THE ENTOMOLOGIST’S WEEKLY INTELLIGENCER. 55 
and Leucophasia S inapis flies in every 
favourable situation around. Thecla 
Betulce also appears on Underbarrow 
Moss, in Westmoreland, in the planta- 
tions and woods on the Wbitbarrow side. 
Throughout this district Gonepleryx 
Rhamni is in profusion, yet how few 
occur in South Lancashire ! A few have 
been taken at Simonswood Moss and at 
Hale, hut they do not seem to thrive 
with us. The same remark applies to 
L. Sinapis ; in the South they are com- 
mon ; here (in Cheshire and South Lan- 
cashire) they are rarely seen, yet as we 
go North they abound. Mr. Hodgkinson 
took, and I set, twenty-six perfect spe- 
cimens of Leucophasia Sinapis before 
breakfast one morning last year, near 
Grange. 
The same remarks apply to the moths 
which are usually taken with L. Sinapis, 
&c., in the South ; there Octomaculalis 
spins along in the same places in which 
Sinapis wends its sluggish flight, where 
I have taken them, either North or 
South; and, from observations I have 
made, I sometimes think I can tell what 
butterflies should appear when I view 
new localities, irrespective of their posi- 
tion, North or South. 
I know “ Geographical distribution” is 
one of those wonderful sentences often 
used now a days, but I cannot for the 
life of me make head or tail of it as ap- 
plied to the insects of this country ; for 
instance, Agrotis Lueernea was once an 
exclusively Southern species, then Mr. 
Logan made it a Northern one, and w'e 
made it an intermediate one; A. Ripce, 
once Southern, is now Northern, more 
specimens being taken in West Cumber- 
land than elsewhere ; A. Obelisca, once 
confined to the Lie of Wight, then taken 
freely on Arthur’s Seat, at Edinburgh ; 
A. Lunigera, the same, and now taken at 
Conway freely ; Lobophora Polycommaria , 
once exclusively “ Darenth Wood, Kent,” 
then found in profusion at Keswick, 
Cumberland. 
I could run this paper along for 
an hour, hut think it better not to do 
so, as I think I have pointed out suffi- 
cient instances to show there is little in 
geographical distribution as applied to 
England. 
Chalk and lime-stone districts — North, 
South, East or W est — seem to produce 
somewhat similar species. Birch woods 
in Kent and birch woods in Perth supply 
us with V ersicolora and Carmelita ; 
Vaccinium in Lancashire and Vaccinium 
in Scotland afford us Neplicula Weaverii, 
Euchrornia Arbutana, &c. ; heath in 
Hampshire and heath in Sutherlandshire 
give us Peronea Mixtana, though as yet 
the Northern locality has not given us 
Eulepia Cribrum ; juniper South of 
London gives us the same species we 
find upon juniper North of Kendal, 
even to Ypsolophus Marginellus and 
Argyresthice, except perhaps S. Vari- 
aria. 
On looking at both sides of the 
question, T cannot see how geo- 
graphical distribution is to be made 
to apply practically, hut shall be glad 
to see the opinions of others on this 
subject. 
When our observations are more ex- 
tended, I think few species will be found 
South which do not obtain in the North, 
except only such as feed exclusively upon 
