72 



THE BRITISH NATURALIST. [April 



evident other entomologists saw there was considerable doubt, and 

 were by no means satisfied by the mere assertion of one man, made 

 on the superficial resemblance in the markings or colour of the wings 

 of a small number of specimens. Then commenced the discussion, 

 and first one and then another argument was held forth as bearing on 

 the subject. Mr. Robson in this Magazine after commenting on the 

 resemblance of other species, says these two species never resemble 

 each other, and brings forward a strong argument ; he states they 

 assume the perfect state at different times of the year, and their flight 

 is so different that could we see them together on the wing that alone 

 would be sufficient to distinguish them. That they appear at a differ- 

 ent time is not a safe guide. I have myself taken both off treacle in 

 abundance at the same time, but on the other hand fasciuncula flies very 

 abundantly at Bidston Marsh in June and July, and you may capture 

 any number, flying low, close to the ground, almost like the swifts, 

 without capturing a single strigilis, but on the same evening on the 

 sandhills adjoining, you may take any number of strigilis at treacle. 

 Mr. Tutt, on the 15th of the same month, shows in the " Record" 

 liow he arrived at the conclusion of the identity of the species. In 

 the following month, Mr. South in the " Entomologist" endeavoured 

 to prove that there are neither one, nor two, but three species ! ! Mr. 

 South's classification is mainly based on the crests or tufts of hair on 

 tlie body, the third species apparently being intermediate, as it 

 partakes of the fasciitncula colour, but has the strigilis -like dorsal tufts 

 On the body. This, at a meeting of the South London Entomological 

 Society, seemed to be overthrow^n, for Mr. Tutt, according to the 

 " Record," pointed out that the dorsal tufts were equally well developed 

 in both species, and produced specimens to show this. Then cam.e a 

 mo A interesting point, Mr. Fenn expressed an opinion that all the 

 Armagh specimens were dark fasciuncula, Mr. i^outh that two were 

 sirigiiis, and the rest fitsciuncula, other members considered that three 

 of the specimens were referable to strigilis, the others to fasciuncula. 

 Then Mr. Tutt agreed with all these different views, because he stated 

 the questionable varieties might with equal propriety be called either 

 one or the other, so that at the end nothing was decided. 



While this controversy was going on I was surprised to find that 

 r.o one suggested the examination of the genital armature, possibly 

 for want of thought, and more probably for fear of spoiling a fine 



