58 
take in 1884. Many of us will do a lot of collecting this spring. We 
must remember that this species hibernates in the larval state while 
0. antiqna does so in the oval. Now I am inclined to think that we 
may sometimes pass over larvae of 0. gonostigma without remembering 
this fact. I am not prepared to say at which exact point the two species are 
about as larvae together, but, if ever, then the rarer larva must be vastly 
larger than the commoner. In fact one can hardly fancy that they 
could ever be confused. One never knows. Impulse is accountable 
for many strange mistakes, even in the best regulated entomological 
minds, and it is possibly responsible for the rarity of O. gonostigma. 
How many individuals have escaped an early death in this way one can 
never know. The lateral brushes of the larva of 0. antiqua and the 
absence of these from that of 0. gonostigma, are generally accepted as 
the most marked points by which they may be distinguished, but 
Dr. Chapman has quite lately pointed out, Entom. Record, 1904, pp. 
271, 828, that there may be a race of the common species which lacks 
these distinguishing marks. However that may be, the brushes are so 
delicate, and their removal by accident so easy, that one feels that they 
are after all but small helps to identification. However that may be, 
again we shall be in the safer position if we imprison all the larvae 
without these brushes. I have never heard that 0. gonostigma develops 
them. 
As to likely localities, I can only speak of that which I know best. 
About Coventry I have heard that the larvae are taken from the road¬ 
side hedges. I have never been to Wimbledon Common. But speaking 
of the Brentwood locality, 1 have mentioned that it consists of scrub. 
0. gonostigma does not appear to be a tree feeding species, and I should 
think that the most likely places to find it would be open places near 
woods (or not) where there is plenty of scrubby growth of oak, biich, 
etc. I hope that these notes may induce our members who have the 
opportunity, to search likely localities, and that our “ Proceedings ” may 
be enriched this year by some notes which will enlarge the range of the 
species. 
I may perhaps be allowed to close my remarks with one suggestion 
without causing offence. If any member be so fortunate as to rear a 
female, and uses her for “ sembling ” purposes, please leave her 
comfortably placed upon a bush before you return home. I always 
tried to do this. The female does not vary, and one or two specimens 
are enough for any collection. It seems a duty, unless we really want 
to continue the race in captivity, to do what w r e can to save the species 
from extinction. One cannot regulate the seasons, but can hope to 
enjoy the comfortable reflection that one has not taken the last 
specimen. 
I may perhaps be allowed to add that, since reading this paper, Haslemere, 
Surrey, has been added to my list of localities, also Barton Broad, by Mr. Bacot, 
and Horning, by the Bev. A. Moss (Entom. Record, vol. xvii., p. 225). It is most 
interesting also to note that the insect has returned to the burnt part of the Brent¬ 
wood locality, and that both larvae and imagines were captured there during the 
early summer (Entom. Record, vol. xvii., p. 299). 
