] 16 
THE ENTOMOLOGIST’S WEEKLY INTELLIGENCER. 
coronata ! this was some time during the 
second week in this month: all the 
others are still dormant in the pupa state. 
The larvte were of a dirty reddish white, 
with rust-coloured markings, the same as 
Mr. Harpur Crewe has described in his 
Monogram on the Larva of the Genus 
Eupithecia, in the ‘Annual’ for 1861. 
I may add to this that Eupithecia 
Minutata has been making its ap- 
pearance from the pupa state since the 
end of September up to the present 
time: these are bred from larvae taken 
on Hayes Common last August twelve- 
month! — Rf.v. Heney Burney, Waven- 
don Rectory ; Dec. 31, I860. 
EXCHANGE. 
Acronycta Alni. — I have a specimen 
of this rare species to dispose of, and 
shall be glad to receive offers from any 
gentleman who is in want of it. I am 
most in want of Sphinges or Clear-wings. 
Those who do not hear from me in six 
or eight days may conclude that their 
offers are not accepted. — H. Thomson, 
4, Eastern Terrace , Heicorlh Moor , near 
York. 
Exchange. — I shall be glad to ex- 
change M. Cinxia, A. Gulathea , H. Se- 
me le and P. Corydon for any of the 
Clear-wing Moths. — Alfred Owen, 
Spring Cottage , Venluor, Isle of Wight,; 
December 30, 1860. 
Exchange. — I have very fine speci- 
mens of T. W-album , T. Cralagi, X. 
Scolopacina and M. Miniata, and shall 
he glad to receive offers of good local 
insects in exchange for them. My wants 
are among the Noctua: principally. — 
Joseph Wragg, 7, Spring Gardens, 
Doncaster ; January 1, 1861. 
Exchange. — I have good specimens of 
the following, numbered as in the Ap- 
pendix to the ‘Manual’: — Nos. 10, 12, 
19, 33, 137, 294, 684. My principal 
wants are butterflies, Hawks and Bom- 
byces. Please write before sending 
boxes. — Thomas Wood, 39, Bondgale, 
Darlington ; January 7, 1861. 
DIANTHCECIA CAPSOPHILA. 
To the Editor of the * Intelligencer 
Sir, — On seeing Mr. Bircball’s letter 
of the 22nd of December (Int. No. 222), 
on tbe subject of Mr. Gregson’s claim to 
the discovery of Dianthcecia Capsophila, 
I notice a slight discrepancy between it 
and my note in the ‘Zoologist’ for this 
month, which I hasten to rectify. 
Having distributed specimens of that 
insect to several entomologists in London 
and elsewhere, I thought it best to send 
a short note to the ‘ Zoologist,’ an- 
nouncing the capture. 
In that note I stated rather too posi- 
tively the name of the species. Mr. 
Doubleday gave it as his opinion that 
the insect was Dianthcecia Capsophila, 
but would not say certainly that it was 
so, as there is not a specimen in the 
British Museum, and his only knowledge 
of it was from the description in Gueuee’s 
work, and his memory of the species as 
he saw it in Continental collections, 
some years ago. He has kindly promised 
to forward a specimen to M. Guenee for 
his decision. 
For my own part, I have so much 
confidence in Mr. Doubleday’s know- 
ledge of Lepidoptera tliat I considered 
his opinion sufficient to settle the matter, 
but now think it due both to him and 
Mr. Birchall to give this explanation. 
Yours, &c., 
C. G. Bakrett. 
30, Parkyate Street, Dublin ; 
January b, 1861. 
