remains, and no antennae) 

 to be described. 



"Mhow, October 1881 ; common for about a week." — C. S. 



It is a pity that only a single injured example was sent ; without 

 palpi, it is not even certain that the species is a Gelechia, though I 

 have very little doubt that it is. 



149. Depressaria swinhoei, sp. u. 



Allied to I), culcitella. Stramineous ; the primaries with two 

 black dots placed longitudinally and slightly obliquely, in and at the 

 end of the discoidal cell ; a curved marginal series of dusky dots ; 

 secondaries with the basi-abdominal half whitish ; wings below with- 

 out markings. Expanse of wings 1 (i mm. 



Mhow, October 1881. 



150. Ypsolophus robustus, sp. n. 



Thorax and primaries pale ash-grey, the latter with two small 

 elongated blackish spots, one in the cell before the middle of the wing, 

 the other below the extremity of the cell ; a marginal series of dusky 

 dots ; secondaries and abdomen whitish ; the long tapering fringe 

 of the palpi black, tipped in front with white : primaries below 

 fuliginous brown ; secondaries and body white. Expanse of wings 

 17 mm. 



"Kurrachee, September 1879; one taken there in each of the 

 months of February, September, November, and December." — C. S. 



The remainder of the Microlepidoptera are too much broken to 

 be determined. 



In a collection, the account of which I published last year (Ann. 

 & Mag. Nat. Hist. ser. 5, vol. ix. pp. 206-211), I indicated an im- 

 perfect female Hipparchia as possibly //. anthe ; the male of Epi- 

 nephele roxane was in the same collection. Major Marshall (P. Z. S. 

 1882) states that the "specimens " identified as H. anthe have been 

 sent to him by Col. Swinhoe and prove to be females of Epinephele 

 roxane. As I know both sexes of the latter, and am not likely to 

 regard a rubbed specimen as belonging to another genus, it is clear 

 that Col. Swinhoe, through press of official business, has made a 

 mistake in labelling his specimens ; indeed this is evident from the 

 fact that more than one specimen was sent to Major Marshall. 



