THE WEEKLY ENTOMOLOGIST. 
195 
OBSERVATIONS. 
Lepidopteba. 
M. Maura. Having become ac- 
quainted with the larva of M. Maura 
some time back, while I was residing 
at Chingford in Essex, I can confirm 
Mr. J. B. Blackburn’s description of 
it, with the exception of the colour. 
All that I have taken have been a 
purplish brown. I took a great quan- 
tity while residing in that neighbour- 
hood which was a first-rate locality for 
them, about six years ago. I do not 
doubt that it is as good now, as, at 
that time. I have taken as many as 
thirty specimens, at sugar, on favour- 
able nights, and almost as many of A. 
Pyramided in the same locality. Of 
the latter insect I have distributed 
several hundreds among my friends. 
M. H. Latchfokd, 12 New Charles 
Street, City Road, London. Jan. 26, 
1863. 
L. Petraria. I have tried very 
hard for the past three years to find 
out the larva of the above insect, and 
the food plant, but without success. 
I have taken the perfect insect freely 
on the Archbishop of Canterbury’s 
estate and have had batches of eggs 
which were of a very light colour. 
The larvae, when hatched, have only 
lived a day or two, in consequence of 
my not being able to supply them with 
their proper food, — and I have tried 
them with every description of food 
that I could think of. I shall make 
another attempt this season, and hope 
I shall be more successful. Id. 
HORiE HAWORTHIANhE. 
By W. E. Kibby, Esq. 
In consequence of the great rarety 
of Haworth’s Lepidoptera Britannica, 
of which I have just had the good 
fortune to secure a complete copy, I 
thought a series of extracts with com- 
ments, especially relating to such of 
his species as have proved to be var- 
ieties, would be extremely valuable 
to all British Lepidopterists who have 
no opportunity of consulting the origi- 
nal work. I shall therefore proceed in 
order through his book enumerating 
every species he notices, and copying 
everything that is likely to be most 
useful to the modern Entomologist 
except what has already been copied 
into easily accessible works. I will 
therefore commence wtih some ex- 
tracts from Haworth’s Preface. 
“In the Preface to the Prodr omus 
I have greatly extolled the uniformity 
of the terminations of Linnaeus to 
most of his sections in his genus 
Phalcena, by which alone numerous 
species are decidedly referred to the 
divisions, to which they belong. 
In this place it is only necessary to 
add that in the following pages, I 
have endeavoured to perfect as far as 
possible, the original intentions of 
that celebrated man on this head, by 
adopting all his uniform terminations 
and by inventing others of a similar 
puqmrt to such of my genera as re- 
quired them, whereby * # * * the 
disagreeable and unscientific necessity 
of repeating the name of the genus 
with the species [is] effectually re- 
moved * # * * I have terminated 
