22 
operation of the act could at roost have only slightly accelerated the 
general decline which had already set in, and even this in point of fact 
is highly problematical. As to the mam fact put forward by Professor 
Meldola that the Satyridce have decreased, I think all old collectors 
must fully agree. I perfectly well remember when aegeria could be 
taken at Loughton pretty freely, some 40 years ago, and I have not 
met with a specimen in that district for at least 35 years, but I am 
not saying that none have occurred since then. Unfortunately, I have 
not visited my early collecting grounds for some years past, which 
were to a great extent in the neighbourhood of Ipswich, but I am 
convinced that, with the exception of Lirnenitis sibylla, many of the 
butterflies are much scarcer than they were when I first visited these 
woods about the year 1865. From that date until 1885 I was a fairly 
frequent visitor to these parts. Since then I paid one visit in July, 
1891, and lastly, in July, 1894. Up to that date there was a most 
marked decrease in Argynnis adippe, paphia, selene, Thecla quercus, and 
Apatura iris, which latter had apparently gone, whereas in 1868 it was 
abundant; and Lirnenitis sibylla was the only insect which appeared to 
be more than holding its own. These same woods during the sixties 
used to produce both Catocala promissa and sponsa, but I have not 
heard of either having been taken for many years. 
When we refer to somewhat old entomological literature we observe 
this gradual decadence in the abundance of our butterflies visibly noted. 
A few instances will suffice. Edward Newman records Leucophasia 
sinapis from Darenth, and Birch-wood, Kent, saying they were formerly 
very abundant. Edward Doubleday records Melitcea athalia from Col¬ 
chester, and W. H. Harwood adds now confined to one wood. J. C. Dale 
gives a locality for Lycaena avion in Hampshire, as formerly taken on the 
hills near Winchester. Then we have the records of Lycaena acis, 
most of them denoting a great falling off from about the year 1835. 
T. Parry says in 1835, 18H6 and 1837 he could take acis in plenty, hut 
has not seen it since. J. C. Dale says, in 1841, formerly in plenty at 
Glanvilles Wootton, in Dorsetshire, but none have been taken since. 
Thus we trace the general decrease from that time until the present 
day, and in my opinion it may be dated from the time of the intro¬ 
duction of Railways into England, and the general use of steam both 
in our harbours and rivers, as well as on our iron roads. This, 
together with the immense increase in the consumption of coal for 
manufacturing purposes, to say nothing of the vast increase of 
inhabited houses, all pouring forth their quota of smoke must cause 
far-reaching contamination of our atmosphere. It is pretty clear that 
with a few exceptions butterflies cannot stand the proximity of towns, 
and at the present time the remote parts of Cornwall produce a larger 
number of species than can be found in more populated parts. The 
difference in the atmosphere around Ipswich at the present day, and at 
the time when I was a boy, is most marked. Fifty years ago it was 
comparatively a small country town with very few factories of any kind 
that produced smoke, and the air was always clear and bright. Now 
as you approach the town by rail, there is quite a visible thickness in 
the atmosphere, which spreads far and wide owing to the vastly 
increased consumption of coal, and to my mind this impurity of the 
xxi. 
