Transactions of the Eity of London 
Entomological & Natural History Society, 
REPORTS OF MEETINGS & ABSTRACTS OF PAPERS READ. 
City of London Entomological Society. — December iSt/i, 1890. 
—Mr. O. C. Goldthvvait exhibited Coremia propugnata bred from females 
taken at Rochester and Chingford, showing a wide range of variation 
in the transverse band, also for comparison a bred series of Melanippe 
fluctuata , the two species showing parallel ranges of variation in the 
bands. The same gentleman also drew a comparison between Mr. 
Merrifield’s inferences, based on the so-called temperature experiments, 
and some of Mr. Tutt’s deductions as set forth in the Record . Mr. 
Tutt stated that he considered that temperature, moisture, etc., only 
affected the larval stage (although retardation might possibly affect 
pupae in a slight degree), and that the results of Mr. Merrifield’s latest 
experiments were probably due to in-breeding. Mr. Machin exhibited 
Dicranura furcula , Lithocolletis insignitella , Incurvaria canariella, 
CEcophora stipella , and other Tineina. Mr. Hodges, Setina irrorella 
var. signata , from the Isle of Wight, and two fine vars. of Abraxas 
grossulariata , the inner half of forewings being suffused with yellow. 
Mr. Quail, cocoon of Saturnia carpini with two exits, cocoon of 
Simyra venosa , etc. Mr. Battley, cocoons of Cuspidia acetis. Mr. 
Boden, Phoxopteryx upupana , and Mixodia ratzeburghiana. Of 
Coleoptera :—Mr. J. A. Clark, exhibited a cabinet drawer of various 
species; Messrs. Cripps, Elliman, Heasler, Lewcock, Milton, and 
Newbery collections of the genus Donacia , which comprised seventeen 
species of that genus, the two unrepresented being obscura and impressa. 
Mr. Lewcock read a paper on the subject, and gave an account of the 
nomenclature, the life-histories, variation (melanism), and the methods 
of collecting the species, with lists of localities, etc. He referred to the 
misapprehension respecting the identification of dentata and sparganii , 
and the vague specific distinctions between sericea and discolor ( comari ), 
showing that the descriptions laid down in both Cox’s Ha?idbook of 
Coleoptera , and Fowler’s Coleoptera of the British Isles failed in their 
purpose of identification. It was quite true that the extreme forms of 
the insects were very dissimilar, but there also existed various con¬ 
necting links between them. He likewise produced over 100 
specimens of the insects in support of his statements. In some of the 
specimens the antennae were long, others of medium length, and the 
B 
