1^00.] Ill 



tliey lay quite still in the net. I have given a rough sketch of a fore-wing, which 

 perhaps will give you an idea of what it is like. — Matthevst Henderson, Minories, 

 Jesmond Road, Newcastle-on-Tyiie : March \Oth, 1890. 



[This communication was in the form of a letter to Mr. Mitchell {ef. ante p. 90). 

 There can be no doubt of the identity according to the sketch sent. Gibside is in 

 Nortli Durham on the Derwent, a tributary of the Tyne. I find there is some slight 

 popular misapprehension as to the nature of this insect, probably because most of 

 the British specimens have been captured near water. Suffice it to say that it has 

 nothing whatever to do with " Caddis-flies," but belongs to the " Lace-wing " division 

 of Neuropterous insects, and tliat the larva feeds on Aphides, of which it destroys 

 large numbers. — R. McLachlan]. 



The distribution of Bombus Smithianus, White. — This Bomhus is generally 

 considered a northern species. Mr. Saunders, in his " Synopsis," says of it, " This 

 beautiful species has at present only been found in the extreme north, and is recorded 

 from Shetland and the Hebrides." In the Entomologist for 1879 (p. 54), however, 

 Mr. J. B. Bridgman records both male and female as having been taken at Tresco 

 (Scilly Isles) ! Amongst a few Hymenoptera caught this year and sent for my in- 

 spection by Mr. O. H. Latter, of Keble College, Oxford, was a single worker of this 

 same species. This, he informs me, he caught about a mile and a half north-west 

 of Dover " last August," and that he knows of another specimen caught also in 

 Kent during the past summer. 



The distribution of the species is certainly remarkable ; it would seem probable 

 that it once occupied a much wider range, but is now in a decadent state. Its oc- 

 currence in the extreme Northern and Southern Islands above mentioned points to 

 such a conclusion. It must be vei-y scarce in the South of England generally, as it 

 is so distinct that it would not be likely to be overlooked for one of the commoner 

 brown species, B. muscorum or B. cognatus. — R. C. L. Perkins, Sopworth Rectory, 

 Chippenham: February 2.hth,\^'d^. . 



Date of Zeller^s Crambidce. — Prof. Fernald has lately published liis reasons for 

 believing that Zeller's Monograph of the CrambidoB is earlier than the 27th Part of 

 Walker's British Museum Catalogue, whicli he has ascertained to have been pub- 

 published April 18th, 1863. He finds Zeller's papers to have been issued in con- 

 junction with a School Report, on the title page of which is an invitation to friends 

 of the school generally to attend a public function on March 30th, 1863. I submit 

 that this reason is not conclusive in the absence of more direct evidence ; it shows 

 doubtless, that it was intended to issue the Report in question by that date, but it 

 does not follow that the intention was successfully carried out. 



Whilst lately visiting my friend, Mr. Gr. T. Baker, I happened to mention this ; 

 and he immediately produced a copy of Zeller's Monograph, on the title page of 

 which was written in Zeller's own hand-writing, " ec?. t7M?y, 1863." It appears to 

 me that this is direct and unmistakeable evidence which outweighs the probabilities 

 involved in Prof. Fernald's argument. I have communicated this fact to him, but 

 meanwhile I think it ought to be placed at once on record. — E. Meyeick, Rarasbury, 

 Hungerford : Febr^iary \Uh, 1890. 



