266 
u 
^'1 subsequent authors have entirely mistaken the Phnjganea hicaudata of Linr 
^^will be perfectly evident to any entomologist who will take the tronbl, 
examme the Linneean specimen, now in possession of the Linn^an Socle 
Notwithstanding this assertion, Pictet in his " Perlides" did not feel justifie, 
considenng the matter as settled, and named the species " lipunctata." I 1 
exammed the Linnaean Cabinet, and find therein no insect that has any claia. fc 
considered a type of bicaudata. It is true there is a label " Mcaudaiar but in 
handwritmg of Sir J. E. Smith and not of Linne. It fact, it is one of the nunie, 
cases m which the insects added by Sa.ith. and labelled by him, have been mista 
for actual Linn^an types. The insect is very old. and I will not affirm it is hipunot, 
but by the side of it (without labels) stand an imago and larva certainly of i 
speces. Hence the nan.e bicaudata remains as unsettled as ever, and will prob. 
smk quietly into oblivion, unless some Swedish entomologist can succeed in 
instating it. I may add, that bicaudata of Zetterstedt (Ins. Lapp , 1058^ Liu, 
tellow-countryman, is evidently Dictyopteryv microcephala, Pictet. 
And now, as to maxima of Scopoli (Ent. Carn., p. 269 ; 1763), a name that 
also been variously applied. Herr Brauer in his " Neuroptera Wriaca" give, 
as a synonym of abdcninaUs, Burm., without according to it the right of prior 
thus indicating doubt. Scopoli himself cites bicaudata of Linne, and yet applie, 
new name. That ma.ima is really the species described by Pictet as bipuncto 
appears to me most probable from his description of the imago, and absolut 
certain from that of the larva, for he had bred the species. I have no hesitati 
therefore in adopting Scopoli's name. The species occurs in all the moun a a 
regions of central Europe, and surpasses any other in size. As Britlh I haTe 
present seen only a Leachian example in the British Museum, labelled « Dartmoo 
and some smaller and somewhat doubtful specimens in thL Entomolo^ rS 
CO lection, probably taken by Mr. Newman at Leominster, but think it proba 
that other examples are extant, and that the insect referred to by Curtis as 
9rand^s is the same species.-R. McL.chlan, Lewisham, January Stk, 1870 
Entomological Society of Newcastle-on.Tyne.-We are reauested fn ..f .,, 
on the 1st of February, a meeting was heldit Mr. Johns rBean^;^^^^^^^^^ 
^he purpose of establishing a Society in that town, when abou't 20 MembL oin 
s^ ts chTeflr;^ ^-Hamilton, of ,3, Union Street. We believe the Society " 
Itefnf V " ^'^ "r "'°^ °'"^°" "^^ beginners, and they would i 
g.ateful for larvae or eggs of Lepidoptera. From the best source, we hear that 
^:::^^:f-'''^-^ ^-^-y^-^--- .graduan; spring;:" 
M. M SchioJte, of Copenhagen, and von Siebold, of Munich, were elects 
Honorary Members, and Messrs. G. T. Porritt, of Huddersfield, and B Tlu as 
looting, Subscribers. ' 
Mr. Hunter exhibited a Plusia from the New Forest, which he thouoht migh 
be Pm, recently introduced into our lists (interrogationis ? Eds ) 
sentt:hrnfb'y^n'',r 'f "^"^^ '''' °^ ^'^ ^^^^^^ o^ Tanacetum .^agar, 
sent to h m by Mr. D'Orville, of Exeter. This gall consisted of hypertrophied disca 
florets, which were raised far above the level of the others. 
