T280 Insects. 



Note on the Rate of Speed of Flight of a Butterfly. — October 12th, at 5 p.iii., 

 on board the " Pera," some twelve miles east of Cape Bon, Africa, when silting 

 in the after part, I observed a painted lady butterfly. It came from the sea and 

 readily overtook the steamer, which was then making ten and a half knots an hour. 

 I observed the insect for about twenty-five minutes, during which it made three dis- 

 tinct flights from the ship, and each lime (as I thought) I saw it alight on the waves. 

 The wind was nearly ahead and tolerably strong, and the log was heaved at the time, 

 by which I determined the rate of the vessel. As I have never in my entomological 

 reading met with any one actually testing the rate of speed of the flight of a butter- 

 fly, I deem this note worthy of preservation in the pages of the ' Zoologist/ I may 

 add that the inject alighted and again flew away, apparently quite untired — soaring 

 high and flying at times directly aft.— C. Home ; " Pera^" October J 2, 1860. 



Critical Notes on and Diagnostic Characters of the New British 

 Sesia of 1860. By J. J. Reading, Esq. 



Lately I have been engaged in trying to make out this species, 

 and believe I have succeeded satisfactorily in identifying it. Mr. 

 Newman, in the 'Zoologist' (Zool. 7153), claims the honour of first 

 introducing this species to the British list, and refers the reader to his 

 " Monographia iEgeriarum Angliae " (Entomological Magazine, vol. i. 

 p, 79). Mr. Newman considers this insect to accord with Trochilium 

 Muscaeformis of Esper. In this I consider him correct, but the de- 

 scription in his Monograph is so short, and some portions of it 

 so unlike the insect, that I need not say that the description is 

 insufficient to identify the species, but Mr. Newman, in the ' Zoologist ' 

 (Zool. 7153) amends his description of the monograph : this amend- 

 ment is more faulty than the first description, and I feel certain 

 that Mr. Newman will not take it amiss if I venture to point 

 out the mistakes: — "Antennae fuscae, apice nigricantes, medio pal- 

 lidiores." ( Vide Monograph). The foregoing description certainly does 

 not accord with the characters of Esper's Muscaeformis, nor indeed 

 with the best description that has hitherto appeared of Sesia Philan- 

 thiformis, viz.^ that by Dr. Staudiger, in his ' Berlin Species.' It 

 runs thus : " Antennae articulis 45 compositae, caeruleo-nigrae, articulo 

 basali infi-a flavescente in ^ apicem versus supra squamis paucis 

 albis, maculum conform antibus mixtus, in ^ dentibus aculio in- 

 structis." It is plain these two descriptions do not refer to the same 

 insect. 



Next to be considered are Mr. Newman's amending remarks on this 



