74 



Most of the larger Sphingidge are very irregular in their 

 appearance ; Acerontia atropos, L., for instance, although 

 occurring here almost every year, is only occasionally really 

 common, and then generally in the larval rather than in the 

 perfect stage ; while Sphinx convolvuli, L., although seldom 

 found as larvae, is from time to time quite common as ima- 

 gines, and on such occasions its range generally extends over 

 the greater part of these islands; it has been taken as. far 

 north as Aberdeen; and at Sciliy in abundance. But perhaps 

 there is no species more intermittent in its appearance than 

 Deilephila gain, Schiff. ; thus we find that in 1855 larvae were 

 fairly common in suitable situations on the south coast, and 

 were also found some distance inland, some few being found 

 even as far north as Perthshire. In 1856, 7, and 8, small 

 numbers were found, and in 1859 ^^ ^^^ quite common again ; 

 but in the two following years it was not to be found, although 

 we know that it was diligently sought in favourite localities, 

 and with the exception of three larvas at Deal in 1862, a 

 solitary imago in 1863, one larva at Folkestone in 1864, and 

 another moth at Deal in 1868, we hear nothing of it until 



1870, when imagines were taken far and wide during August, 

 and the larvas by hundreds in September and October. In 



1 87 1, after an exceptionally mild winter, a few larvae were 

 found on the south coast ; and then for the next sixteen years 

 they are conspicuous by their absence, indeed the only records 

 we have of the species at all throughout the whole of this 

 period are of single imagines taken near Norwich in 1875 and 

 6 respectively; but in 1888 we were again inundated with 

 records of the imago from England, Scotland, and Ireland, 

 and larvae were subsequently found in hundreds. 1889, 

 however, brought but two records of imagines, namely two 

 taken in Cheshire, and one in Yorkshire, and a couple of larvae 

 at Dover and Wallasey respectively.^ The abundance of 1888 

 will be so fresh in your minds that it is quite unnecessary 

 that I should here recapitulate the history of the captures 

 and subsequent finding of the larvae ; but there are two or 

 three points in regard to it that I should like to say a word 

 upon in passing. In the first place, we have no evidence that 

 would lead us to suppose that the insect could remain quies- 

 cent in any of its stages for so long a time as would be 

 necessary to connect the abundance of 1888 with that of 1870, 

 nor can we suppose that it has occurred in such numbers 

 during that time as would be necessary to perpetuate the 



1 I find no record of the occurrence of this species in either stage in 1S90 or 

 1891.— R.A. 



