i«92.] THE BRITISH NATURALIST. 



species (a noii- British one) to the Linnaean name iesseradactyla, it 

 becomes clear that Haworth's tesseradactyla (a British one occurring 

 near London) is not the Linnaean one. Haworth places the species 

 hct\\ieen jmiiciidactyla and didactyla (.^ distans, according to my deter- 

 mination), and the only British species which has occurred continuously 

 near London, wlhch is " asliy-grey " or clouded with " ashy-grey,'' is 

 lithodactyla, a species which our early collectors must liave known, 

 and taking tlie few British species now known, that Haworth does 

 not distinctly describe, I think it is impossible to apply tlie description 

 to any other British species. Referring to the Continental tcsseradactyla 

 again, 1 dare say the Continental lepidopterists have a species, 

 distinct from, but closely aliied to gonodactyla ; but, I have some 

 specimens of Continental tesse/ddactyla , wliich are entirely indistinguish- 

 able from some large gonodactyla I have bred. At any rate, I feel no 

 doubt that tlie tesseradactyla of Haworth is the lithodactyla of our 

 present lists. This makes no difference to our nomenclature as 

 tesseradactyla, Linn., is prior, and therefore tesseradactyla, Haw, simply 

 becomes synonymous with lithodactyla, Treitschke. There is still 

 another point — VVocke makes isodactyla, ZeW, synonymous with 

 similidactyla , Dale. But Dale's description of similidactyla is a first- 

 class one of lithodactyla, and has nothing in common with isodactyla, 

 Zell. To make matters more mixed, Dr. Staudinger, m iiis trade list, 

 has sometiiT.es for sale y^d. lithodactyla, Plat, similidactyla and Plat, 

 isodactyla, so that Dr. Staudinger's idea of these species is rather 

 muddled, and it would be apparently very unsafe to place the 

 shghtest reliance in the correctness of his nomenclature of any of 

 these more difficult species which he may obtain " (" Entomologist's 

 Record," etc., Vol. L, pp. 91-92). Wocke in the "Catalog" has 

 muddled the British references to this species most thoroughly. Mr, 

 Meyrick, in his new arrangement, places th.e two synonymns 

 lithodactyla and sunilidactyl.i in different genera. There is some 

 excuse for Continental entomologists not being thoroughly conversant 

 with our British literature and synonymy, but one hardly expects a 

 British lepidopterist to show his ignorance of our fauna by copying 

 the errors of Continental authors. Besides, 1 had before pointed out 

 the error (in the " Entomologists Record," Vol. I., pp. 91-91,) in the 

 extract previously quoted. This species lias the anterior wings 

 divided into two lobes, both of which are pointed and slightly hooked, they 

 are of a pale grey coloration, more or less tinged with brownish scales, 

 and sometimes )iaving a shght purplish liue. The costa is shaded 

 with darker as far as the centre, just beyond whicli is a longitiuhnal 

 black costal spot ; from this spot a pale lunular mark runs transversely 

 to the centre of the wing ; another hmular mark joins tlie former, and 



252 



