148 
THE ENTOMOLOGIST’S WEEKLY INTELLIGENCER. 
submitted only to the natural tempera- 
ture. — Abraham Edmunds, The Tything, 
Worcester; January ‘IS. 
The Ordinal Position of Acentropus . — 
If Mr. M'Laehlan will carefully read 
over my paper on this iusect in the 
‘ Transactions of the Entomological So- 
ciety,’ or, better still, if he will examine 
the insect itself, he will see that there 
are other characters of ordinal import- 
ance than those to which he alludes, 
which prove it to be Lepidopterous. 
When he can find either tippets or wing- 
bristle in a true Trichopterous insect 
I shall be willing to reject it from the 
Lepidoptera,to which order a knowledge 
of its larva and pupa stales even more 
decidedly assign it. — J. 0. Westwood, 
Oxford; January 28. 
EXCHANGE. 
Exchange. — In referrence to Mr. J esse’s 
note of “Exchange” (Int. ix. 123), that 
gentleman has desired me to say that it 
was quite an oversight on his part in uot 
stating that the Pieris Daplidice, Chryso- 
phanus Chryseis and Vanessa Antiopa 
are all foreign specimens, and that they 
ought to have been recorded as such at 
the time. — John Scott, 13, Torrington 
Villas, Lee, S.E. 
NOTES ON HEMIPTERA. 
The kindness of Dr. Baerenspruug, 
during my stay at Berlin this winter, 
has enabled me to clear up several 
difficulties with regard to our British 
Hemiptera: I have now about two 
hundred species correctly named, and 
which, with the aid of Hahn’s work, 
I am engaged in figuring. But I write 
especially to call attention to Dr. Bae- 
rensprung’s ‘Catologus Hemip. Europa:,’ 
as being throughout Germany preferred 
to that of Dohrn, known as the ‘ Stettin 
Catalogue.’ Indeed, if Fieber’s work 
were complete, little would be wanted, 
but until that takes place there will be 
no ultimate court of appeal. Dr. B.’s 
Catalogue will be found to have a B. 
appended to such species as occur at 
Berlin, and it appears probable that, 
with few exceptions, this initial would 
equally indicate Britain ; the cost will 
be 8 d., including postage. 
And now may I, without offence, offer 
a few remarks od the List of British 
Hemiptera given in the ‘ Annual’? Mr. 
Walker’s List has already been severely 
handled, and this should at least be an 
improvement on it. To the former I 
confess my entire obligation for the im- 
pulse given by it: the very errors and 
misprints were a source of interest and 
excitement, and its incompleteness of 
course, offers to every tyro the delightful 
opportunity of discovering a dozeu or so 
of species new to Britain. The List in 
the ‘Annual’ is a collation of Dohrn and 
Walker; but though Capsus pilosus, 
Hhn., follows tricolor, F ., in Walker, it 
is not so in Dohrn, and consequently 
pilosus. Boh., is wrong, and should be 
Leptomerocoris mulabilis. Fall., which is 
pilosus, Hhn., referred to by Walker. 
Again, Capsus hirlus, marginatus and 
ochripes, not being found in Dohrn, are 
omitted; C.lnrtus and marginatus are, 
however, replaced by Baerensprung. Was 
Hehrus pusillus then not to be found 
ihere, and where did Hydrometra slag- 
norum secrete itself? at all events it is 
not in the index, and I have wasted an 
hour in vague attempts to discover it 
elsewhere. Again, Gerris lacuslris and 
apicalis were intended to have been 
bracketed by Dohrn, it being obviously a 
typographical error. 
