i8 



THE BRITISH NATURALIST. [January 



from which the species was named, were very different, having narrower 

 and more pointed wings." May I be permitted to say that the above 

 statement is misleading and that the words I have itaHcised would 

 never have been uttered by anyone who was acquainted with the 

 actual facts of the case. 



Those who desire to know where the insect came from to which 

 Treitschke gave the name of coiiflua will obtain the information by 

 referring to Duponchel' VII., p. 140, where it is stated that the insect 

 in question was found in Hungary, in 1824, sent by Treitschke to 

 Boisduval under the manuscript name of Apamea conflua. At the time 

 the insect came under the notice of Duponchel it had not been 

 described or figured by any author, so adopting Treitschke's MS. name 

 he figured and described it in the seventh volume, a continuation of 

 Godart's " Histoire Naturelle des Lepidopteres," etc. (1827), which 

 was published in the same year that Treitschke issued the sixth 

 volume of his " Schmetterlinge von Europa," containing the description 

 of his '^Apamea'' conflua, which he says occurred on the Riesengebirge 

 (the locality referred to by Staudinger, "Stett. Entom. Zeit., 1857, p. 

 236). It was not until about 1857, when Dr. Staudinger returned 

 from his collecting tour in North Europe, that Iceland examples of 

 conflua found their way generally into collections. The Shetland 

 form of conflua has been named var. thnlei. 



In conclusion, I may add that I regret that the action of the City 

 of London Entomological and Natural History Society, in the matter 

 of my communication with reference to the Luperina testacea, var. 

 nickerlii question last January, obliges me to depart somewhat from 

 the course usually taken in this kind of controversy. — Richard South, 

 12 Abbey Gardens, St. John's Wood, N.W., December i6th, 1891. 



The Shape of the Wing in Noctua festiva. — The above note is 

 conclusive enough as to the locality of the original conflua, but it does 

 not deal with the shape of the wings which was the point relied on at 

 the meeting of the City of London Entomological and Natural History 

 Society. Whilst I consider it very unscientific to draw positive 

 conclusions from partial data, the little knowledge I have respecting 

 this insect leads me to a very different result to that at which my 

 friend Mr. Tutt has arrived. I do not know what he means by "a 

 good and distinct sub-species," but in my opinion the Shetland insect 

 is so connected by intermediate forms with the ordinary festiva that no 

 line can be drawn between them. Speaking from my own specimens 

 only, and witliout any reference to what may have been written on 

 the subject, I find that festiva in the South of England always has 

 broad wings. As we get further North, or on to elevated land there 



