LAMPIDES BOETICUS. 375 



evidence relating to some of the examples is only too evident. The 

 records to date are : — 



1. — Near Christchurch ; flying about everlasting-pea; August 4th, 1859, taken 

 by Latour (Stainton, " Ent. Wk. Int.," viii., p. 82; Newm., "Brit. Butts.," 

 p. 119 ; " Entom.," ix., p. 92) (where "Latour" is mis-spelt " Latimer"). 



2. — At Brighton; near the chalk downs; August 5th, 1859, taken by McArthur 

 (Newm., "Zool.," 1859, p. 6732; Sta., "Ent. Ann.," 1859, pp. 126-127). 

 [Newman mis-states (Brit. Butts., p. 119) that McArthur captured "two" 

 specimens, and repeated the inaccuracy (Ent., ix., p. 92) ; McArthur himself 

 corrected the error (Ent., ix., p. 132), stating that he only took "one." South, 

 however, repeated the error (Butt*., p. 155).] 



3.— Near Freshwater ; . August 23rd, 1878 (Snell, Entom., xii., p. 83). [It is 

 curious to observe that, although Mr. Snell recorded this example on February 

 10th, 1879, he could not then remember whether he or his brother captured it. 

 Also that two of the very few Swiss records outside the Rhone Valley are made by 

 Mr. Snell, August and October, 1879 (see Wheeler, Butts. Sroitzerland, p. 45). 

 South wrongly gives (op. cit., p. 155) the date of the reputed British capture as 

 1879.] 



4. — At Andover, Hants ; captured by Elton, Trinity Coll., Cambridge. No other 

 data. Produced 12s. at sale of the " Briggs' coll." (Ent. Rec, viii., p. 272). 

 Further noted as a <? , underside, on large common pin, fair condition, "Dale" 

 coll. (J. J. Walker, Ent. Mo. Mag., xliii., p. 132). [No hint of the existence of 

 this specimen is to be found until offered for sale in 1896. The date and place of 

 its capture are alike unknown and unrecorded.] 



5. — J in fair condition badly set. Now in the Hope Museum. Label in Dale's 

 handwriting — "From J. G. Ross, 1882, who had it from a boy who took it in 

 Devonshire." " Dartmouth (C.W.D.)." [Information, therefore, third hand. 

 If Ross was satisfied with " Devonshire " one wonders why Dale localises it some 

 years later to " Dartmouth."] 



6. — Specimen reputed to have been purchased of a "local collector on the 

 Cotswold Hills " by a friend of the recorder (McCaul), the friend having " long 

 since lost sight of the collector " ; from this friend McCaul obtained it for " the 

 fine collection of A. F. Sheppard, of Lee" (Ent., xii., p. 155). [Sheppard, of 

 course, was a well-known dealer in the " seventies." On this evidence, McCaul 

 " entertains no doubt that it is a really British specimen."] 



7. — At Aldwick, near Bognor ; a specimen at rest on a geranium in a garden ; 

 captured September 12th, 1880 (Durham, Entom., xiii., p. 240). 



8. — Near Bournemouth ; captured by Miss Staples. October 2nd, 1882 

 (McRae, Entom., xv., p. 260). 



9. — At Heswall, Cheshire, in 1886 or 1887, by a boy named McFee (Newstead, 

 Ent. Bee, iii., pp. 271, 313). [This example was not recorded until 1892. One 

 would like to believe that stray immigrants reached Cheshire, but it appears to be 

 well out of the latitude of the immigrant range of the species.] 



10. — At Brighton, on the downs; captured July, 1890 (Smith, Entom., xxvi., 

 p. 361). [In rather battered condition ; supposed to be Polyommatus icarus ; not 

 recognised for a year, etc. (Smith).] 



11. — Near Beckley, Sussex ; in a rough meadow near hop grounds ; captured 

 August 28th, 1893 (Warner, Entom., xxvi., p. 301). 



12. — <? . Between Dartford and Erith ; on the railway-embankment, settled 

 on a flower; captured September 7th, 1893 (Sabine, Entom., xxvi., pp. 300-301). 



13. — At Hastings; captured in the third week in September, 1893, by a boy 

 about ten years of age (Bath, Entom., xxvi., p. 827). 



14. — In a room at Wood Street, Woolwich ; supposed to have entered the room 

 through "French" windows; September 29th, 1898 (Brooks, Ent. Rec, xi., p. 79). 

 [One would like to know how this butterfly got into a room in Woolwich through 

 "French" windows. Whether meant for a joke or not we should prefer to 

 consider it one. It was not observed anywhere in Europe north of its most 

 southern habitats this year.] 



15. — c? . At Winchester, recently emerged ; captured September 1st, 1899, 

 sitting on a window (Shepheard-Walwyn, Entom., xxxii., p. 281 ; xxxv., p. 221). 

 [This is the first suggestion of a "recently emerged" specimen being found in 

 Britain. What is the connection between this species and windows ? ] 



16. — At Deal ; captured September 16th, 1899, sitting on a window (Parry, 

 Entom., xxxii., p. 281). [This and the preceding example were recorded in the 



