24G 



[March 



at intervals all tlie summer, and seems to have three broods. In this, 

 however, I was partially disappointed, as pressure of business prevented 

 my working more than the first brood to any purpose. The first speci- 

 men occurred on May 20th, and was followed by occasional specimens 

 till May 30th, when I took two much worn, and after which they dis- 

 appeared. Three days afterwards, however, in a damp portion of the 

 same wood, I took a lovely specimen of the true suhroseana, and in the 

 next fortnight half-a-dozen more. This was most fortunate, as I had 

 never taken it before, and, from meeting with the two species so nearly 

 together, was able to compare them when fresh, and see how very 

 distinct they really are. 



As far as my experience goes, both are truly wood frequenting 

 species. Although heath is most abundant around Haslemere, I never 

 saw a specimen of Heydeniana among or near it, and cannot, therefore, 

 confirm Mr. McLachlan's habitat for this species. 



With reference to the localities given in the Manual for sulroseana 

 (and in Wilkinson's Tortrices they are similar), "Ambleside and near 

 Airthrey, in healthy places," when we began carefully to examine these 

 species, Mr. Stainton, with his invariable kindness, sent me one of his 

 Scotch specimens. This I found to be totally distinct from siibroseana, 

 but of precisely the /om of ciliella, but much yellower and more sufi'used. 

 By the kindness of Dr. White, of Perth, and Mr. Chapman, of Glasgow, 

 I have since received specimens taken near Kirkwall and at Dunoon, 

 and these specimens form connecting links from this to the ordinary 

 English type of ciliella, aud prove conclusively, I think, that these 

 localities pertain properly to that species. 



Norwich, February, 1869. 



Scydmariius fimetarius taken near Newcastle-on-Tyne. — I take here, by no means 

 unfrequently, and always on boards lying on the edges of hot-beds, an insect which 

 accords with the description, by Thomson, Skand. Col. iv, 89, of his Euconnusfime- 

 ta'i-ius, and which has been recently added to the British list by Mr. G. R. Crotch, 

 but rather doubtingly admitted by Mr. Rye in this year's " Annual." It appears, 

 however, to be a good species, and, in addition to the characters pointed out by 

 Thomson, has the elytra proportionately narrower than its near ally, hirlicolli$i of 

 which a Norfolk example has been kindly furnished mo by Dr. Sharp. — Thos. Jno. 

 Bold, Long Benton, Newcastle-on-Tyne, January 26th, 1869. 



[^Ir. Bold refers, I presume, to my remarks with regard to Thomson's apparent 

 inconsistency in attnbuting so much specific value to the very moderate difference 

 in habitat between S. hirticolUs and S.fiinctoHus, whilst disregarding a more marked 

 difference in habitat in the case of Bemhidium ceiieum and biguttatum. In the 



