. oe é , H ’ A N ‘a4 tal 4 : f ‘ ; i F p i: ri aA KH UAL aby 7 rama SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS oee@ Seng, “EVERY MAN IS AX VALUABLE MEMBER OF SOCIETY WHO, BY HIS OBSERVATIONS, RESEARCHES, AND EXPERIMENTS, PROCURES KNOWLEDGE FOR MEN’’—SMITHSON (PUBLICATION 3118) CITY OF WASHINGTON PUBLISHED BY THE SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION 1931 The Lord Baltimore Press BALTIMORE, MD., U. S. A. ae vice aed ain ADVERTISEMENT The present series, entitled ‘“ Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collec- tions,’ is intended to embrace all the octavo publications of the Institution, except the Annual Report. Its scope is not limited, and the volumes thus far issued relate to nearly every branch of science. Among these various subjects zoology, bibliography, geology, mineralogy, anthropology, and astrophysics have predominated. The Institution also publishes a quarto series entitled “ Smith- sonian Contributions to Knowledge.” It consists of memoirs based on extended original investigations, which have resulted in important additions to knowledge. CG ABBOT, Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution. (ili) CONTENTS Howarp, L. O. A history of applied entomology (somewhat anec- dotal). November 29, 1930. 564 pp., 51 pls. (Publ. 3065.) (Whole volume. ) (v) SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOLUME 84 (WHOLE VOLUME) A HISTORY OF APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY (Somewhat Anecdotal) (WITH 51 PLATES) BY L. O. HOWARD (PUBLICATION 3065) CITY OF WASHINGTON PUBLISHED BY THE SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOVEMBER 29, 1930 The Lord Baltimore (Press BALTIMORE, MD., U. 8. A. Page. 53; 113, 140, 201, 228, 236, 280, 281, 281, 281, 281, 284, 300, 304, 305, 397, 307, 22 330, 330, 359, 357; 357; 357; 359, 359; 375; 416, 425, 444, 502, A line 12, from bottom, for “19” read SOTA SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS Vow. 84. (Whole Vol.) HISTORY OF APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY . By L. 0. HOWARD ERRATA ” 19, for “Southern” read “ Eastern.” 1, for “J. H. Morgan” read “ H. A. Morgan.” 9, from bottom, for “ classifications” read “ classification.” 7, for “ Cambridge” read “ Oxford.” 8, from top, for “ Goreau” read “ Goureau.” 18, from bottom, for “ Caporal” read “ Corporaal.” 2. 4on 10 reads Tix 15, for “T. A. Schoevers” read “T. A. C. Schoevers.” 26, for “G. F.” read “J. G.” 29, for “Caporal” read “ Corporaal.” ai for “den” read “der.” 11, from bottom, for “ Mamentov” read “ Mamontov.” 1, for “first annual meeting” read “ Second Congress.” 1s, from bottom, for “N. F. Rimsky-” read “ M. N. Rimsky.” 15, for “ Nasunov” read ~ Nasonov.” 15, for “ Kusnesoff” read “ Kusnezov.” 5, from bottom, for “ Dryenowski” read “ Drenowski.” 12, from bottom, for “ Escalara” read “ Escalera.” final paragraph: Townsend worked in the Gypsy Moth Labora- tory on his return from the Philippines; and between his residences in Peru and Brazil worked in the U. S. National Museum for five years. 16, for “Van” read “den.” 28, for “ Kuchenius” read “ Keuchenius.” 28, omit the second “J” in “C. J. J. van Hall.” 28, for “A. E. Rutgers” read “A: L. Rutgers.” 6, from bottom, for “ Doctors” read “Docters.” (Docters is part of family name). 2, from bottom, for “Doctor” read “ Docters.” 19, for “Secretary for” read “ Director of”; for “ Northern” read “ Southern.” 4, under SAMOA, for “F” read, K.? 21, from top of page after “a” and before “ German” insert “native Brazilian of and after “German” insert the word “ancestry.” 8, from top, for “J. B. Poppe” read “ Dr. James Pope.” 15, from bottom, for “ H. W. Bates” read “Thomas Belt.” 2, from bottom, for “ montrousieri” read “ montrousiert.” 48, omit “ Betran, G. F.” and add “281” to Betrem, J. G. omit “ Caporal, J. B.” for “Corporaal, J. D.” read “ Corporaal, J. B.” and add “ 280, 281.’ for “De Meijere, J. C. U.” omit “U.” add “356” to “ Den Doop.” for “Escalara” read “ Escalera.” for “ Dryenowski” read ‘ Drenowski.”’ for “ Friederich, Karl” read “ Friederichs, Karl” and add “ 416.” omit ‘‘ Friederichs, F.” for “ Kuchenius” read “ Keuchenius.” for “ Morgan, J. H.” read “ Morgan, H. A.” for “ Rutgers, A. E.” read “ Rutgers, A. L.” for “ Schoevers, T. A.” read “ Schoevers, T. A. C.” omit “Van Doop.” omit’ the-second —J “in S VianvElall: «Gof. y:” Plate 1, fig. 2, for “1878” read “ 1870.” 10, fig. 2, for “1852” read “ 1853.” - 10, fig. 4, for “1928” read “19209.” “16, fig. 3, this is not Swammerdam, but Hartman Hartmansz. | 20) fis. 2; for> “18237? tread! “1828! 22> he. A. for «1807s sreadeantl cole ~ 42, fig. 3, add, after Boas, “(1855= _).”” Page or or Ur Tee © un or ur on oS aAamnonnnn on ow on un NNN ow wo wi wm WOHONN DN DN HH She Se tNod (Sah ateeeal fen ea ree ek Ratan eet ee DD) Se PREFACE In January, 1928, I wrote the following lines as a preface to the history I was about to begin: After studying insects nearly all my life and after having worked as an economic entomologist in the service of the Government for more than fifty years, I find that in an effortless way I have accumulated a lot of information which did not fit into anything I have published but which younger workers are constantly telling me ought to be put into print. There are hundreds of ento- mologists today where there was one fifty years ago, and in the soon-coming years there will be thousands, or I miss my guess. Why then should I drop off the stage before I have recorded certain experiences and impressions which, con- nected up with an historical account of the development of applied entomology, may be of much interest to many of the present younger workers as well as to thousands who are surely coming? I have no satisfactory answer to this question, and so I shall begin to write the pages that will follow. It is now something more than two years since the above was written, and, while I have been deeply interested in gathering together what follows, I am not satisfied with it. It is bound to be criticised It is not a history of the strict, modern, documented type. But it will be useful and I think that most entomologists will thank the Smithsonian Institution for publishing it. L. O. Howarp May 29, 1930. CONTENTS PAGE Bee ey CCM eRe TEE eI Re cia ic a) a orate Soins ouomrsie oe ae ete ieia Sere aoe ads aete S'es ill MritrOGUCEI OM Mme ert ei HACIA oi alc, «cre tessf reo Ruciow cer ee seme Meee asike sicvenslc) ease venison wiigters I Part I. North America imi eS tea tespeeen eee seers etre cheer seh steer cream ate re ch cat cute Corer we eke erremouintch a iewe 9 Barlyahistonyandwearly, American® whiters. sas. selec on vom - a 9 ANneckksne: Wallen lalkeiguGaocedspeudemounes odugounacconoSonetmecrtd 30 Townend Glover (and his biographer, C. R. Dodge)............... 35 Asa mitch the wirst State Pntomologist)..0.6 eens cce + cic ce. 43 Data, concerning: Fitch’s New York Reports... ............. 46 Benyamine anneal Sheets o.s Lintner and A. S. Packard continued to publish after 1878, some of them dropping out shortly after that date, and others continuing for many years. Several of them we have considered rather fully in the earlier chapter and nothing further need be said about them here. This holds for Cook, Lintner, Miss Murt- feldt, Hubbard, Webster, and Fernald. Something must be said, how- ever, about the others. We have mentioned in a single paragraph the work of Prof. S. A. Forbes who began to publish in 1876, and in that paragraph (written in April, 1928) he was recorded as still living. Very recently (March 13, 1930) he died, at the age of 86. The value of Professor Forbes’ work could hardly be overestimated. He was a sound worker and an advanced thinker throughout his whole career, and was a leader among all the American entomologists. He succeeded Cyrus Thomas as State Entomologist of Illinois in 1882, and speedily became known as one of the strongest men in the field of applied entomology in the United States. I honestly think that it would have been for the good of the country had he succeeded Riley in 1894 as Entomologist of the United States Department of Agriculture, and I think there is no doubt that he could have had the position had he wished it. I do not know that his name was considered by the Secretary of Agriculture, but I myseli wrote him asking whether he would consider the position, not wish- ing to obtrude my own claims ahead of his. He replied, however, that he was so greatly interested in his Illinois work that he much pre- ferred to stay there. His career has been an admirable one ; it has dig- nified the applied science and has helped no end to bring about its pres- ent important standing. An admirable review of his career, by Henry B. Ward, is published in the number of Science that comes to my desk as I write this (Science, April 11, 1930, Vol. 71, No. 1841, pp. 378- 381). Lawrence Bruner was a man who became prominent during the period we now have under consideration. His first article was pub- WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 103 lished in 1883. He was then connected, as he was practically his whole active life, with the University of Nebraska. He taught natu- ral history; was at first interested in ornithology (he was a good taxidermist) ; and was engaged as a special agent of the United States Department of Agriculture to make observations, usually in the sum- mer, on the Rocky Mountain locust in the various States adjoining Nebraska—in fact, in the whole Northwest. His last report in this capacity was published in the Annual Report of the United States Department of Agriculture for 1887. He became very greatly inter- ested in the Orthoptera and widely known as an authority in that group. Later, when the Argentine government appealed to me to recommend an American to go to Argentina and advise concerning migratory locusts, I had no hesitation in recommending Professor Bruner, who spent some time in that South American country and pub- lished an excellent report. On reaching retiring age, he went to California where he still lives. An interesting incident connected with Professor Bruner may be told. He came to Washington on his wedding trip. He had mar- ried a charming Nebraska girl. Some time later I received a tele- gram from him announcing the birth of a daughter. I wired a reply of congratulations, and added that if he would name the daughter Psyche the Division of Entomology would stand as god- father. This despatch was not answered, but I learned a year later that his little girl bore the unusual name of Psyche; whereupon the entomological force in Washington sent her a silver cup. It may be interesting to know that this little girl eventually became the wife of Harry S. Smith, so well known to all American entomologists. While Prof. J. H. Comstock continued to publish occasionally on injurious insects after his return to Cornell University, he soon began to devote his attention to the non-economic aspects of the sci- ence of entomology, and the economic work was taken over largely by his assistant, M. V. Slingerland, who, however, did not begin to publish until the year when the experiment station law came into operation. I imagine that the fifteen-thousand-dollar fund allotted to the Cornell station enabled the definite employment of Slinger- land, at that time a student assistant, and facilitated his work which was very notable. His publications soon became models for the on-coming generation of applied workers. Prof. E. A. Popenoe, teaching entomology at the Kansas State Agricultural College, published occasional articles between 1880 and 1882. 104 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 Dr. John B. Smith, coming to Washington in 1884, published several articles on economic entomology before he was appointed Entomologist to the State of New Jersey on the founding of the Agricultural Experiment Station. Doctor Smith was primarily a taxonomist, first in the Coleoptera and later in the Lepidoptera. While he came to Washington for work largely in the United States National Museum where he was Assistant Curator of Insects under Professor Riley who was then the Honorary Curator, he was called upon for work in the Department of Agriculture and, if I remember rightly, was paid from the funds of the Department of Agriculture. One of his notable pieces of economic work at that period was his report on cranberry insects. Later, in New Jersey, he became one of the foremost of the State workers and published many admirable reports and bulletins. Prof. Clarence P. Gillette, at first Assistant Entomologist to the Michigan Agricultural College (1886-87), later at Ames, Iowa, and still later and for many years head of the Department of Zoology and Botany in the Colorado Agricultural College and Entomologist of the Colorado Experiment Station, and still later Director of the Colorado Experiment Station, began to publish while still at Michi- gan, and his first recorded paper was published during the period we are now considering in this chapter. It was on the subject of mites and was published in 1887 in the Annual Report of the Michigan Horticultural Society. Prof. F. H. Snow, teacher of natural history in the University of Kansas and afterwards President of the University, was working and publishing concerning insects nearly until the time of his death, and was responsible for the great interest in the destruction of the chinch bug by a fungus disease that was much talked about in the late 1880's. Harrison Garman, working in Illinois and later for many years connected with the Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station, began to write in 1882 and was the author of several important papers. Many articles on entomology were published by a rapidly increas- ing number of writers, largely in the agricultural journals, during this period, and a few of the workers in systematic entomology occa- sionally published a note upon some injurious species. V. T. Cham- bers, a well known writer on Microlepidoptera, W. L. Devereaux, George Dimmock, a broad biologist entomologically interested in the Diptera, C. H. Dwinelle of California, Henry Edwards, the actor and famous collector of Lepidoptera, G. H. French of Illinois, a Lepidop- terist for the most part and the author of a book on butterflies, F. W. Goding who later entered the United States Consular Service but WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD TO5 who wrote in the 1880's of leafhoppers, John Hamilton, the Coleop- terist, Joseph Leidy, the biologist, Rev. Samuel Lockwood, a New Jersey clergyman interested in entomology, Joseph Voyle, a south- erner and at one time an agent of the United States Department of Agriculture, C. S. Minot, the eminent biologist and embryologist, and Edward Burgess, the well known Dipterist and yacht designer—all published on economic entomology in the early 1880’s. In spite of all this, when one looks back, there was after all, as we have already stated, comparatively little economic work being done outside the Federal organization. Entomologists, it is true—ama- teurs—were abundant, and I think even more abundant than they are now, but we must remember that there were absolutely no books on economic entomology. The publication of the first edition of Prof. William Saunders’ “Insects Injurious to Fruits” in 1883 was a great event. It was written by a Canadian, it is true, but it was published by an American firm (J. B. Lippincott Co. of Philadel- phia). And it was not until after the Agricultural Experiment Stations and the Agricultural Colleges were in full swing that other books began to be published ; and there has followed, of course, a series of them that would more than fill Doctor Eliot’s famous five-foot shelf—all excellent books and constantly growing bigger, culminating last year in the big book entitled “ Destructive and Use- ful Insects’ by Metcalf and Flint. But there were several active entomological societies, and the big collections were growing rapidly. Tue HatcuH Act AND THE STATE AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATIONS A number of things happened toward the close of the last century which not only emphasized the importance of applied entomology in a very extraordinary way but which also helped to place the United States in better condition to fight the destructive influences as they developed. In the latter category belongs the passage of the so-called Hatch Act by Congress in the late eighties which resulted in the organization in the spring of 1888 of the State Agricultural Experi- ment Stations. Down to that time New York, Illinois, and Missouri had been practically the only States to support distinct and consecutive inves- tigations in economic entomology. A number of the State horticul- tural and agricultural societies had, as we have seen, published reports on injurious insects, and I believe that Doctor Packard was paid for his Massachusetts reports. The State Board of Agriculture of Penn- 8 106 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 sylvania had handled its economic entomology by means of an officer who held an honorary commission. This position was held by Dr. S. S. Rathvon, and I have elsewhere called attention to the fact that in 1880 J. T. Humphreys wrote to Washington on letterheads which read “ Late Naturalist and Entomologist to the Georgia Department of Agriculture,” but I have not been able to learn the details of such employment. Although the State Experiment Stations were not organized until the spring of 1888, a number of entomologists were soon appointed and active work began practically in the month of February. It would be difficult to overestimate the value to the country at large of this action on the part of the Federal Government. It is true that there was a dearth of trained entomologists and that it became nec- essary for men to undertake the work who had had practically no training in entomology at all, or for entomologists who knew nothing at all about agricultural entomology to step in and try to meet the new needs. By 1894, 42 States and Territories had employed persons to do entomological work, while the number of experiment station workers who had published entomological bulletins or reports reached 77. Not all of these writers, however, were officially designated as ento- mologists to the stations, but there were 28 who were so designated, and it is reasonably sure that there were not 28 qualified agricultural entomologists in the country. The others who wrote were botanists, horticulturists, physiologists, zoologists, superintendents of farms, directors and vice-directors of stations, mycologists, and_ special agents. dsut the output was not bad. It could not from the start include original research, By 1894 there had been: 311 publications contain- ing agricultural entomology. It is interesting to look at the entomo- logical publications which appeared in the first few months. They were not at all bad, although, among the authors, Hulst in New Jersey and Ashmead in Florida had been simply systematists while Tracy in Mississippi was a botanist. However, Weed in Ohio, Popenoe in Kansas, Perkins in Vermont, Fernald in Massachusetts and Lugger in Minnesota had already shown themselves to be, in one position or another, capable of good research work in applied entomology. Between 1894 and 1907 (the next time that I had occasion to survey the Experiment Stations field) affairs with the Experiment Stations had shaped themselves into good form, and entomology, among the other sciences applied to agriculture, had begun to receive greater WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOW ARD 107 recognition and more experienced handling. The men in charge of entomological work had had 13 years more of experience, and new workers had been added from the colleges where the training of ento- mologists had really begun for the first time between 1888 and 1894. In my 1907 survey I found that the number of entomological publi- cations of State Agricultural Experiment Stations had reached 1,300, of which 424 were reports, 839 were bulletins, 34 circulars and 3 apicultural bulletins. The stations had issued g4I reports in all, of which about one-half, on a rough estimate, were entomological or con- tained some entomological matter. The subjects of the bulletins and circulars were found to be about as follows: insecticides and ma- chinery, 251; compiled accounts of insects, 259; more or less origi- nal observations, 356. Obviously, in the course of the 13 years, bulletins based on origi- nal observations had increased very considerably in number. It is perfectly obvious also that, not only at that time but even today, compiled bulletins often have a greater practical value to the constit- uency of a State Experiment Station that the bulletins giving the results of original work. The original-work bulletins advance the condition of the science; the compiled bulletins extend the knowledge of the results so as to make them more valuable to the people at large. At that time the work of Forbes in Illinois, Felt in New York, and Smith in New Jersey, among the State Entomologists, stood out. And from that time on the quality and quantity of work done by the State and Experiment Station officials have increased and improved rapidly. Larger funds have been given to these institutions by their respective States and by additional Federal appropriations. The State men and the Federal men have come together year after year, and cooperative work is going on in many directions. Many of the State men have made sound scientific reputations, and the value of the State work as a whole is very great. The Office of Experiment Stations of the Federal Department of Agriculture early began publication of the Experiment Station Rec- ord, in which abstracts of all the publications of the Stations are given from month to month. This publication has been of very great value. Dr. W. A. Hooker, who for many years has been the editor of the entomological and veterinary portions of the Record, has been good enough to investigate for me the number of contributions on ento- mology by experiment-station entomologists, including both State and insular Federal stations, between the time of my 1907 summary down to the end of June, 1928, He finds that there have been during this period of 21 years 2,844 such publications. This account includes 108 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 all entomological contributions appearing in bulletins, circulars, re- ports, and periodicals. Many of the reports by station entomologists as State Entomologists, however, include separate articles which if counted would greatly increase the total number. The State Depart- ments of Agriculture contributions that have appeared under the authorship of station entomologists have been included ; also the contri- butions from the Illinois Natural History Survey by Doctor Forbes and his associates have been included, since the Survey in Illinois takes the place of the Station Department of Entomology. I have made no effort, nor: has Doctor Hooker, to check out the number including original research, but it must be very great. In practically every sta- tion in the country original research has been going on for years and many valuable and far-reaching discoveries have been made by the State people. There have been times during all this progress when there have been rumblings of dissatisfaction among the State people with certain actions and apparent policies of the Federal Department, but on the whole the feeling in entomology has been one of harmony, and so far as I can see, looking back from the close of 1928, there have been no misunderstandings that have retarded the advance of investi- gation work. At this time of writing the sky is especially clear and there is not even the faintest suggestion of a cloud. I am well aware that this narration cannot be considered a thor- oughly competent history of American economic entomology without much longer consideration of the work done at the State Agricultural Colleges and State Experiment Stations and by the scarce State Ento- mologists, and I can, for lack of space, do little more than generalize concerning the work done by these institutions and by the later men. I have spoken more of the Federal work on account of my intimate association with it, but of the men who have grown up in the service of the States and who have established strong reputations for them- selves, who have published the results of sound research work and have helped enormously to bring about the present conditions, I can- not enter into detail. I should like to devote some space to the consid- eration of the work of many of the younger men of prominence, like those who have served in the last 20 or more years as Presidents of the Association of Economic Entomologists (these will be specified ina later chapter), of men (to mention some whose names have not yet appeared in this account) like W. E. Britton of Connecticut, W. C. O’Kane of New Hampshire, Henry Fernald of Massachusetts, E. P. Felt of New York, Wilmon Newell of Florida, E. D. Ball of Utah and Iowa, W. E. Hinds of Louisiana, Miss Edith M. Patch of Maine, T. J. Headlee of New Jersey, P. J. Parrott of New York, Franklin WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD I0g Sherman of North Carolina and South Carolina, R. W. Harned of Mississippi, H. A. Morgan formerly of Louisiana, J. J. Davis of Indiana, George A. Dean of Kansas, R. A. Cooley of Montana, R. H. Pettit of Michigan, W. B. Herms, E. O. Essig and Harry S. Smith of California, and perhaps a score of others. The portraits that are published with this account show the faces of the older ones among these men, but, if I am not mistaken, there is not a man shown on these plates who is less than 55 years of age; and there is an army of younger men who cannot be mentioned except by an expression of heartiest praise of their important and often self-sacrificing work. The apparent age restriction mentioned in the preceding para- graph applies only to the American entomologists. There are so many of them. As to the economic entomologists of the rest of the world, since they are less numerous and since work in economic entomology is really of much more recent date in other countries, younger men are necessarily shown on the plates. Tue ASSOCIATION OF Economic ENTOMOLOGISTS Another event which had a striking influence on the development of applied entomology to its present rank in the United States was the founding of the Association of Economic Entomologists in the summer of 1889. The State Agricultural Experiment Stations had been organized for little more than a year, but so many entomologists had been engaged for this practical work by the new stations that the desirability of an association was evident. The original suggestion for the formation of such an association, I think was made by Professor Riley in the January number of Insect Life for that year. He went to Europe in the late spring and remained abroad until the following October. During his absence the organization was effected. The meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Sci- ence was to be held in August, 1889, at Toronto, and James Fletcher, the Dominion Entomologist, was the President of the Entomological Club of that Association. It was the obvious thing for Fletcher to issue a call, and as he came to Washington on official business in July he and I together drafted a constitution for the proposed associa- tion and it was organized at Toronto in August. The men attending the organization meetings were Prof. A. J. Cook of Michigan, who acted as chairman, Dr. John B. Smith of New Jersey, Secretary, Prof. C. W. Hargitt of Syracuse University, Mr. E. P. Thompson, a mathematician who was present more or less by accident, Prof. C. M. Weed then of the Ohio Experiment Station, and Prof. Harri- son Garman, just appointed to the Kentucky Experiment Station, 110 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 and the writer—all from the United States. The Canadians present were Dr. C. J. S. Bethune, Dr. James Fletcher, Mr. E. Baynes Reed, and Mr, H. H. Lyman. All of these became charter members except the Canadian Mr. Lyman and the American Professor Thompson. Other charter members, however, were included as follows: Dr. William Saunders of Canada, Prof. S. A. Forbes of Illinois, Dr. J. A. Lintner of Albany, New York, Prof. J. H. Comstock of Cornell Uni- versity, Prof. F. L. Harvey of Maine, Prof. M. L. Beckwith of Dela- ware, Prof. F. M. Webster then of Purdue University, Prof. P. J. Campbell of Georgia, Prof. E. J. Wickson of California, Prof. C. W. Woodworth of Arkansas, Prof. Otto Lugger of Minnesota, Prof. C. P. Gillette of Colorado, and Prof. Herbert Osborn then of Iowa. All of these men were distinctly entomologists with the exception of Professor Wickson who was at that time Lecturer on Dairy Hus- bandry and Agriculture at the University of California and who afterwards became Associate Professor of Agriculture, Horticul- ture, and Entomology, still later becoming Dean of the Agricultural College and Acting Director of the California Agricultural Experi- ment Station; and I think that at one time he was the editor of the famous agricultural newspaper known as The Pacific Rural Press. Beginning in a small way, the Association grew steadily. The growth of the Federal Service and the greater opportunities for re- search given by the States and the Agricultural Colleges increased the number of men turning their attention to this branch of work (rather rapidly when we look back and review the progress). It is unnecessary to detail the steps that have brought about the present large, efficient, helpful and very important organization as it exists today. It was until 1913 the only organization of its kind in the world, but in that year Dr. K. Escherich, after a visit to the United States, organized the German Verein fiir Angewandte Entomologic which we shall describe later, in the section on Germany. Looking back at the early meetings of the Association, it is plain that while there was much interest and enthusiasm among the mem- bers, little of the prophetic was shown in the addresses given at the annual meetings. The enormous scope of the problems confronting humanity and their extremely serious character do not seem to have been realized in those.days. We met (and there were lamentably few of us then) to talk about comparatively few individual things that were, or bid fair to be, of general interest. When there were 20 of us together, we felt populous; and we met but once a year. There were many dull papers on “ The Insects of the Year” or some simi- lar title. But our interest was vivid, and it increased as time went WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD Tug on and we realized more and more, not only the importance of our vocation and its multitudinous aspects and contacts, but also there began to dawn upon us the disturbing thought that conditions in a broad way were growing worse instead of better. For the first 19 years after the founding, the Proceedings of the annual meetings of the Association were published either in Insect Life or in the bulletins of the entomological service of the United States Department of Agriculture. By 1907, however, the Associa- tion had grown so large and so strong that it began the publication of the Journal of Economic Entomology. The 2oth annual meeting in December of that year had an average attendance of 90 at its several sessions, and the list of members showed 257 names. The Journal showed its merit at the start. The opening number covered 80 pages. At the present time (April, 1928) it has passed through 20 volumes, and the first number of Volume 21 covers 248 pages; and the mem- bers of the Association as listed in this number reach nearly 1,000. Not only has the Association developed in numbers and in publi- cations, but it has broadened out in its organization. It now has its Pacific Coast Branch, its Cotton States Branch and its Eastern States Branch. The main Association has always held its meetings at the time and place of the annual meetings of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and therefore changed the time of its meetings, with the old Association, from August to the week that includes January Ist, now known generally as ‘* Convocation Week.” It may be stated incidentally that the term “ Convocation Week ”’ has been adopted by the leading universities and hence incorporated in the leading American dictionaries to mean a week during which the learned societies hold their meetings. University schedules have been altered so that the attendance of teachers on these meetings during this week will cause no interference with their college duties. For the last 26 years, therefore, the main Association has met during Convocation Week; but it seemed desirable for the branches to meet during the growing season, and hence there have been oppor- tunities for members of the Association to come together during the summer time, and therefore for members on the Pacific Coast and in the far South to keep in closer touch with the Association and its work than if they were prevented by long distance from frequent attendance at the meetings of the main Association. There are now three such regional branches. Moreover, the Association has kept itself well up to date by means of standing committees which have exercised a constant oversight 112 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 of the whole field. There are, for example, a committee on policy,’ one on nomenclature, one on membership, one on the Journal, one on the United States National Museum, one on the Insect Pest Sur- vey, and so on. The Association is represented on scientific organi- zations of broader scope, as for example, on the National Research Council, in the Council for the American Association for the Ad- vancement of Science, in the Council of Union of American Biologi- cal Societies, on the board of trustees of the Tropical Plant Research Foundation, and on the board of trustees of the Crop Protection Institute, the last-named two organizations being in a way children of the National Research Council. Not long after the passage of the law creating the Federal Horti- cultural Board (1912) it was deemed desirable to establish two sec- tions of the main Association to hold separate programs at the annual meetings, namely the Section of Horticultural Inspection, including all entomologists engaged in this kind of work, and the Section of Apiculture. These sections have carried out separate programs at the annual meetings of the main Association. Another section—Extension—has since been added. Another noteworthy thing accomplished by the Association of Economic Entomologists has been the taking up of the “ Bibliogra- phy of American Economic Entomology’’ at the point where it seemed unlikely that the Federal Bureau would continue it for some time. Under the title ‘‘ Bibliography of the More Important Contri- butions to American Economic Entomology,” eight parts had been published by the Bureau down to January 1, 1905. In 1917 there was published by the Association what is really a continuation of this bibliography although arranged differently. The first part was en- titled “ Index to the Literature of American Economic Entomology, January 1, 1905, to December 31, 1914.” The compilation was pre- pared by Mr. Nathan Banks of the Bureau of Entomology, who had done the latter parts of the “ Bibliography.’ The preparation, then, was the work of the Federal Bureau, but the publication of the part, covering 323 pages, was done by the Association. This part was followed by a second, covering the period from January I, 1915, to December 31, 1919 (published by the Association in 1921). And again, a third part, covering the period from January I, 1920, to December 31, 1924, was prepared by the Bureau and published by the Association in 1925. Parts 2 and 3 were compiled by Mabel Colcord, Librarian of the Bureau, and edited by E. Porter Felt for The duties of this committee were transferred to the Executive Committee in 1928. WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 113 the Association. The fourth part is now in course of preparation. A glance at the third part, with its 441 double-column pages simply listing the topics treated during the period of five years, gives one a good idea of the really immense amount of work in economic ento- mology done in North America during that period. While it is true that the Review of Applied Entomology, published by the Imperial Bureau of Entomology in London and which was started in 1913,.covers American entomological publications as well as those of the rest of the world, the American Index of the Asso- ciation, containing only indexed titles, is much more complete for North America and perhaps more handy for speedy reference. At the present time, just as I am completing this volume, the Asso- ciation so far exceeds our original anticipations in every respect that it seems marvelous. The Journal for February, 1930, covers over three hundred pages and is illustrated. The membership list totals 1150, of which 51 are foreign members. This especial number in- cludes the proceedings of the annual meeting held December 30, 1929, to January 1, 1930, at Des Moines, Iowa, and it also includes the proceedings of the meeting of the Southern Branch of the Asso- ciation held in New York City November 21 and 22,1929. I was unable to attend the Des Moines meeting (it was the first one I have missed since the organization of the Association), but I was present at the meeting of the Eastern Branch in New York. The program for the two days at this meeting was crowded with short papers covering a large part of the field of economic entomology and giving accounts of current investigations or of those just closed up for the year. So numerous were the papers that there was almost no time for discus- sion. I could not help contrasting this meeting with that of the whole Association held 35 years before, just across the river in Brooklyn (August, 1894). That was the year when I had the honor of being President. Then there were 17 members in attendance and eight or ten non-members. And that, mind you, was the annual meeting of the whole Association, while this New York meeting was only one of several geographical sections. It should be stated that from the very beginning Canadians have shared with the workers of the United States in the whole con- duct of the organization. They have held prominent offices. James Fletcher, C. Gordon Hewitt and Arthur Gibson have acted as Presi- dent. Other countries have been recognized from the start, and their prominent workers in economic entomology have been made members of the Association. II4 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 This section may be concluded fittingly with a list of the men who have occupied the position of President. Presidents of the Association of Economic Entomologists 1889 1890 1891 1892 1893 1804 1895 1890 1807 1898 1899 1900 1901 1902 1902 1903 1904 1905 1906 1907 1908 1909 IQ1O IOI 1912 1913 1914 IQI5 1916 1917 1918 I9LO 1920 1921 1922 1923 1924 1925 1926 1027 1928 1929 C. V. Riley (Washington, D. C.) C. V. Riley (Washington, D. C.) James Fletcher (Canada) J. A. Lintner (New York) S. A. Forbes (Illinois) L. O. Howard (Washington, D. C.) John B. Smith (New Jersey) C. H. Fernald (Massachusetts ) F. M. Webster (Ohio) Herbert Osborn (lowa) C. L. Marlatt (Washington, D. C.) Lawrence Bruner (Nebraska) P. Gillette (Colorado ) . D. Hopkins (Washington, D. C.) P. Felt (New York) . V. Slingerland (New York) L. Quaintance (Washington, D. C.) . Garman (Kentucky ) H. Kirkland (Massachusetts ) . A. Morgan (Tennessee) A. Forbes (Illinois) W. E. Britton (Connecticut ) E. D. Sanderson (New Hampshire) F. L. Washburn (Minnesota) W. D. Hunter (Washington, D. C.) P. J. Parrott (New York) H. T. Fernald (Massachusetts ) G. W. Herrick (New York) C. Gordon Hewitt (Canada) R. A. Cooley (Montana) E. D. Ball (Iowa) W. C. O’Kane (New Hampshire) Wilmon Newell (Florida) George A. Dean (Kansas) J. G. Sanders (Pennsylvania) A. G. Ruggles (Minnesota) A. F. Burgess (Massachusetts ) H. A. Gossard (Ohio) Arthur Gibson (Canada) R: W. Harned (Mississippi) W. B. Herms (California) T. J. Headlee (New Jersey) >O Bon > io PS el Elected for 1930, Franklin Sherman (South Carolina) ‘In 1902 the date was changed from midsummer to winter, and there were, therefore, two meetings in 1902, WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOW ARD II5 THE STRIKING EVENTS OF THE LAST DECADE OF THE NINETEENTH CENTURY Following very soon after the establishment of Agricultural Ex- periment Stations in the United States as the result of the so-called Hatch Act passed by the Federal Government in 1888 and the almost simultaneous founding of the Association of Economic Entomolo- gists, there occurred four events which fixed the attention of the whole country upon the importance of entomological work. The first of these was the discovery of the gipsy moth in Massachusetts in 1889 ; the second was the discovery of the San Jose scale in the East in 1893; the third was the discovery of the Mexican cotton boll weevil in Texas in 1894; and the fourth was the discovery by Ross in 1898 of the carriage of malaria by Anopheles. The first three were events apparently then of importance to the United States only; the last was of great importance to all humanity. THE GIPSY MOTH It very often happens that injurious insects, coming from abroad, obtain a foothold in the United States in some way that we are not exactly able to explain. We may know in a general way that it has come in in the course of commerce in plants or plant products, as was undoubtedly the case with the Japanese beetle and the European corn borer, or in the straw packing about fragile imported packages, as may have been the case with the alfalfa weevil. But with the gipsy moth it seems rather certain that it was brought over from Europe in the egg stage to assist in a scientific experiment that a French astronomer, employed in the Harvard Observatory, was Carrying on in the cross-breeding of certain silk-producing cater- pillars in the hope of establishing a race that would be resistant to the pebrine disease which was at that time threatening the destruction of the silk industry in France. This man, Leopold Trouvelot, im- ported egg-masses of the gipsy moth from Europe where this insect had long been known as a destructive enemy to forest trees. By some accident, the insects escaped from his laboratory and established them- selves in waste land in Medford near his house. This was in 1869. He notified the scientific public, but nothing was seen of the gipsy moth, which remained, however, gradually increasing, on this waste land until 1889 when a tremendous plague of caterpillars almost over- whelmed the iittle town. The numbers were so enormous that the trees were completely stripped of their leaves, the crawling cater- pillars covered the sidewalks, the trunks of the shade trees, the fences and the sides of the houses, entering the houses and getting 116 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 into the food and into the beds. They were killed in countless num- bers by the inhabitants, who swept them up into piles, poured kero- sene over them and set them on fire. Thousands upon thousands were crushed under ihe feet of pedestrians, and a pungent and filthy stench arose from their decaying bodies. The numbers were so great that in the still, summer nights the sound of their feeding could plainly be heard, while the pattering of their excremental pellets on the ground sounded like rain. Valuable fruit and shade trees were killed in numbers by their work, and the value of real estate was very con- siderably reduced. So great was the nuisance that it was impossible, for example, to hang clothes upon the garden clothesline, as they would become covered with the caterpillars and stained with their excrement. Persons walking along the streets would become covered with caterpillars spinning down from the trees. To read the testi- mony of the older inhabitants of the town, which was collected and published by a committee, reminds one vividly of one of the plagues of Egypt as described in the Bible. During all this time the Medford people had been under the impres- sion that the insect which they were fighting in their gardens was a native species, and they knew it simply as ‘the caterpillar” or “ the army worm’’; but in June, 1889, when the plague was at its height, specimens were sent to the Agricultural Experiment Station at Am- herst, and were identified by Mrs. C. H. Fernald as the famous gipsy moth of Europe. A town meeting was immediately called in Medford, and work against the insect was begun. The next year a State appropriation was made, and very active and intelligent investigations were carried on under continually increasing appropriations until 1901 when, unfor- tunately, just as the possible extermination of the species appeared to be in sight, the appropriations were stopped and were not renewed for four years. During these four years the insect increased and spread from an area of about 400 square miles to one of 4,000 square miles. In 1905 the Federal Government was cailed in, and since that time has made large appropriations annually. When the fight was rebegun in 1905 it was realized that the oppor- tunity for extermination was gone, and that all efforts should be based upon the ideas of control and prevention of spread. It is a pity that the State appropriations were interrupted in 1gor. It is a pity that the Federal Government did not take hold at the start and make every effort to exterminate the pest while it was still confined to the vicinity of Medford. But the government did not do things of WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD E17 that sort at that time. Appropriations were small and were hard to get. The economical New Englanders were tired of the expensive fight, and it is hard to blame them. Knowing what we do now, it would seem that the Federal Bureau of Entomology might fairly be blamed for lack of foresight in not warning Congress and the other States of the great danger and in not appealing to Congress for funds with which to prosecute radical work. As I look back, the idea seems never to have occurred to us. It seemed to us a State matter which Massachusetts could handle if she would. There is no doubt that prior to 1901 large areas had been so carefully gone over by State forces that the gipsy moth was exterminated locally, and we argued that if this could be done over a number of square miles it could be done over 400 square miles then occupied by the insect. All this is now, however, vain speculation. The insect has spread gradually, and for a very large part its commercial spread in great jumps has been prevented by quarantine and inspection, Such com- mercial jumps have occurred, however, in one case as far as Ohio, and in several cases in New York. All, however, have been discovered in time, and vigorous work has exterminated the insect, except in a large New Jersey outbreak which is only now being reduced to such an extent that successful extermination seems a matter of a very few years. This last case by the way was not a commercial jump, but undoubtedly a direct accidental importation from Europe. But the other New England States have all been invaded, and all of them have passed legislation compelling community and individual work. The Federal Government has occupied itself along the bound- ary of spread in the effort to hold the pest in check. In the interior, the States have been supposed to control destructive outbreaks. At the present time both New York State and the Federal Government are holding it back along a line extending from Canada to Long Island Sound (virtually the Valley of the Hudson River) which has been termed a “ Hindenburg line.” Some years after the gipsy moth was discovered in Massachusetts another European pest, the brown-tail moth, was found to have been imported in its winter webs on rose bushes from Holland and to have become thoroughly established ; and the study of this insect and its treatment was included with the gipsy moth work carried on by the State. The brown-tail moth, however, after a comparatively few years proved not to spread so rapidly as the gipsy moth, and to be so easily handled by the cutting and burning of its conspicuous webs during the winter time, and moreover was so readily attacked by 118 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 parasites imported from Europe, that it has ceased to be considered as a pest of the first importance. The operations against these two insects, and especially the gipsy moth, constituted the largest and most continuously active work sup- ported by legislative appropriations that the country had yet experi- enced. The cotton boll weevil work differed in the fact that the invaded States can hardly be said to have done their share financially, at least in comparison with the New England and bordering States. The gipsy moth work has accomplished several notable things in addition to what in itself may be termed more or less of a feat, namely keeping it all this time practically within the borders of the New England States. These other things are, first a striking im- provement in insecticides. The old Paris green, upon which farmers and fruit-growers had relied during the latter. part of the last cen- tury, was found, in the ordinary solutions, to be ineffective against the gipsy moth. The vigorous caterpillars of this species, it was found, can consume with impunity almost ten times the quantity of arsenic that would kill any other caterpillar against which it had been used, and larger proportions of arsenic could not be used since the burning of foliage would result. Therefore, in the course of the work of chemists employed by the State of Massachusetts, arsenate of lead was found to be effective and not injurious to foliage. And this substance has been used by the thousands of tons not only in work against the gipsy moth but in orchard work against the codling moth and many other insects. The second result of the gipsy moth work was the enormous improvement of spraying machinery. In the spraying of tall trees, spray nozzles were soon abandoned, and solid-stream nozzles sub- stituted. The stream of poisoned water thrown up with great force from the powerful machine breaks into the requisite spray long before it reaches the tops of tall trees. All of the features of the machines and of the hose were greatly improved, and it has of late been one of the marvels of applied entomology to see a spraying machine by the roadside in the mountainous regions of southern New Hampshire getting its supply of water from a roadside stream, and, through strong sectioned hose carried up over the top of hills of con- siderable size, spraying the trees on the other side of the hill, per- haps nearly a mile away. In the course of the gipsy moth work, entomologists found them- selves able to carry out on a very large scale and for continuous years the importation of parasites of the gipsy moth and the brown-tail moth from Europe and from Japan. The funds at their disposal WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD IIg allowed the entomologists to make very careful studies of these para- sites and of the general subject of parasitism among insects. While there has been nothing spectacular in the results of this side of the investigation, there can be no doubt that the importation of many species of these parasites and natural enemies has resulted in great good. A number of them have been established in this country. And the present condition of the woodlands of New England as contrasted with the conditions that existed 20 years ago is attributable in no small part, I believe, to the destruction of both gipsy moth and brown- tail moth by these imported species. The country has been fortunate in the type of men connected with this work from the start. The fine volume published by the State of Massachusetts in 1896, which is a report of the work of the gipsy moth, and was written by E. H. Forbush, Field Director in Charge of Remedial Work, and C. H. Fernald, Consulting Entomologist, is a model of its kind. Doctor Fernald continued his active interest in the work as a consultant for many years. Mr. Forbush was active until the State appropriations stopped in 1901. When they were resumed in 1906 he was succeeded by A. H. Kirkland, a former stu- dent of Professor Fernald’s, who grew up with the work and who proved to be an inspiring and efficient executive. Later the work was taken over by the State Forester, but the great emergencies had passed, and little more was needed within the invaded States than more or less routine work. Of the part that the Federal Bureau of Entomology took in the work, it need only be stated that we entered upon it first in 1905, at the invitation of the State of Massachusetts, and that our efforts were confined for the first few years to the importation of European parasites and their care. Later the Federal Government began to make large appropriations to assist in the prevention of the further spread of the insect ; and in the conduct of that work Mr. A. F. Bur- gess has shown himself to be most efficient and resourceful. He was aided in the quarantine features of the work by Mr. D. M. Rogers, a Massachusetts man, who had been associated with the work from the early days. These quarantine features constituted the first Fed- eral quarantine work against insects done in this country, antedating the establishment of the Federal Horticultural Board by several years. THE SAN JOSE SCALE When Professor Comstock, in the summer of 1880, found Aspidio- tus perniciosus in the Santa Clara Valley of California he was so I20 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 impressed by the damage which it was doing that he had no hesita- tion in applying the specific name perniciosus to it, since, as he said: _ From what I have seen of it, I think that it is the most pernicious scale insect known in this country; certainly I never saw another species so abundant as this is in certain orchards which I have visited. It is said to infest all the deciduous fruits grown in California, excepting peach, apricot, and the black Tartarian cherry. It attacks the bark of the trunk and limbs as well as the leaves and fruit. I have seen many plum and apple trees upon which all the fruit was so badly infested that it was unmarketable. In other instances I have seen the bark of all the small limbs completely covered by the scales. In such instances the wood beneath the bark is stained red. In his account he gave the insect the common name of “ the per- nicious scale,” and the name San Jose scale seems to have originated in California, a term to which the citizens of San Jose have always objected. The insect spread along the Pacific coast rather rapidly and was the occasion of much loss, but for years was confined to that part of the country. The original home of the species was under dispute for many years. For a time it was thought that it had been introduced by James Lick, from Chile. Years later this was found to be incorrect, and its original home was then attributed to Japan. The question was finally settled by Marlatt, who has shown definitely that its home country is China. Lick imported trees from all parts of the world, and undoubt- edly some from China as Marlatt has shown. It seems rather well proved that its occurrence in Chile and Japan was due to importations from the United States after it had been brought here from China. The species was not known to eastern fruit growers until 1893. In August of that year Doctor Hedges, of Charlottesville, Virginia, dis- covered some curious spots on his favorite pears and sent them to Doctor Galloway of the Department of Agriculture, thinking that they were a fungus disease of some kind. Doctor Galloway brought them to me, and I jumped from my chair in excitement on recogni- tion of the fact that the San Jose scale was at last in the East. Men were sent at once to Charlottesville, and an effort was. made, by the use of oil insecticides, to exterminate the outbreak. In the course of the next few months, however, scales were received from Maryland and Florida; and hence in the spring of 1894 an illustrated warning circular was sent out which resulted in the receipt of specimens from very many localities, and it was found that the dread orchard pest was rather thoroughly established throughout the Eastern States largely from the fact that two firms of nursery dealers in New Jersey had imported infested stock from California ; that their nurseries had WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD I21I become well infested and that the stock which they had sold here and there and everywhere had carried the scourge. The announcement of these facts aroused the most intense interest among fruit growers everywhere. The entomologists of the differ- ent States at once began investigations and experimental work, The sale of nursery stock had become so great an industry during recent years, and the multiplication of this scale insect is so rapid, that, with- out another introduction of the scale from California, the products of two introductions in the East had in six years been spread through portions of almost every one of the Eastern and Middle States. Not only the economic entomologists, but the agricultural and horticul- tural societies, the agricultural journals and the State organizations became aroused, and in the next few years the literature relating to this insect became enormous. Within five years its bibliography com- prised several hundred titles of permanent record and several thousand articles had appeared in ephemeral publications. It had occupied the attention of nearly every meeting of farmers and fruit-growers that had been held in the Eastern States, from the village clubs to the great State horticultural or agricultural societies. It had been the exciting cause of a national convention of fruit-growers, farmers, entomolo- gists, and nurserymen. It had been the subject of legislation in 16 States of the Union, and its suppression was the principal object of two bills before Congress. Thus the entomologist had become a per- son of much importance. But this was not all. On February 5, 1898, the Emperor of Ger- many issued a decree prohibiting the admission of American fruits and living plants into Germany. A day or so later a shipment of Cali- fornia pears arrived at the port of Hamburg and was refused admit- tance. The fact was telegraphed to American newspapers and there was much excitement both in horticultural and in official circles. Gen- eral interest was created by the more or less sensational articles pub- lished. For some days there was no knowledge in this country of the word- ing of the decree, and beyond the fact that it was understood that the introduction of injurious insects from America was feared, no reason for its promulgation could be assigned. The general impres- sion seemed to be that the decree was issued at the instigation of the agrarian party in Germany and that it was to be considered as a retaliatory measure against the United States for certain tariff legis- lation by this country. All the early articles published in the United States protested vigorously against the enactment, and insisted that 9 I22 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 there was no ground for it, since the danger to Germany from Ameri- can insect pests was purely imaginary. Californians were particularly indignant, since it was a shipment of California pears that had been refused. Interviews with Congres- sional representatives of that State, published in Washington, stated that California especially prided herself on the cleanness of her fruit and upon the vigorous measures which for years she had taken to prevent the introduction of injurious insects within her boundaries. It was reported in the newspapers that vigorous diplomatic corre- spondence between the two governments ensued and that Ambassa- dor Andrew D. White had been instructed to protest energetically against the edict and to endeavor to secure a modification of its terms. It was not long, however, before the text of the imperial decree became known, and it was then found that the particular insect aimed at was the San Jose scale. When Ambassador White, at the instruction of Secretary of State Judge Wm. R. Day, called on the Foreign Minister, Von Bulow, in Berlin, the latter sent a clerk for certain documents and handed the American Ambassador a bulletin on the San Jose scale that had been published in 1896 by the Depart- ment of Agriculture at Washington and which contained all the facts concerning the destructiveness of the insect and its menace to eastern orchards. (Possibly the fact that Doctor White, who had been Presi- dent of Cornell University, discovered that the bulletin had been written by one of his own former students may have given an added assurance of its soundness. ) The action of Germany immediately called the attention of other nations to the danger which similarly threatened them. On March 18, 1898, Canada passed a prohibitory law known as the “San Jose Scale Act.” A month later the Government of Austria-Hungary issued a decree simultaneously at Vienna and Budapest prohibiting the importation into that country from America of all living plants. Holland and Sweden sent experts to the United States to make a study of the situation. Thus the San Jose scale was the cause, not only of a very great arousing of interest in entomological matters in the United States, but it promoted international quarantines on a very large scale. From the action that foreign governments took at this time we may date the beginning of the agitation in this country to provide for our own protection against foreign importations, which, delayed for years largely by the lobbying of the very interests which ought to have been most friendly to its passage, was finally enacted into the Fed- eral horticultural law of 1912. WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 123 While the United States has thus perhaps ultimately profited by the whole experience, there is one lesson which she might have gained but which she does not seem to have learned. Germany at that time had an agricultural expert attached to her embassy at Washington. I think that it was Count Beno von Hermann. He was a charming young man, well posted, and a ready talker. I myself handed him in my office one day when he called a copy of the bulletin that brought about all the trouble for the United States and which was afterwards shown to Ambassador White by Foreign Minister Von Bulow. The United States should have had, and should have, men of similar ability in agricultural lines attached definitely as “ agricultural attachés’”’ to its principal foreign offices. This was done once, in the case of C. W. Stiles, who was stationed in Berlin for a time when the subject of trichinosis in German meats was under dispute, but it has never become a practice. At the present time (1927) the San Jose scale is not the terrible orchard pest that in 1898 we feared it would become. This does not mean that the alarm excited among the fruit-growers by the entomolo- gists was in the least unjustified. It does not mean that the scale is controlled by parasites that have become habituated to it. Appar- ently it does not mean that our fruit-trees have developed qualities resistant to scale damage, although this has been suspected in regions which have harbored the scale for the greatest length of time. It does mean, however, that the entomologists and the orchardists have devel- oped remedial treatment, applied especially during the dormant sea- son, in the way of lime-sulphur and mineral oils, which destroys the overwintering scales and thus prevents serious damage during the fol- lowing summer. The scale still exists in nearly all orchards, and there is always a reservoir of living material on untreated garden fruit-trees growing along the roadsides or on waste lands. For some unknown reason, such trees, although stunted in their growth and pro- ducing very inferior and spotted fruit, continue to live for many years. Possibly, to a slight extent, they have developed resistant qualities. But the United States grows as much and even more good fruit than it did 30 years ago, although at the cost of greater expenditure (Quaintance has estimated it at 20 millions of dollars each year). Winter washes have become an annual charge against the fruit- growers, and the control of the San Jose scale is simply another instance in which we are still obliged to spend great sums of money in fighting an injurious species while we are still trying to find some easier, cheaper, and more natural means. I 24 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VoL. 84 I should have stated earlier in this account of this insect, although perhaps it has been inferred, that intense investigation of its biology was begun at once and that it is one of the species that have been most studied by careful workers. When Comstock found it in the Santa Clara Valley of California he called it the pernicious scale. It is in some ways unfortunate that it has come to be known popularly as the San Jose scale. It was suspected for a time that James Lick brought it in from Chile on apple twigs, and at another time that he brought it from Japan. The question as to its origin was eventually settled by Marlatt who studied it in Japan and decided that Japan got it from the United States. He afterwards found it in China under such condi- tions as to show that its original home was north China. Further than that, he showed that in all probability James Lick imported it, possibly through the missionary, Doctor Nevius, on the flowering Chinese peach. Marlatt, in his wonderfully interesting account of his search for the native home, concludes that the insect should be known as the Chinese scale and that it came to this country on some ornamental stock from north China. THE COTTON BOLL WEEVIL Seemingly unimportant things that are later connected with great events are well worth recording. Back in 1843 a Swedish entomolo- gist named and described, in Europe, a little weevil which had been collected by some one in Vera Cruz, Mexico. The entomologist was C. H. Boheman, and he called the weevil Anthonomus grandis. In 1871 a German entomologist named E. Suffrian recorded the same insect as occurring in Cuba. That is all that the world knew of this famous insect down to 1880, In the latter year a very interesting man named Dr. Edward Palmer, an Englishman by birth and a profes- sional botanical collector, who had traveled greatly in Mexico for the United States Department of Agriculture and for Harvard University, found that a small, dark-colored weevil was doing great damage to cotton in the neighborhood of Monclova, Mexico. He sent specimens of this weevil to the Department of Agriculture in Washington with the statement that the insect had stopped the cultivation of cotton in that part of Mexico. When Doctor Palmer’s letter and specimens arrived in Washington (the letter was addressed to the then Secretary of Agriculture, W. G. Le Duc), Professor Comstock was in California; E. A. Schwarz, the experienced beetle man was then working with the United States Ento- mological Commission and not with the Department of Agriculture ; and the writer, who knew very little about beetles, and to whom the cor- WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 125 respondence was referred since he was in charge of the entomological office, took the specimens to Mr. Henry Ulke, an artist, musician, and famous collector of Coleoptera, who lived in Washington. The insect was new to Ulke, and he sent it to Dr. George H. Horn, of Phila- delphia, the foremost American authority on beetles. The insect proved new to Doctor Horn also, and he in turn forwarded it to a well known writer on the weevils, in Paris, Monsieur A. Sallé. Even- tually the name came back, and we had at least the satisfaction of knowing the name of the Mexican pest. No mention was made of this matter in any of the publications ot the Department of Agriculture until 1885 when, Professor Riley hav- ing returned as chief of the entomological service of this Depart- ment, the mere fact was mentioned in his report for that year. Again some years elapsed ; and then the species was brought very forcibly to the attention of the Department. On October 3, 1894, Mr. C. H. DeRyee, of Corpus Christi, Texas, sent the following letter to the Department of Agriculture in Washington : The “Top” crop of cotton of this section has been very much damaged and in some cases almost entirely destroyed by a peculiar weevil or bug which by some means destroys the squares and small bolls. Our farmers can combat the cotton worm but are at loss to know what to do to overcome this pest. They claim the ordinary methods of poisoning for cotton worm have no effect on these bugs. They probably deposit their eggs in the square and their larvae enter the boll as soon as sufficiently formed and are there out of reach of the poison. Will you kindly, for the benefit of our farmers, let me know what this pest is and send me any literature that may be available with information which will enlighten and benefit our farming people. I send you by mail today a lot of these bugs put up in a small vial. Have put some coarsely ground flax seed in with them which may keep them alive till you receive them. Mr. DeRyee was a member of the firm of DeRyee & Bingham, dealers in drugs and medicines. The exact locality from which the specimens came was not given, but it was obviously not very far from Corpus Christi. The original sendings did not reach Washington, and an additional sending was requested. On October 26, 1894, more were received and were identified as Anthonomus grandis by Doctor Schwarz, who had resumed his work in the Department of Agri- culture. The situation appeared to be so serious that C. H. Tyler Townsend was sent from the Department, and from November 15 to December 15 traveled in south Texas and adjacent Mexican terri- tory, and submitted an alarming report. Between the time when Doctor Palmer found the insect at Mon- clova and the receipt of Mr. DeRyee’s letter just quoted, it had begun 126 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 to do damage at points farther east, and from Matamoras had crossed the Rio Grande at Brownsville. It must have been in the Brownsville region before 1894, but north of this point there was a large area in which there was no cotton. Evidently, however, cotton had been car- ried, for ginning, north to Alice, and thus the insect became estab- lished in the good cotton region about Alice, San Diego, and Corpus Christi. Mr. Townsend reported that the damage to the crop during 1894 in this latter region amounted to from 75 to go per cent. The remedies that he suggested included burning the fields, flooding where this was possible, rotation of crops, picking and burning the bolls, and turning cattle, hogs, etc., into the cotton fields. He especially rec- ommended the abandoning of cotton throughout a wide strip of country along the Texas border. He showed that a fifty-mile non- cotton zone would protect the United States, and gave it as his opin- ion that crops more valuable by far than cotton could be raised in the territory. The following year the insect spread further. Mr. Townsend was in the field and was joined by E. A. Schwarz and later by the writer ; and by the close of the year the weevil had been found as far north as San Antonio and as far east as Wharton, Texas had become seri- ously alarmed. The then Governor of the State (Charles A. Culber- son, later for many years United States Senator) visited Washington the following winter. He was an old friend of Dr. C. W. Dabney, at that time Assistant Secretary of Agriculture. The writer was called into consultation, and the Governor was strongly urged to forward legislation by the State of Texas establishing an antipest law and cre- ating a non-cotton zone for the protection of the rest of the State and the rest of the cotton belt—a law, in fact, comparable in many respects to the State pest law of California which was the first State law of this kind to be adopted. The plan met with the Governor’s approval, the bill was drafted and presented to the Texas State legislature, but it failed to pass, and it seems safe to say that the responsibility for the enormous loss which followed lies at the door of that particu- lar legislature. The spread of the insect continued. Mr. Townsend continued his investigations.’ A State convention was held at Victoria, Texas, and *In April, 1896, Dr. Marlatt, in the course of a general trip of inspection to the Southwest, including California, spent a week studying the boll weevil situation in southern Texas, and, in cooperation with Judge Borden, conducted some tests with arsenical sprays. These tests demonstrated clearly that the early-appearing weevils fed readily on volunteer cotton, piercing the leaves with minute holes, and could be easily killed by an arsenical application. The pos- sibility of thus destroying overwintered weevils on volunteer cotton prior to WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 127 was attended by many planters, bankers, and merchants. The legisla- ture of the State passed a bill providing for the appointment of a State Entomologist with a limited appropriation for an investigation. The United States Department of Agriculture, realizing that the State wished to do this work, stopped its own investigations and re- ferred all correspondence to the new State Entomologist of Texas. The spread, however, continued, and as it became certain that other States were threatened the Federal Government once more took up the investigation in the spring of 1901. The late W. D. Hunter was appointed to head the work, and continued in charge until his lamented death in October, 1925. Hunter and his associates, notably Dr. W. E. Hinds (now State Entomologist of Louisiana) and later Dr. W. D. Pierce, built up a strong organization, and very early decided, after a very large-scale field demonstration, that a change of agricultural methods was neces- sary. They demonstrated that, with the use of an early-maturing variety of cotton and a forcing of the crop, bringing about an early har- vest, and the destruction of all cotton standing in the field by the end of October, damage by the weevil could be reduced to the minimum and its spread greatly delayed. Little or no attention, however, was paid to the recommendation. In the main, cotton continued to be planted and harvested in the same old way, and the spread of the insect con- tinued. It crossed into Louisiana in 1903, into Mississippi in 1907, and so on year after year until, in 31 years after the crossing of the Rio Grande, it had invaded practically all of the more than 600,000 square miles included in the so-called cotton belt. ; One who has never lived in the South cannot appreciate what this meant. At the time of the weevil’s advent, so large a measure of the prosperity of the South depended upon this one crop that its loss practically affected every industry and every individual. As it spread year after year, partial paralysis followed it at first. Mortgages on old plantations were foreclosed ; negro labor fled before the weevil’s advance; wealthy families were reduced to comparative poverty ; banks failed; planters and speculators suicided. All of these things happened, and happened very many times, but the spread of the weevil seemed as inexorable as fate. Louisiana made a desperate stand against its entrance from Texas, but did not cause the appearance of the newly planted crop had special significance on account of the belief that the weevils never feed on the leaves and that therefore arseni- cal applications to the foliage would be valueless. These tests were the basis for the recommendation of poisoning volunteer cotton, the weevil at that time being limited very largely to a region of such volunteer growth. 128 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VoL, 84 it more than a temporary delay; and after the Mississippi bottom lands were invaded it became apparent to all thinking and far-sighted men that the situation of the cotton belt was little short of des- perate. But the mass of the planters paid little heed to the warnings and advice of the experts. Wise prophets were scouted as alarmists, and very many took the stand that measures should be taken when the weevil should come and not before, apparently feeling that something indefinite would happen to retard or stop the spread and so save them. It is true that a delegation of prominent men from the Carolinas and from Georgia visited the infested regions and the government laboratory in Louisiana at one time and grasped the seriousness of the situation and foresaw the future disastrous results of the do-nothing policy. These men issued advice and warning to the planters of their States. But their prophetic wisdom met with no adequate response, and impoverishment, failure, and suicide marched steadily along with the weevil’s progress. It is true also that, under the urge of the Federal Government and with the support of congressional appropriations, a great campaign was started “ to meet the emergency caused by the advent of the boll weevil,” and that strenuous efforts were made to start new agricul- tural industries, to vary the crop, to draw the South from its abso- lute dependence on a single culture, This movement was the begin- ning of a wave which has run over the South and laid the ground- work for the rapidly growing activities now to be seen all through that portion of the country. Nevertheless, history repeated itself again and again. After a few years of weevil, that is to say, a few years of failure and despair, an invaded State or section of a State began to recover hope, to vary its crops and to continue to grow cotton, at a greater cost it is true, but with the spirit of enterprise and fight that carried it once more into a condition of comparative prosperity. Poor cotton lands have been abandoned; better ones have been more intelligently worked, and good crops have been grown in spite of the weevil. All through this era, and in spite of the discouragement due to apparent lack of appreciation on the part of the public, the entomolo- gists have worked manfully. The original headquarters of the inves- tigation at Victoria, Texas, were early removed to Dallas and later to Tallulah, Louisiana. As the northeastern part of the cotton belt was in- vaded a substation was established at Florence, South Carolina, where, in cooperation with the State, careful investigations were carried on to decide the variations in the life history of the extremely adaptable WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD I29 weevil which might have been brought about by its invasion of new and somewhat different territory. Able minds of trained men were constantly searching for new light, and every suggestion that was made, not only by men familiar with the cotton crop but by ingenious individuals all over the country and in fact in many parts of the world, was tested by the experts. And these experts included not only the men in the Federal service but also the official entomologists of the different States. As to these last men, it may be stated that. although at the beginning of the cotton boll weevil investigation there was hardly a single trained economic ento- mologist in the South and in fact no educational institution that trained such men, the lack was soon noted, and the southern colleges and universities took up entomology and began to turn out strong and well trained young men. At the time of present writing (1928), in spite of the enormous loss which has been caused by the weevil, conditions in the South are immeasurably better than they were 25 years ago. It is true that the abolition of the menace of yellow fever and the practical aboli- tion of the hookworm have been tremendous boons, but the boll weevil experience has probably been a blessing in disguise—in a very terrible disguise, but nevertheless a blessing. Appreciation of this fact is slowly coming. In fact, in at least one locality, it was realized a number of years ago, when a statue was erected to the boll weevil by the citizens of Enterprise, Alabama, with the legend “ In profound appreciation of the boll weevil and what it has done as the herald of prosperity.” The very competent cotton planter and economist, Mr. Alfred Stone, of Mississippi, in an address before the United States Cham- ber of Commerce in Cleveland, Ohio, in 1924, advanced the idea that “The boll weevil is not the dominantly controlling factor in cotton production which it is thought and claimed to be by the average man who considers or discusses the subject.” He goes on to say that if this were true “it would follow as a logical sequence that the final control of the weevil would mean such an over-supply of American cotton as would glut the markets of the world. If this were true then the control of the weevil would be a calamitous thing for the cotton grower, instead of a benefit, for his product would share the inevitable economic fate of the extreme over-production of any commodity.” As early as 1924, Dr. Clarence Poe, the Editor of the Progressive Farmer, summarized nine clearly indicated and logical results of the boll-weevil investigation in addition to the obvious result that the one- 130 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 crop system was being done away with and that diversification was being promoted. The nine results discussed by Doctor Poe were as follows: (1) The boll weevil is speeding up the processes of agricultural evolution in the South. (2) The boll weevil discourages absentee landlordism, which has been one of the great curses of the South. (3) The ancient crop-mortgage, “time-prices”’ system, which has so long cursed the South, has also been hard hit by the coming of the boll weevil. (4) Agriculture will become more nearly boss of itself (and not the tool of the mercantile interests). (5) The boll weevil sharply penalizes the traditional indifference to soil fertility which has also been one of the curses of the South. (6) The boll weevil necessitates higher grade tenants and renters and dis- perses those who do not come up to the new standards. (7) We must now have more intelligent labor, even to make cotton profitable, and this opens the way for other lines of farming progress heretofore neglected. (8) The boll weevil penalizes agricultural indifference and insures agricultural alertness. (9) Last but not least, the coming of the boll weevil promises to give us on southern farms a greater proportion of men who really love farming. .... The weevil has greatly intensified the struggle for the “survival of the fittest” and has caused thousands of the unfit to go into other industries and other sections. .... From now on, cotton growing demands alert intelligence. The boll weevil has speeded up both the passing of the clodhopper and the coming of the up-to- date farmer. In the great boll weevil investigation two names stand out most prominently among those of many who from time to time have been connected with it, namely W. D. Hunter and B. R. Coad. W. D. Hunter, of Nebraska, selected for the work in the spring of 1901 on account of the ability he had shown in another investi- gation, stayed in the cotton states, mainly in Texas, for the rest of his life. Centering around the boll weevil, his work gradually came to cover the whole subject of insects injurious to southern field crops, and later of insects affecting domestic animals and the health of man. He was respected and loved by many of the most prominent people of the South, and no man was ever more sincerely mourned. He com- bined scientific methods and scientific insight with a broad knowl- edge of practical affairs to an extent seldom found in an individual. B. R. Coad came to.the laboratory at Victoria, Texas, from the Uni- versity of Illinois in 1911. In 1915 he was placed in charge of the boll weevil laboratory at Tallulah, Louisiana, and Doctor Hunter gradually turned over to him the entire management of the boll weevil work. Coad developed the process of cotton dusting with calcium arsenate to such a perfection that it became the standard protection of cotton i! eae ee eee WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 131 against the weevil; and later brought about the use of airplanes for the distribution of this poison dust over large areas. Many people think that it has been very largely through his labors, that cotton can be grown profitably in the presence of the weevil. He is now (1928) in charge of all the work on Cotton Insects for the United States Bureau of Entomology.’ But the work, largely biological, of Hinds and Pierce and of many other assistants must not be forgotten. Possibly no other insect is better known today than is Anthonomus grandis. I first visited the field in 1896, joining Townsend and Schwarz. Again I joined Hunter in the summer of Igor, and for many years thereafter went to the South each year to see the conditions and the work. So vivid were the impressions I gained, so novel were the experiences, so many and so delightful were the new southern friends and so sad was the plight of many of them, that for many years the South, the southern people and the boll weevil were uppermost in my mind. The bravery of the people, the wonderful way they accepted a burden that would in any other region have driven thousands more to despair, was a revelation to me. They actually joked about this small but terrible enemy; cheap cigars were called “ boll weevils” ; sign- boards said “ Forget the boll weevil and come to [such and such a show] ”; the boll weevil became a daily and even an hourly word ; the man in the street was heard in a fight to call his opponent a blank blank boll weevil—evidently nothing worse, in his opinion, could be said. A politician in the heat of political argument was quite apt to *While I have omitted mention of State officials, a number of whom did excellent work in the course of the investigation of this pest, the name of Wilmon Newell stands out tor a very espec.al reason. Mr. Newell went south in 1902, and was stationed for a time in Texas. In 1903 and most of 1904 he was State Entomologist of Georgia, and in the latter part o: the latter year he was made Entomologist of the Louisiana Experiment Station and Secretary and Entomologist of the Louisiana Crop Pest Commission. These posts he held until 1910, when he returned to Texas; and eventually, in 1915, became Plant Commissioner for the State Plant Board of Florida. In 1921 he was made Dean of the College of Agriculture of the University of Florida, Director of the Florida Experiment Station, and Director of the Agricultural Extension Division of the University of Florida. His name stands out among the workers on the cotton boll weevil for the reason that in 1907, in Louisiana, he first tried powdered lead arsenate against the boll weevil. Large field tests followed in 1908 and 1909, and the results showed a decided increase in the yield on the poisoned plots. This was the first use of an arsenate in powder form against the weevil, and undoubtedly led naturally and directly to the development of calcium arsenate by Coad and the subsequent use of that material on such a broad scale throughout the cotton belt. 132 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 call his opponent a boll weevil. A prominent official of one State was called “ The greatest boll weevil the State of Mississippi ever pro- duced.” Doctor Hunter once told me that the boll weevil had figured in a number of romantic tales, some of them dealing with the villainous introduction of the insect for the purpose of wreaking vengeance on a community. Of course the insect figured often in the news- paper cartoons. One of the best of them appeared in the News of Greenville, South Carolina in 1911. It showed a gigantic boll weevil standing partly in Georgia and partly in Alabama, its shadow begin- ning to strike South Carolina. In its hand it held a black flag with skuil and cross-bones, and the legend read “ In the shadow of the pest.” And it got into poetry and even into the only folk-song we have in the United States—that of the negro. One of the longest and best of these is a narrative work song recorded by Prof. Gates Thomas, of the Southwestern Texas State Teachers College at San Marcos, in the Publications of the Texas Folk-Lore Society, No. 5 (1926), pages 173 to 175. The two stanzas at the end of this song are as follows: The boll-weevil sez to the farmer, “ What make yo’ neck so red?” “ Tryin’ to beat you devils; it’s a wonder I ain’t dead ; For you're takin’ my home, Babe, just a-takin’ my home! ” “Well ef you want to kill us, I'll sho-God tell yo’ how: Just bundle up yo’ cotton sack and th’ow away yo’ plow; Then hunt yo’ a home, Babe, then hunt yo’ a home.” Note that the boll weevil itself makes practically the same recom- mendation for its own extermination that Townsend made in his original report in the winter of 1894-5 and which was urged upon the Governor of Texas by Assistant Secretary Dabney and the writer. INSECTS AND DISEASE The last of the four striking discoveries of the last decade of the last century which have been so instrumental in the promotion of work in applied entomology was the demonstration by Ross in India that certain mosquitoes carry malaria and that only through their punctures do people get malaria. This was one of the most important, far-reaching, and revolutionary discoveries ever made in the etiology of disease. Although Manson had previously proved the transmission of filariasis by mosquitoes, and although Smith and Kilborn had demon- strated the carriage of the Texas fever of cattle by ticks, the insect WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 133 transmission of disease was brought before the people with immense force by Ross’ work. Malaria was practically a world-wide malady ; millions of people were subject to it; and it is therefore no wonder that the attention of investigators everywhere was drawn to this new field and that by their work the field was broadened out to an extraordinary degree. Almost immediately Ross’ results were con- firmed in Italy, and antimalaria work from the mosquito standpoint was begun in many parts of the world. In a very short time the work of Reed, Carroll, and Lazear demon- strated that without a doubt yellow fever is also mosquito-borne and is transferred only by a certain species of mosquito. Medical ento- mology became at once an important field of investigation. Dis- coveries followed one another with rapidity. New schools of tropical medicine were founded, and teaching in these subjects was begun in the medical colleges. In the thirty years that have elapsed since Ross’ discovery thousands of papers have been published giving the results of research work all over the world, and large and comprehensive books have been published on medical entomology. In fact, the world’s output of scientific papers relating to this kind of scientific work has become so great that their titles alone crowd the pages of the biblio- graphical journals, while at least one journal of this kind has been established solely for the review of this mass of special scientific literature. So rapidly did discoveries mount in number that as early as 1921 W. D. Pierce, in the large book edited by him and entitled “ Sani- tary Entomology,” devoted 27 pages to the mere listing (in fine print) of the maladies of man and domestic animals that are spread by insects, of their insect transmitters, and of the secondary hosts of these insects where such are involved. The four years and more of the world war, while interrupting scientific investigation to a cer- tain extent, incited work on some of the problems of this nature, and many important facts were discovered and many important results were gained. It is perfectly true that most of the main discoveries in medical entomology have been made by medical men, but all future work demands the intimate cooperation of pathologists and entomologists. The control of an insect-borne disease, whether of man or of domes- tic animals, means primarily the control of the carrier; and who so competent to investigate the possibilities in that direction as the man trained in economic entomology? Down to the present time perhaps the entomologists have realized this more than the medical men have done. It has happened too often that medical investigators have 134 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 underestimated the need of colleagues trained in entomology. They have underestimated the difficulties of entomological study. What has appeared simple to them has been shown often to be extremely complex. But the old ideas are passing away, and the vital need of cooperation in this as in so many other directions is apparent. The great French parasitologist, Raphael Blanchard, once said—- The rapid movement which leads medicine into the current of parasitology cannot be stopped. In reality these two branches of general biology seem more or less distinct, but, as two rivers whose waters meet and flow side by side for a certain distance soon come together, so parasitology may include almost the entire domain of medicine. (Translated.) This may be the extreme view of an over-enthusiastic parasitolo- gist, but it cannot fail to emphasize the importance of the study of the insect carriers of parasitic diseases. A rather full chapter on medical entomology will be found near the end of this book. QuARANTINE AGAINST INJURIOUS INSECTS Although the United States has been one of the very greatest suf- ferers from damage by pests imported accidentally through com- merce, it was one of the latest countries to adopt satisfactory quar- antine measures. This was due to some extent to ignorance and inertia, but later to the active opposition of organizations of people engaged in some one branch of the importing business. The Phylloxera scare, beginning in Europe in 1859 and going around the world subsequent to 1869, induced the first legislation of .this kind in other countries. Legislation against the Colorado potato beetle was adopted a few years later. Of all the States in the Union, California was the first to take action to stop the incoming of plant pests; and her first law, passed in 1881, was broad and at the same time specific, and, with subsequent modifications, has proved reason- ably effective. Other States were repeatedly urged to pass similar laws, relating, however, for the most part to commerce between States in the Union; and eventually certain other States followed the example of California. As early as January, 1895, I brought these laws together in Bulletin 33, old series, of the Division of Ento- mology, and there were at that time in operation State laws of Ore- gon, Washington, Idaho, New Jersey, Colorado, Missouri, Kansas, Minnesota, and Nebraska. Other States followed, and in Bulletin 13, new series, published three years later (1898) all of these laws were brought together. WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOW ARD 135 In an address entitled “ Injurious Insects and Commerce,” deliv- ered before the Peninsula Horticultural Society at Dover, Delaware, January r1, 1895, I made a plea for the extension of such legisla- tion, terming it ‘“‘ The Crying Need of the Present Time,” pointing out especially the unprotected Mexican border and stating that work had been begun by the Federal Department of Agriculture to study the possibilities of imported pests from Mexico. The following year (February 15, 1896) I gave an address before the Massachusetts Horticultural Society, urging the adoption of general legislation. Carrying the idea further, I prepared in 1897 a rather lengthy article entitled “‘ Danger of Importing Insect Pests,’ which was pub- lished in the Yearbook of the Department of Agriculture for that year, accompanied by illustrations of a number of the dangerous insect pests of foreign countries that at any time, through commerce, were possible assisted immigrants. During 1896 I had been corresponding with F. M. Webster, then Entomologist of the Ohio Experiment Station at Wooster, Ohio, who induced the Ohio State Horticultural Society to adopt resolutions calling for a “ national convention for the suppression of insect pests and plant diseases by legislation.” This convention was held March 5 and 6, 1897, at Washington. It was attended by representatives of State agricultural and horticultural societies, State granges, agricul- tural colleges and experiment stations, and experts from the United States Department of Agriculture. At this convention four papers were read—one by myself, entitled ‘‘ The Desirability of an Inspection System against Foreign Insects”; another by Dr. B. T. Galloway, of the Department of Agriculture, entitled “ Plant Diseases and the Possibility of Lessening their Spread by Legislation”; a third by B. F. Lelong, of California, entitled “The Inspection of Trees, Plants, Fruits, etc., as Conducted under the Laws in California ”’ ; and a fourth by Gerald McCarthy, of North Carolina, entitled “ Crop Pests and Their Repression by Law.” At this convention a bill was drafted and discussed.. I had a stenographic report made of the dis- cussion, which was printed in the proceedings of the convention which were published as a special unnumbered bulletin by the Department of Agriculture. In the discussion, the nurserymen, led by W. C. Barry, voiced several objections to the bill submitted. This was the first indication of the opposition to such legislation from the nursery- men and this opposition accumulated force from that time on for a number of years. *Insect Life, vol. 6, pp. 332-338, March, 1895 136 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 On the 5th of February, 1898, Germany suddenly placed an em- bargo on the importation of all American fruits and fruit plants. Ger- many was followed by nearly every European country; and other countries of the world followed suit. There was great consternation in official circles in Washington when Germany’s action became known. President McKinley called in his Secretary of State, Judge Wm. R. Day, and they puzzled about the reasons. Had it been done in retaliation for the action of the American government in regard to trichinized pork from Germany? At all events, they decided it must be looked into at once, and the Secretary of State cabled to Ambassador Andrew D. White at Berlin to find out the cause of the apparently unfriendly action on the part of the German government. Ambassador White called on the German Minister of Foreign Affairs, Von Bitlow, who smiled and sent for a pamphlet which proved to be a bulletin on the San Jose scale that had just been pub- lished in Washington and of which a copy had been transmitted to Berlin by the Scientific Attaché of the German Embassy in Washing- ton. Ambassador White cabled back to the Secretary of State; and the Secretary of Agriculture, James Wilson, was immediately brought into the discussion. Not only did‘ this action on the part of foreign governments em- phasize tremendously the importance of action for self-protection on the part of the American government, but incidentally it called atten- tion to the importance of the policy of establishing scientific attachés at foreign capitals.’ I remember an attempt to draft a satisfactory bill modifying the bill drawn up by the convention of March 5, 1897, which was made by the Hon. Gilbert N. Haugen and myself at his rooms in the old St. James Hotel. Mr. A. E. Ingram (later of the Consular Service but at that time a stenographer in the Bureau of Entomology ) acted as assistant. This was the bill, I think, covering both interstate commerce in domestic stock and the protection of entry of foreign stock that was introduced by Mr. Wadsworth, then Chairman of the Agricultural Committee of the House, December 4, 1899 (H. R. 96), and on February 12, 1900, was reported to the House by Mr. Haugen with amendments from the committee. This bill thereafter was reintroduced at different sessions of Con- gress. It led a precarious existence. The opposition of importing nurserymen and the interstate factors involved prevented it from eoing far. It never reached an advanced stage. In the meantime * This latter point had already been urged by Secretary Wilson in his report to the President of the United States in 1802. WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOW ARD D7 numerous conferences were held by entomologists and the Legisla- tive Committee of the National Association of Nurserymen, without any agreement as to suitable legislation. Finally in 1908 the promoters of this legislation became thoroughly discouraged, and the project was definitely abandoned in this shape, since, the San Jose scale having in the meantime been carried on nursery stock into practically every State in the Union, the original reason for the predominating inter- state features of the bill had been largely eliminated. I remember well the hearings before the Committee on Agriculture of the House in the winter of 1908-1909 and my complete discouragement as to the possibility of securing the needed legislation. Fortunately, there was a man who did not allow himself to be dis- couraged, and that was Dr. C. L. Marlatt, later Chairman of the Fed- eral Horticultural Board and now also Chief of the Bureau ot Entomology. As it happened, the fruit stock that came in from Europe, particu- larly from France, in 1908 and 1909 carried very many over-winter- ing nests of the brown-tail moth and many egg-masses of the gipsy moth. These sendings were consigned in very many cases to regions of the United States that had not yet been reached by either of these pests. We were all very greatly alarmed about the matter, At that time, as already stated, many of the States had passed quarantine and inspection laws, and these shipments were held up at many places, and the findings were reported by State inspectors. Doctor Marlatt became intensely interested, and began in 1909 vigorously to prose- cute once more the question of national legislation. He drafted a new bill for Congress on a plan that differed greatly from the earlier ones, since it related solely to the safeguarding of plant importations and to the control of important new pests having limited foothold in the United States, abandoning altogether the question of Federal control of interstate traffic in nursery stock that had been carried in the earlier bills. This bill, with the authority of Secretary Wilson, was submitted by Doctor Marlatt to the House Committee on Agricul- ture. It was introduced by Mr. Scott, the Chairman of that com- mittee, on January 29, 1909, and promptly passed the House. Learn- ing of this, the Legislative Committee of the National Association of Nurserymen came to Washington and asked permission to study the bill and possibly to suggest amendments in minor features. The bill was then withdrawn for this purpose, with Mr. Scott’s full consent. Having secured this withdrawal of the bill, the nurserymen opposed any legislation, and during the three and a half years following were 10 138 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 able to prevent the enactment of any law having this general effect. Doctor Marlatt has on file many different drafts and reproductions of the plant quarantine act, which was several times wholly rewritten, and notably after its first disastrous failure March 2, 1911, when it came up for a vote by the House, The legislation was strongly criti- cised at the time of the vote by several influential Congressmen, notably by Messrs. Mann, Rucker, and Lever. Doctor Marlatt did not, however, allow himself to be discouraged, and, believing that the opposition of such men must be based on lack of information as to the purpose and necessity for the legislation, immediately sought and obtained interviews with the Congressmen named, and without much difficulty brought them into alignment back of the bill and secured their support. Through them also he secured the support of Speaker Cannon and others; and the Plant Quarantine Act of August 20, 1912, passed. Mr. Mann became par- ticularly interested, aided very materially in redrafting the bill, and was its warm friend and supporter during the remainder of his life. By the spring of 1912 I was convinced that no immediate relief was to be expected from Congress, and went to Europe partly for the purpose of trying to secure the establishment in France, England, Germany, and Holland (our principal sources of living plants) of thoroughly competent inspection services to assure the cleanness from insects and disease of plants exported to the United States. It seemed to me then that this was our last hope. I visited the ministries of agriculture in each of these countries, and, in spite of my doubts con- cerning legislation by this country, I predicted to these foreign minis- tries an eventual embargo on all their plant shipments to the United States in case they did not at once bring about a thoroughly compe- tent inspection over there that would stand the test. Although the French laws were already fairly good, and although their inspection service was supposed to be in charge of a perfectly competent man, I made an address before the Academy of Agriculture of France and received the assurance that they would at once memorialize the Min- istry. In fact, I was promised by the authorities of France, Belgium, and Holland that their inspection staffs would be strengthened imme- diately. After all this had been done, I received a cablegram from Secretary Wilson in. August to the effect that the bill had passed. Thus my efforts in the summer of 1912 were in large part wasted. I remember that in one of the committee hearings in 1908, the Chairman of the Legislative Committee of the National Nursery- men’s Association remarked that he did not fear a bill that would be liberally interpreted and in which the interests of the importers would WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 139 be carefully guarded, but he did fear that it might be administered in a very strict manner by such a keen person as Doctor Marlatt (and he mentioned him by name). The latter replied that he would not accept such a thankless and difficult position. However, when the bill did pass in 1912, Doctor Marlatt was induced to accept the chairmanship of the Board which he held with very great efficiency and tact until the close of 1929. It is an interesting and somewhat sad commentary on the delay in securing this legislation that during the interval of four years between the original introduction of the bill and its final passage in 1912 no less than seven important pests, many of which are now the subject of very considerable State and Federal appropriations, entered this country and became established—such pests, for example, as the European corn borer, the Japanese and related Asiatic beetles, the oriental fruit moth, and the Citrus canker. The energetic enforcement of the provisions of the Act of 1912, brought about by Doctor Marlatt’s intelligent energy, aided by Con- gressional appropriations, has been undoubtedly of the greatest value to the United States. In looking over some old papers, I have found some notes of a lecture that I gave in the spring of 1912 before the Brooklyn Insti- tute and before the Staten Island Academy of Sciences. I talked in this way several times during the winter of 1911-12. In order to convey an impression of the way we felt at that time and to give an idea of the efforts we were making, I think that it will be interest- ing to quote from those notes : In most if not all European governments many laws are made in the form of decrees issued by the ruler or by his council or by the ministry, and these may or may not be subject to ratification by the parliament or house of delegates. In the United States, even in case of emergency, a bill must be carefully drafted and must pass both the House of Representatives and the Senate of the United States at a session always crowded with business and by Members and Senators dependent for their places upon men representing many opposing business interests. Partly for this reason and partly for others, the United States is the only important agricultural country in the world today which does not have a national quarantine and inspection law governing the introduction of plants and prevent- ing the introduction of injurious insects and plant diseases. This country today is the dumping-ground for plants which could not be sold in any other market in the world, while the rest of the horticultural world is quarantined against us. This was followed by an account of the European legislation against the Phylloxera, the German decrees against American pork, the sending of Doctor Stiles to Germany to investigate the alleged 140 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 presence of trichinae in inspected American meats, and the Ger- man decree in 1898 against the importation of American fruits. I then went on to tell of the efforts that had been made on the part of the people most vitally interested and on the part of the officials of the Department of Agriculture at Washington to secure the passage of protective legislation for the United States; and concluded with the following remarks: Never before in the history of the Republic has the urgency of such a law been so great. We are menaced on all sides not only by unknown dangers but by a number which are thoroughly well understood. The Mediterranean fruit fly, an insect which destroys practically all kinds of fruit, filling them with its disgusting maggots and causing them to drop and to decay, has made its appearance in Hawaii, and every bit of fruit landing on our Pacific coast from the Island of Oahu is quite likely to contain this insect in one stage or another, and in the absence of quarantine its establishment in this country sooner or later is a certainty. With the knowledge of what this insect has done in Western Australia, in South Africa and on the Island of Oahu, it is obvious that no worse calamity could befall the fruit-growing industry of this country than the introduction of this pest. A prompt quarantine on all Hawaiian fruit is the only thing that can save us. But we are confronting an equally dire emergency on the other side. Last year the potato crop of the country as a whole was a failure, and we are now importing potatoes from all available sources; potato growers are importing seed potatoes from Europe, and they are coming in every day without inspection and without reference to the prevalence of disease in the regions from which they are sent to us. It so happens that in many parts of Europe there exists at the present time one of the most serious of all known diseases of the potato; it converts a tuber into an ugly, irregular and utterly unsalable growth. When established in a field it may affect the entire crop and the land remains so infected that potatoes cannot be successfully grown for six or more years. The disease is known as the ‘“ wart disease,” “ black scab,” “the canker,” and “ the cauliflower,” and is caused by a fungus. It occurs at present in Scotland, Wales, Germany and Hungary. It has already crossed the Atlantic and has become prevalent in Newfoundland; our neighbor, Canada, has quarantined against Newfoundland potatoes, but Newfoundland can send her potatoes to the United States without let or hindrance. There should be in this country a rigorous quarantine at this moment against potatoes from Newfoundland, Scotland, Wales, Germany and Hungary. Botanists have known for some time of a dangerous European disease of the white pine, which also affects other five-needle pines and occurs on wild and cultivated currants and gooseberries. This disease has been imported into America at several places, but by active cooperation among the persons interested all cases found have been eradicated. This disease is known as the “ blister rust’’ and its effect upon pines is disastrous; the fungus is sure to kill a tree if the attack is on the stem, and most of the young trees attacked on the, stem die the first season Its introduction into our valuable pine forests would be a national calamity, yet nurserymen may bring pine trees at their will from the worst infested regions of Europe. Moreover, even a patriotic and honest American importer of nursery stock is easily deceived by the dishonest European WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOW ARD I4I importer, and blister rust has been found in this country on pines shipped from a healthy region in France, and later I was told by the exporter himself that he had purchased this stock near the infested district in Germany. A quarantine against all European pines is needed. At present those scourges of the forests and orchards, the gipsy moth and the brown-tail moth, are confined to New England, but every year nursery stock containing the winter nests of the brown-tail moth and the egg-masses of the gipsy moth enters the port of New York from Europe and is scattered over the country. There is no law which can bring about the inspection of this stock ; but by the cooperation of many people an inspection is generally secured even in the absence of the law; it is the best we can do. The Bureau of Entomology at Washington is notified by the Collector of the Port of New York and of other ports upon the arrival of plants from abroad, and is furnished with the name and address of the consignee. Several of the large importing agents in New York send the addresses of the ultimate consignees to the Bureau; several of the railroads also send word of the carriage of foreign plants. In this way, in the great majority of cases, perhaps nearly in all, the Bureau learns the addresses of the persons receiving the plants, and is enabled, either through inspectors of the different states or through its own inspectors, to inspect the plants before they are put in the ground and to advise concerning the destruction of those found to be infested with new pests. It may happen, however, at any time that the gipsy moth and the brown-tail moth and other forest and orchard pests of Europe may escape this kind of inspection, through faulty notification, and may establish themselves here, there, or anywhere in the United States ; and when we think of the havoc that these two insects have made in New England and of the enormous sums of money which have been spent to hold them in check, the prospect that other States will have similar fights on their hands is appalling. It is safe to say that of insects alone, and not considering diseases of plants. the species accidentally imported into this country are costing us some hundreds of millions of dollars annually. It is also safe to say that if the nation does not secure a quarantine and inspection law this amount will be doubled by the losses caused by new introductions. That this estimate is moderate is shown when we consider only the pests recently introduced and established, that is within the past year or so. Possibly the most destructive of these is the alfalfa leaf weevil, which has already caused enormous damage in Utah and which has spread over into the Wyoming fields and threatens to spread throughout the great alfalfa-growing region of the middle west. The introduction and spread of this insect is a veritable calamity, so much depends upon the alfalfa crops in those regions. Dr. John B. Smith, of New Jersey, has recently called attention to the discovery of the European red-tail moth in New Jersey. This is capable of being a very troublesome pest, and is a general feeder in Europe, sometimes entirely defoliating forest areas. In Cambridge, Massachusetts, it has recently been found that the smaller European elm bark beetle has become established, and, working with the leopard moth—also a European importation—has nearly destroyed the mag- nificent elms in and around the campus of Harvard University. These old trees are being uprooted, and the cost of their removal alone amounts to $30 per tree. What bids fair to be a very important apple pest is the apple seed chalcis which has been found in New York State. It is a well-known European pest, 142 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 and probably came to this county with apple seeds imported from France. It has spread in destructive numbers in orchards in Pennsylvania. A destructive scale-insect known as Pulvinaria psidii has recently appeared in Florida and has been widely distributed on nursery stock by one of the leading firms of that State. The mango seed weevil has come in very commonly in mango seeds imported for planting the past year. A warning circular has been issued on this insect, and it is to be hoped that it has not escaped in Florida. And now a word as to the other pests that are coming in almost daily. Extreme care is taken in the importations of the Department of Agriculture. All such material coming to Washington is thoroughly inspected by officers of the Bureau_of Entomology, and, as illustrating what may be brought in by such material, and which in the case of private importers must often escape detection, it may be noted that more than 20 different pests have been intercepted on the importations by the Department, many of them new to this country and with very great possibilities for damage. FAKE INSECTICIDES AND INSECTICIDE LEGISLATION It is probable that the condition of affairs with regard to fake or charlatanistic remedies for insects in this country during the last century was no worse than it was in other countries, but it was very bad. There was no governmental control of the sale of compounds for which the most absurd claims were made; and towards the close of the century even such standard insecticides as Paris green were adulterated and sold as pure and effective. If one runs through the old files of the agricultural and horticultural journals it is easy to find advertisements of mixtures for which the most absurd claims are made. There is a queer quirk in the human mind which accounts for the success of fakers. Thousands upon thousands of dollars go into the pockets of these persons daily in many ways and on account of many claims. The public is swindled with most incredible ease, and in the old days fruit-growers and farmers seemed to be especially easy to fool. No one in the United States wrote about these matters so fre- quently and so forcibly as Benjamin D. Walsh. The two volumes of The Practical Entomologist published in 1865 to 1867 contained many vigorous articles from his pen showing up the absurdity of many remedies which were advocated in the agricultural press. He did not mince words. Some of his articles appeared under the following head- ings: “ Popular Remedies for Noxious Insects,” “ Doctors Differ,” “A New Humbug,” “Another Humbug,” “ Universal Remedies,” “Entomology Indeed Run Mad,” “ Doctoring Fruit-Trees Again,” “Another Universal Remedy,” “A Mass of Mistakes,” “ More Uni- versal Remedies,” “ Quacks and Physicians.” WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 143 Walsh’s fearlessness and his trenchant style were admirable. No one has expressed himself in print about these matters quite as posi- tively as he did. Here are some quotations: Addressing the advertiser of a patent remedy, he says, “ We fear greatly that, instead of being a decently good entomologist, tolerably well acquainted with the noxious insects of the United States, you are a mere entomological quack ; and that, instead of talking good, com- mon, horse sense to us, you are uttering all the time nothing but bosh.” Another time, writing of people of that class and the avidity with which farmers and fruit-growers bought their wares, he says, “ Long live King Humbug! He still feeds fools on flapdoodle, and many of them have large and flourishing families who will perpetuate the breed to the remotest generation.” In another connection, referring to the sudden springing of an old scientific name on a generation that commonly uses a later one, he says (and we quote it to show his style), “To my mind the naturalist who rakes out of the dust of old libraries some long-forgotten name and demands that it shall take the place of a name of universal accep- tance, ought to be indicted before the High Court of Science as a public nuisance, and on conviction sent to a Scientific Penitentiary and fed there for the whole remaining term of his scientific life upon a diet of chinch bugs and formic acid.” I have made a slight search for some of the old advertisements of those days, but have not found any which it is worth while to repro- duce. Reputable journals did not often print them as they did the advertisements of patent medicines, but the most extraordinary circu- lars were mailed to farmers and fruit-growers, and the country mer- chants permitted the posting of placards and engaged to some extent in the sale of these untried nostrums. Thanks to sound legislation in this country the situation is now greatly improved, but there is still a tendency to push the sale of com- pounds of unproved worth, and there is an amazing readiness on the part of the agricultural public to buy almost anything that is offered. This probably is human nature. In my frequent journeys to European countries I have found that conditions in this direction in many of those countries are much like they used to be in the United States. There does not seem to be gov- ernment control over the sale of worthless nostrums. In 1903 only six States of the United States had passed insecticide laws—California, Louisiana, New York, Oregon, Texas, and Wash- ington. The first State law was probably enacted in Louisiana, but it 144 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 related only to Paris green and to the percentage of arsenic contained in this substance as sold—established as a standard that there should be a content of fifty per cent arsenic (probably meaning white arsenic—As.O;). In 1898 New York passed a law to prevent fraud in the sale of Paris green. In r8g9 Oregon and Texas passed insecti- cide laws or combined insecticide and fungicide laws. The Oregon law named specifically Paris green, arsenic, London purple, sulphur, “or any spray material or compound for spraying purposes, in quantities exceeding one pound.” It required a certificate guaran- teeing the quality and per cent of purity of the materials. It provided also a fine for the violation of the act. The Texas law was passed in 1899 and was entitled “An Act for the better protection of the farmer in the purchase of commercial fertilizers and commercial poisons used for destroying bollworms and other pests.” The history of the Federal legislation has been described competently by Dr J. K. Haywood of the Bureau of Chemistry of the United States Department of Agriculture in his address as President of the Asso- ciation of Official Agricultural Chemists in 1920. It is published in the Journal of that Association, Volume 4, No. 1, August 15, 1920. Doctor Haywood, in this address, gives the credit of suggesting Fed- eral legislation on this subject to the Association of Economic Ento- mologists and more especially to Prof. E. D. Sanderson, then Director of the New Hampshire Agricultural Experiment Station. The Asso- ciation of Economic Entomologists had a standing committee on pro- ptietary insecticides, and Professor Sanderson was chairman of this committee. The Association instructed this committee to investigate the possibility of securing an interpretation of the Federal Food and Drugs Act which would bring proprietary insecticides and fungi- cides within its scope, and, should this not be possible, to consider the feasibility of securing an amendment to the law so that proprietary insecticides and fungicides would be covered. It was the opinion of Dr. H. W. Wiley, Chief of the Bureau of Chemistry, after consulting legal opinion, that the Food and Drugs Act did not cover insecti- cides, and he reported that there should be a special insecticide law. The committee of entomologists requested Doctor Wiley to formulate a Federal insecticide law, and the task was assigned by Doctor Wiley to Doctor Haywood.. In his draft, the law applied only to insecti- cides. It provided in certain cases larger fines than are provided for in the law which eventually passed Congress. It directed that the Act be inforced by the Bureau of Chemistry. It defined “ original un- broken package.” It stated that the amount of arsenious oxid in Paris green must be.55 per cent. It stated that arsenic in water- WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 145 soluble forms in lead arsenate must not be equivalent to more than one per cent of arsenic oxid. It did not allow the addition of water to lead arsenate under certain restrictions. And it did not declare a product adulterated if it contained substances injurious to vegetation. At the suggestion of Professor Sanderson, the law was rewritten to cover fungicides, and later a section was added to prevent the sale of insecticides or fungicides that would injure vegetation. The law as finally corrected, with the exception of the clause relative to injuring vegetation, was introduced in the Senate of the United States on April 6, 1908, and while the bill was being consid- ered the entomologists, the agricultural chemists, and various manu- facturers met for consultation concerning the provisions of the bill. In its final form it was passed in April, 1910, and became effective on and after the first day of January, IQIT. The most important features of the Act are as follows: (a) Definite standards for lead arsenates and Paris greens are stated, and it is required that all lead arsenates and Paris greens subject to the act shall conform to these rigid specifications. (b) All insecticides and fungicides (other than lead arsenates and Paris greens) which contain inert ingredients shall bear a statement upon the face of the principal label of each and every package giving the name and percentage amount of each and every inert ingredient contained therein and the fact that it is inert, or, in lieu of this, a statement of the name and percentage amount of each and every active ingredient which has insecticidal or fungicidal ou together with the total percentage of inert ingredients. (c) For insecticides (other than lead arsenates and Paris greens) and for fungicides which contain arsenic or compounds of this metal, a statement must be made on the face of the principal label of the total arsenic, expressed as per cent of metallic arsenic, and total arsenic in water-soluble forms, similarly expressed. (d) No statement, design, or device appearing on the label of an insecticide, fungicide, Paris green or lead arsenate shall be false or misleading in any particular. It will at once be seen that all false or exaggerated claims relative to the efficacy of the article constitute misbranding, and the Government is empowered to institute criminal or seizure proceedings as outlined above. (e) All insecticides and fungicides (other than lead arsenates and Paris greens) must be up to the standard under which they are sold. (f) No substance or substances shall be contained in any insecticide or fungicide (other than lead arsenates and Paris greens) which shall be injurious to the vegetation on which such articles are intended to be used. There are various other requirements, and, in the words of Doc- tor Haywood, “It is by a strict enforcement of these provisions specifically mentioned that the consumer is largely protected against those products which bear misleading claims, which are absolute fakes, and which, while killing insects and fungi, may be injurious to the vegetation on which they are intended to be used.” 146 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VoL. 84 The law is enforced by a board of four members: a representative from the Bureau of Chemistry, one from the Bureau of Plant Indus- try, one from the Bureau of Entomology (Dr. A. L. Quaintance), and one from the Bureau of Animal Industry. Down to June 30, 1927, the Federal Insecticide Board, operating under the law just discussed, was an independent board under the Secretary of Agriculture, the representative from the Bureau of Chemistry, Dr. J. K. Haywood, being the Chairman. Working under his direction, there were employed in the Bureau of Chemistry chem- ists, bacteriologists, and microscopists who made examinations of insecticides, fungicides, and disinfectants, publishing the results in some instances only. The entomologists and plant pathologists of the Board made investigations to determine whether the ingredients of insecticides and fungicides were active or inert against various insects and plant diseases and also whether these substances were injurious to vegetation. Under the appropriation bill for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1928, there was a marked reorganization of some of the branches of departmental work, and the administration of the Insecticide and Fungicide Law was placed definitely under the Bureau of Chemistry and Soils, the old Bureau of Soils having thus been combined with the former Bureau of Chemistry. The law, how- ever, operates as before, with this alteration only. Since the passage of the act of 1910, many States have passed independent laws. At the time of Doctor Haywood’s presidential address in 1920, 21 States had passed such laws which were then in force. The operation of the law has been highly beneficial. Inspectors of the Board have traveled throughout the United States on carefully prepared itineraries, collecting samples of insecticides and fungicides for examination and test to determine whether or not they are in violation of the act. These samples are sent to the Board at Wash- ington, under seal and with complete records identifying the sample with a specific interstate shipment since the penalties provided by the act refer, so far as the Federal Government is concerned, only to interstate shipments. These samples are assigned by the Board to one or more of the four groups that are engaged in the enforce- ment of the act. If any samples are found to violate the provisions of the law, appropriate charges are prepared and submitted to the Board. If violation is shown, the manufacturer is cited to a hearing and given a chance to show any error in the findings of the Board. If he succeeds in showing that there has been no violation of the law, the case is placed in abeyance. If the violation is shown not to have WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOW ARD TA, been flagrant, the manufacturer is given an opportunity to correct his labels, without resort to the courts. Eventually the Board con- siders thé matter again, and, if prosecution is decided upon, the Solicitor of the Department of Agriculture is consulted and given the recommendation of the Board. The Solicitor then decides, from the legal point of view, whether or not in his opinion the law has been violated. If it has been violated, the Secretary of Agriculture is appealed to for action. If he agrees with the Board and the Solicitor, the Department of Justice is called in and the case is referred to the proper United States attorney for prosecution. Reports of decisions are published from time to time, and the result has been that the public has been protected to a very marked degree and an enormous amount of swindling has been prevented. Without doubt the passage of this act and its subsequent successful administration has been a great step in the fight against insects. It has been an object-lesson to other nations. At the beginning of the fiscal year 1928 the Department brought together into one unit, known as the Food, Drug, and Insecticide Administration, a number of regulatory activities as indicated by the title. With this reorganization the Insecticide and Fungicide Board, which had operated since the passage of the act of 1910, ceased to function; and this new regulatory administration added to its force the entomologists and pathologists previously working under the direction of the Bureau of Entomology and the Bureau of Plant Industry. These experts, however, as under the old Insecticide Board, devote their attention exclusively to the securing of informa- tion concerning proprietary insecticides, fungicides, and disinfec- tants, that will be of use in the ‘enforcement of the act. Economic ENTOMOLOGY IN THE SOUTHERN UNITED STATES Climate, occasional outbreaks of yellow fever, the prevalence of the hookworm, and later the Civil War combined to keep the South- ern States behind the front line of progress. The result has been, with economic entomology, that there were no trained workers born and educated in the South until a very recent date. There were some early writers who published good things, such as Colonel Edmund Ruffin who wrote on the Angoumois grain moth, and Thomas Affleck, Dr. D. B. Gorham, Dr. D. L. Phares, Dr. E. H: mnderson, judgzelW. J. ‘ones, Prot: J. E. Wallet, and Prof: J. P. Stelle, all of whom wrote at some length, principally about the cot- ton caterpillar. Then there were at least three northerners who went 148 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS vot. 84 south for some years, who were trained scientific men and who wrote about insects. These were Dr. W. I. Burnett, Major J. L. LeConte, and Dr. A. R. Grote. Even 25 years ago there were no native southern entomologists, and there was no competent instruction given in entomology in any southern institution. I remember in the early days of the cotton boll weevil investigation, when I was discussing appropriations with the Committee on Agriculture of the House of Representatives, one of the southern members of the committee said to me “ Who is this man Hunter; where does he come from?” I replied, “‘ From Ne- braska.” “And who is Hinds?” was the next question, ‘“‘ Where does he come from?” My reply was “ Massachusetts.” “‘ Well,” said the Member of Congress, ‘“ I should think that you would have sufficient judgment to employ for a job of this kind southern boys who know the cotton crop and who know the people.” My reply was that the South at that time was not educating men in this line, and I went on to say that Mr. Jefferson Johnson, then Commissioner of Agriculture of Texas, had told me only a few weeks betore, at Austin, that he con- sidered W. D. Hunter of the Bureau’s force the best posted man he knew on all aspects of the cotton crop. It was at this same hearing that I took with me an enlarged papier- maché model of the cotton boll weevil, perhaps 14 inches long. When Mr. Wadsworth, the chairman of the committee, called on me, 1 took this model from its case and placed it on the table before me: upon which Captain John Lamb, of Virginia, a member of the committee, sang out to Congressman Burleson of Texas, who was also a member of the committee and afterwards Postmaster General under President Wilson, “ My God! Burleson, is it as big as that?” It is probably not realized that practically all of the men who have become prominent in entomological work in the Southern States during the last 25 years (this is written at the close of 1927) have been of northern birth and northern education. Let us take a dozen of them. Wilmon Newell, of Texas, Louisiana, and Florida, was born in Iowa and educated at the lowa State College of Agriculture. W. E. Hinds, of Texas, Georgia, and now of Louisiana, was born and educated in Massachusetts (Massachusetts Agricultural Col- lege). Franklin Sherman, of North Carolina and South Carolina, although born in Virginia, was educated at Cornell University. A. F. Conradi, formerly of South Carolina, was born and educated in Ohio (Ohio State University). Harrison Garman, for many years Ento- mologist of Kentucky, was born in Illinois and educated at Johns WHOLE VOL. APPLIED. ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 149 Hopkins. J. H. Morgan, for many years an authoritative worker in Louisiana, and now President of the State University of Tennessee, was born in Ontario, educated at Guelph and Toronto. E. N. Cory, for many years Entomologist of Maryland, although born in New York, was educated at the Maryland Agricultural College. R. W. Harned, the efficient Entomologist of Mississippi, although born in Maryland was educated at the Ohio State University and at Cornell. W. D. Hunter, who lived during practically the whole of his produc- tive life in Texas and was very highly esteemed by the cotton planters and other prominent men of that State, was born and educated in Nebraska. G. M. Bentley, the Entomologist of Tennessee, was born in Massachusetts and educated at Cornell. E. W. Berger, the Ento- mologist of the Florida Experiment Station, a well known worker, was born in Ohio and educated in Ohio colleges and at Johns Hopkins. E. L. Worsham, the twelfth on our list, is the only one who was born in the far south, namely in Georgia, and was educated at the Georgia State University and at Cornell. The South, however, is rapidly coming into her own in all ways, including economic entomology. Sound courses in applied entomology are being given in all the southern State colleges, and young men are being graduated who are well fitted to produce good results. I had written down to this point in December, 1927. At the end of the year the annual meeting of the American Association of Eco- nomic Entomologists was held at Nashville, Tennessee, in conjunction with the annual meeting of the American Association for the Ad- vancement of Science. The annual address to the Economic Ento- mologists was given by the retiring President, Prof. R. W. Harned of the University of Mississippi. He had chosen for his subject “Entomology in the Southern States,’ and when published the ad- dress was found to cover 25 pages of the February, 1928, number of the Journal of Economic Entomology. This very full paper covers the ground about which I have written above and introduces very many significant statements. Professor Harned, with an intimate knowledge of the conditions that exist in the Southern States today, evidently spent much time and much thought upon this paper and brought out many points of importance. He showed, for example, that the South is today in reality one of the most active sections of the country in entomological work. Based upon figures of one million white population, he shows that, of the members of the two great national entomological societies, namely the Entomological Society of America and the American Association of Economic Entomologists, the State of Mississippi leads (after the District of Columbia) ; that 150 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 Florida is third, and Louisiana fourth, these three Southern States exceeding the old entomological centers of Pennsylvania, New York, Ohio, Illinois, and the New England States. Incidentally, his tabula- tion indicates that California comes sixth, and that Utah, Oregon, Idaho, and Wyoming take the eighth, ninth and tenth places, imme- diately preceding Massachusetts. He has tabulated the amounts spent on entomological research in the South and shows that more than $105,000 is being spent annually in this way by the 11 southern experiment stations which employ for this purpose 50 men. He inci- dentally shows that the Federal Government is spending $392,000 on full-time projects in the South, employing 73 workers, and that further the Federal Government is spending parts of a sum amount- ing to $166,000 upon projects which are being investigated in the South as well as at northern and western stations. He further shows that, while the Southern States are comparatively lacking in great collections of insects, there are still many points at which creditable collections occur. As to results, the showing is very strong, as detailed under 12 headings in the address. Notably striking are the paragraphs con- cerning malaria. One of these significant paragraphs may be quoted: Twenty years ago at the Mississippi Agricultural and Mechanical College for a month or more after college opened each fall the hospital would be crowded with students from the Delta section of the State who were suffering from malaria. Dozens of the worst cases would be kept in the hospital, and in addition the college physician would usually be called upon to treat several hundred milder cases. What are the conditions now? For several years the college physician has not had to treat a single serious case of malaria, and only a small number of mild cases which scarcely interfere with the students’ work. Another significant statement : Sunflower County, Mississippi, in the center of the Yazoo-Mississippi Delta, was 20 years ago teeming with mosquitoes and malaria, yet in 1923 and 1924 girls from this county won the National Health Contest in Chicago in competition with the healthiest girls from all parts of the country, and the 1926 girl from that county tied for first place with an Iowa girl. Could this have happened 20 years ago? In his discussion of the amateur entomologists of the South, Pro- fessor Harned refers to the men I have mentioned above and very justly adds Ed Foster’of New Orleans. Mr. Foster, formerly a news- paper man connected with the New Orleans Picayune, has for many years been a shining light in entomology in the far south. A man of very thorough information, he has played a great part in many eco- nomic investigations, and at one time or another has acted as official adviser and helper in Government and State investigations. WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD I51 In the discussion of Professor Harned’s address, the writer said that he had just written something on the subject of entomology in the South ; that he was going to tear up what he had written and write it over again when the presidential address should be published. Since then he has decided to leave it as it was and to add some state- ments from the address and to express his great appreciation of Pro- fessor Harned and his work. I must add another paragraph in order to mention an interesting paper by Wilmon Newell read at the February, 1929, meeting of the Cotton States Branch of the Association of Economic Entomologists. It was entitled “ Comments on Entomology in the South during the Past Twenty-Five Years.” The paper is an interesting though brief summary, and mentions a number of names of younger men in addi- tion to those we have already noticed, but does not touch upon the subject of sectional education. In this paper Mr. Newell, modestly, does not mention his own very important work except by referring impersonally to the results obtained by the Crop Pest Commission of Louisiana with powdered arsenate of lead and to the demonstra- tion by the Commission (really by himself) in 1909 of the fact that the boll weevil could be profitably poisoned. Great credit should be given to Mr. Newell for this work and also for the remarkable work he has done in Florida culminating with the great struggle now going on (January, 1930) against the Mediterranean fruit fly. In a paper entitled “ The Modern Trend in Entomology ” read by Mr. Newell before the Science Seminar at College Station, Texas, on February 8, 1929, he gave a very broad consideration of the general problem, and in his section on “ Eradication ” includes the following paragraph: y Unfortunately, attempts at the eradication of introduced insects in the United States have not been characterized by general success, but rather by temporizing and delay while the coveted opportunity has slipped away. It is a very striking fact that only a few months after this paper was delivered Mr. Newell was confronted with the appearance of the fruit fly in Florida, and went at the emergency without temporiz- ing and without delay. Economic ENTOMOLOGY IN CALIFORNIA California is one of two States in the Union which might be entirely self-supporting. It contains practically every climate, every kind of soil, abundant mineral resources, and can grow all things needed for human support. It has had but a short history as an agri- 152 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 cultural State. It has a rapidly growing (already very large) popu- lation which seems to be unanimous in its loyalty to the State and in its opinion of the advantages of residence in the State, but which otherwise is very heterogeneous. For many years the political man- agement of the State has wavered from good to bad and back again. For many years the railroads were said to control the State and its politics. There has been a tendency for many years for persons with strange beliefs to migrate to California, largely on account of its climate, and southern California today is known as the home of all of the heterodoxies. With all these things taken into consideration, it is not surprising that many good things in economic entomology have come out of California, nor is it surprising that she has suffered from many unwise policies. California was the first State to protect itself by legislation and quarantine against the introduction of new insect pests. She made up her mind in 1880 that she had quite enough of these enemies and wanted no more; and therefore passed quarantine laws in 1881 which were not only sound but which were novel in their character. She was a pioneer State in this direction. Nothing like it had been done before, except for certain laws passed by certain European countries during the Phylloxera and potato beetle crises a decade earlier. Having passed these wise laws, for which the damage done in the State by certain injurious insects had given abundant cause, we would naturally expect that California would have gone ahead wisely and focused the energies of some of her best men on the best ways to handle the injurious insects already present. But, as just stated, the State has suffered from her politicians, and the wrong men controlled her policies, from the view-point of agriculture, for many years. A good man, lacking in scientific knowledge it is true, but one with rather sound ideas on the whole, named Matthew Cooke, an Irishman by birth, who had migrated to the United States in 1850 and who was a progressive fruit-box manufacturer at Sacramento in the late 1870's, made an address before the State Fruit Growers on January 6, 1879, which indicated some knowledge of insect pests. Later he wrote articles on entomological subjects for the news- papers. On March 4, 1881, a State act was signed which defined the powers of the State Viticultural Commissioners and protected the interests of horticulture and viticulture, and Cooke was appointed the first Chief Executive Horticultural and Health Officer. He formu- lated a set of six quarantine regulations and fifteen rules, and made WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 153 a very efficient officer. A State act of 1883 provided for a State Board of Horticulture, and the position occupied by Cooke was abolished. - The interest of this man in entomology probably arose from the fact that his business as a box-maker was endangered by the probable increase of fruit enemies. In 1883 he published a book entitled “ Injurious Insects of the Orchard, Vineyard, Field, Gar- den, Conservatory, Household, Storehouse, Domestic Animals, etc., With Remedies for Their Extermination.” Such portions of the book as were obviously written by Mr. Cooke himself are interesting though naive, and the word “ Extermination ”’ dently his own choice. Fortunately, he was able to borrow a good series of illustrations from Riley, Comstock, and others. In his preface, the author acknowledges the assistance of D. W. Coquillett, a trained entomolo- gist who had left Illinois not long before and had settled in southern California since he was threatened with tuberculosis. Prof. E. O. Essig, who has been preparing an historical work on California ento- mology, writes me that, although Coquillett’s assistance is acknowl- edged, he is inclined to think that he had little or nothing to do with any of Cooke’s manuscripts. Professor Essig infers this from the fact that Cooke did not include in his bulletin many of the interesting insects that had been studied by Coquillett in southern California and from the fact that communication was not easy between two such widely separated men. As to acknowledgments, it is interesting to note that Cooke in his preface acknowledges, in addition to Coquil- lett’s help, the assistance of the man who bound his book and also the help of the foreman of the printing company who, it seems, was a careful proof-reader. Until I consulted Professor Essig, I was of the opinion that Coquillett must have written many pages of the Cooke book. On the whole, however, Cooke was a very useful man. He surely did no harm, and equally surely he did a great deal of good. Unfor- tunately, the new office succeeding his was filled by a series of, I will not say unwise men, but men who were badly informed and badly advised on the subject of injurious insects; one of them, at least, being a man whose bona fides apparently was not of the highest rank. As a result, the farmers and fruit-growers of California were off- cially misled for many years, and the teaching at the Agricultural College of the University, unfortunately, did little to offset this. In 1888, when the Australian ladybird was brought over and lib- erated the Citrus groves of the State from the blight of the white II in the title was evi- 154 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 scale, the State went wild on the subject of bringing over beneficial insects from Australia. The best’ known and the most influential horticulturist of the State, Mr. Elwood Cooper, of Santa Barbara, allowed himself to go so far in his enthusiasm that he advocated the non-use of any other measures and the devoting of enough money to foreign expeditions for parasites and predators to accomplish “ the extermination” of all of California’s insect pests. Mr. Cooper’s enthusiasm was so great that he was followed by almost every one, the politicians from policy, and even the cautious people because of his weli founded reputation as a successful horticulturist. He him- self eventually became Commissioner of Horticulture, and until his death exercised a very great influence. There is no doubt that Mr. Cooper was an admirable man. I visited him at his great olive ranch near Santa Barbara in 1898 and was much impressed by his personality. His name was prominently men- tioned for the position of United States Secretary of Agriculture a little later, and had he been appointed to this position, his friends said, he would have immediately reorganized the entomological ser- vice of the government and discharged every one who did not hold his extreme views on the subject of natural control. Very fortunately for economic entomology in the United States, this did not come about. I saw him again years later (with his second wife) in the horticultural offices in the Ferry Building in San Francisco. He was cordial, and told me that he was writing a general book on the sub- ject of natural control of insect pests of the orchard, and I surprised him by telling him of the article in the Department of Agriculture Report for 1880 in which the practical use of parasites of orchard scale-insects was discussed. He had thought until that time that natural control was a California invention. Not long after that meet- ing he died, and his book was never published. It is a pity that in the period following the dramatic results of the introduction of the Australian ladybird a violent controversy arose between Professor Riley in Washington and Mr. Cooper, and especially Mr. Frank McCoppin who had been at the head of the American Commission at the Melbourne Exposition, as to the personal credit to be given for the wonderful results of this introduction. So bitter was this con- troversy that Mr. Cooper did not hesitate to decry all of the utter- ances of the entomological force at Washington and greatly to underestimate the value of its work. Mr. McCoppin was especially bitter, and virtually claimed the whole credit for himself. It is true that Koebele, drawing salary from the Department of Agriculture at Washington, was sent to Australia at the expense of the fund appro- WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOW ARD 155 priated by the United States Congress for representation at the expo- sition in Melbourne, but only after agreement on a quid pro quo which included the sending of another salaried official of the United States Department of Agriculture (F. M. Webster) to Australia to make a report to the Commission on the agricultural features of the exposition. So great an enthusiasm for natural control was aroused in Calli- fornia by the success of the Australian ladybird that the State made apparently no advances in her fight against insects for many years. Mechanical and chemical measures were abandoned. The subject of natural control held the floor. It is safe to say that a large share of the loss through insects suffered by California from 1888 until, let us say, 1898 was due to this prejudiced and badly based policy. With the disappearance of Mr. Cooper from the scene, things changed, but not entirely satisfactorily. The State continued its ex- plorations for parasites, and did it in an unscientific way and with the help of men of insufficient scientific training. Probably the Com- missioner felt himself forced to continue the policy (somewhat modi- fied) on account of popular opinion, but dangerous importations were made and much time and money were wasted. Visiting Sacramento, I tried to show the Commissioner the danger and the waste, but the work was not reorganized.’ The situation cannot be said to have assumed a scientific phase until the appointment of A. J. Cook as Commissioner of Horticulture in IQIT. As it happened, conditions had grown so dangerous through the action of the State in supporting an explorer for parasites who him- self was not trained in entomology and who was unable to give a just estimate of the importance of the forms that he introduced that the Department of Agriculture at Washington, under Federal legislation that had been enacted (1905), was about to take steps to prevent the bringing in of any living insects by the State of California. One of the first acts of Professor Cook, however, was to appoint Harry S. Smith, a trained worker in parasites, who had been for some years one of the trusted investigators of the Federal entomological service, to take charge of the parasite work for California. Mr. Smith assumed charge of the State Insectary at Sacramento and held this position ‘Shortly after this interview, I received at Washington, from one of the traveling agents of the California Department of Agriculture, some parasitized specimens of the European Euproctis auriflua. The agent had taken this insect for the brown-tail moth and had sent me these parasites to show what he could do for the government. This sending was dangerous, since the host insect has never been found in the United States although occasionally a pest in Europe. 156 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VoL. 84 until he was transferred to the University of California and placed in charge of the entomological work at the Citrus Experiment Station at Riverside, but he has had virtual charge of all of the Californian parasite work from the time of his original appointment until now (this is written in February, 1929). During the greater part of this time Mr. Smith has been a paid collaborator of the Bureau of Ento- mology and has been in constant correspondence with Washington, consulting freely concerning practically all of the parasite problems of the State. Before leaving this subject it will be of interest to mention an instance in which California attempted to interfere with an important parasite matter. In 1905 the State of Massachusetts took up the matter of the introduction of European parasites of the gipsy moth and the brown- tail moth, and appropriated $10,000 for expenditure in each of the years 1905, 1906, and 1907 for this purpose. The work was placed in the hands of the Chief of the Federal Bureau of Entomology. Certain citizens of Boston had been impressed by the claims of the California State Department of Horticulture and were disappointed by the slow results of the work which was carried on during the first two years in Massachusetts. Mr. Cooper told these citizens that he would have his traveling agent send to Boston “the parasite of the gipsy moth” and would guarantee its success provided the State would put the sum of $30,000 in escrow for eventual compensation in case of success. This caused much difference of opinion in Massa- chusetts, and the legislature of that State appropriated an additional sum of $15,000 to enable the Superintendent in Charge of the Gipsy Moth Work to secure expert advice as to whether the work was being carried on in the right way. With the help of this sum, a number of highly trained American and European entomologists (all acknowl- edged experts) were brought to Boston, examined into the work and reported enthusiastically in favor of the operations as they had been originally planned. This story is told here as an evidence of Mr. Cooper’s misguided enthusiasm which caused for a time much con- fusion in the minds of many people and necessitated the expenditure of a large sum of money. During the past few years California has gone rapidly ahead in all matters relating to injurious insects. They seem determined to pre- vent the introduction of new injurious species and to control those already within their boundaries. Apparently they spare no expense, and it is difficult to see how such matters could be handled in a more efficient way. I have in my hands, for example, at the present moment WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—-HOWARD 157 (December 30, 1929) the Annual Report of the Agricultural Com- missioner for the County of Los Angeles for 1929, and the extent of the operations in regard to insect control is amazing. Compulsory spraying in orange groves is carried on in that county, and a great deal of it is done by the county authorities ; 29,299 acres were fumi- gated or sprayed, for example, during the past year. The county has employed no less than 150 permanent and temporary horticultural inspectors and no less than 103 temporary insectary employees. The quarantine service has been extremely rigid, and during the past nine years no less than 10,159,300 trees, plants, and packages, coming into the county, have been inspected. The extent to which one of the Cali- fornia counties is distributing ladybirds for the destruction of the Citrus mealybug is shown by this report. Fire destroyed one of the laboratories on March 29, causing loss of material for the production of four million beetles, but this plant contained only one-third of the total available productive material. By extending the facilities at the other laboratory (at Downey) to the limit, borrowing 320,480 lady- birds from the Ventura County insectaries, and the direct purchase by Citrus growers cooperatives of 1,264,890 beetles from outside insectaries, which were delivered to the county insectary for liberation, it was possible to carry out a seasonal liberation program as planned. A total of 6,472,970 ladybirds was handled, and these were liberated over 1,067 Citrus estates, representing a total of 11,043 acres. And yet all this was done in one county! What must the great State have done as a whole? During the earlier period there was at least one good man who kept his head and who deserves much praise. That was Alexander Craw. While closely associated with Mr. Cooper and other important men in California, he was greatly interested in other aspects of applied entomology than the one of natural control, although he was deeply interested in the success of the Australian ladybird and believed in the carrying on of much work of that kind. He was made Quaran- tine Officer of the State Board of Horticulture at an early date, and did admirable service in the administration of the State’s pioneer quarantine regulations. His grasp of the entomological problems of the State was admirably displayed in his bulletin entitled “ Destruc- tive Insects; Their Natural Enemies; Remedies and Recommenda- tions,” published in Sacramento in 1891. It is a comprehensive paper of 50 pages, very well illustrated and giving a good summary of reme- dies and of spraying apparatus. It is of note that he lists 64 dealers in spraying machinery in the State of California. 158 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 Following Mr. Craw, other good men sprang up in the service of the State or of the different counties, and today California ranks as one of the soundest States of the Union in matters relating to eco- nomic entomology. Admirable teaching is conducted at the University of California, at Stanford, and at the School of Tropical Agriculture at Riverside (formerly the Citrus Experiment Station). Few States have as good a roll of distinguished workers as Cali- fornia has in her State Department of Agriculture (under the able and enlightened Commissioner, G. H. Hecke) and in her universities and in her county work. W. B. Herms, E. O. Essig, E. C. Van Dyke, C. W. Woodworth, H. P. Severin, at Berkeley; S. B. Freeborn at Davis; H. J. Quayle, and Harry S. Smith at Riverside, are all em- ployees of the State University. R. W. Doane and G. F. Ferris teach sound entomology at Stanford. Mr. Hecke has D. B. Mackie and T. D. Urbahns at Sacramento, and a corps of excellent port inspec- tors at San Francisco under Fred. C. Brosius. Does any State make a better showing? LATER WorK OF THE FEDERAL BUREAU In earlier sections we have traced the early growth of the Federal service in applied entomology, and in a later section have spoken especially of the impressive events of the latter portion of the last century that attracted wide-spread attention to the necessity for strenuous efforts to increase the efficiency of economic entomologists and to increase their numbers. As the century ended the case was obvious ; there was no need for argument. The man at the head of the Department of Agriculture, Mr. James Wilson, had broad views. He knew agriculture. He had been head of one of the great agricultural colleges, He had been a Member of Congress. He therefore grasped the situation and knew what to do and how to do it. Appropriations for the support of the investigations of the entomological service were increased, slowly at first but with increasing rapidity. It will not be important to describe in any detail the steps that followed in more or less rapid succession, but in the first five years of the new century we were placed in a posi- tion of vastly greater efficiency, although there was no radical change in policy and the successive stages of growth and reorganization came about gradually and smoothly. There occurred toward the end of the century a movement which resulted in a rather radical rearrangement of the working forces of the Department as a whole. There had been but two bureaus— Animal Industry and Weather. The other scientific work had been WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 159 divided into a large number of so-called divisions, the chief of each of these divisions reporting directly to the Secretary of Agriculture. About 1898, Dr. B. T. Galloway, the chief of one of these.divisions (that of Vegetable Pathology) had a mild nervous breakdown and went to California for his health. With nothing to do but to think for some weeks or possibly months, he evolved the idea that many of these divisions could be grouped together in bureaus and that only the heads of the bureaus should report directly to the Cabinet official in charge of the whole Department. Naturally this plan included the grouping of all of the divisions relating to plants, such as for example the Divisions of Botany, Agrostology, Vegetable Pathology, Pomol- ogy, and the like, into a single bureau under some such title as Bureau of Plant Industry. Going further, the divisions relating to ani- mal life, like the Divisions of Animal Industry, Biological Survey. and Entomology, he thought, might be brought together in a Bureau of Animal Industry; and so on. When he returned to Washington with his health entirely restored he announced his plan to Secretary Wilson. The latter had from the start been impressed by Doctor Galloway’s ability—possibly the fact that both were Scotsmen made their mutual confidence a trifle closer than it might otherwise have been—and Doctor Galloway was told to sound out the different chiefs of divisions and get their opinions. The result was that the Bureau of Plant Industry was established. The Division of Entomology and the Division of Biological Survey were, however, not brought under the Division of Animal Industry which in itself was made a Bureau. Some independent divisions or offices still remained unassigned to bureaus. I remember very well when Dr. W. A. Taylor, then Chief of the Division of Pomology, and Dr. A. F. Woods, then Assistant Chief of the Division of Vegetable Pathology, came to me as emis- saries to suggest that the Division of Entomology be incorporated with the other units into the Bureau of Animal Industry. I objected strenuously from the start. I greatly wished to preserve the prac- tically absolute autonomy of the organization and to retain the privi- lege of direct consultation with the Secretary of Agriculture. The work of the Entomological service in its field and in its technique, in its literature and in its collections, varied so greatly from anything else among the Department activities that it should be kept apart. Very fortunately, I think, on the whole, my views were heeded and the entomological service was left as an independent division until later (1904) it was made a bureau by the adoption of the term in the Agricultural Appropriation Bill of that year. 1600 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL, 84 - I have just stated that changes in the service came smoothly and without abrupt action. A very important step was taken, however, in 1902, and the credit for this step must be given to Doctor Marlatt, then First Assistant Entomologist. During the summer of that year I was in Europe, largely for the purpose of looking into matters relat- ing to silk culture, and in my absence Doctor Marlatt prepared the Annual Report. In that report he submitted a plan of organization of work, which follows, and recommended its adoption in the appro- priation bill for the fiscal year 1904. lield crop, insect investigations: (a) Southern section—cotton, tobacco, sugar cane. (b) Northern section—cereals and forage plants. Fruit insect investigations : (a) Northern section—orchard fruits, deciduous, (b) Southern section—citrous and other tropical fruits. Small fruit and truck crop insect investigations. Forest and forest product insect investigations. Insecticide and insecticide machinery investigations: (a) Section of field operations and experiments. (b) Section of chemical analyses and tests. Investigations of insects affecting stored products. Investigations of insects in relation to disease of man and animals, and as animal parasites. Special insect investigations—miscellaneous work : (a) Section for the investigation and introduction of beneficial insects, and quarantine work. (b) Section for fungous and other diseases of insects. (c) Section for special insect investigations—emergency work and un- classified. Insect laboratory, collections, and experimental garden. Apicultural investigations. Sericultural investigations. Librarian and bibliographer. On my return to Washington in the late summer, I found the plan excellent. Secretary Wilson recommended it to Congress, and it was at once adopted by the appropriating body. Prof. F. M. Webster was formally placed in charge of Field Crop Insect Investigations, Dr. A. L. Quaintance of Fruit Insect Investigations, Dr. A. D. Hopkins of Forest and Forest Product Insect Investigations ; Doctor Marlatt took charge of the Insecticide and Insecticide Machinery Investiga- tions ; the Investigations of Insects Affecting Stored Products were assigned, with the truck crop insect investigations, to Dr. F. H. Chit- tenden; the Apicultural Investigations were continued in charge of Dr. E. F. Phillips, and the other topics were in general assigned to the especial charge of the Chief of the Bureau. WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 161 The classification of the work adopted in 1904 has held with com- paratively few changes since that time. Dr. W. D. Hunter was placed in charge of the Southern Field Crop Insect Investigations, including cotton, tobacco, and sugar cane, but, as he developed strong interest in the general subject of insects in relation to diseases of man and animals, that section was assigned to him, and excellent work was carried on under him on insects affecting live stock, and a little later on the Rocky Mountain fever tick in the Bitter Root Valley of Mon- tana. Later still the investigations of insects affecting stored prod- ucts was placed under the leadership of Dr. EK. A. Back. Two inde- pendent sections grew up—the one on the gipsy moth and the brown- tail moth, and the other on the Japanese beetle. As an interlude, something should be said on the subject of seri- cultural investigations, since this section was dropped a good many years ago. Silk culture had always attracted a certain number of individuals in North America; and in colonial days a considerable amount of silk was raised by colonists in Georgia and South Caro- lina. While in Missouri, Riley became interested in the subject, suc- ceeded in raising the domestic silkworm on the leaves of Osage orange which was very prevalent down there, largely as a hedge plant, and published articles on the subject in his Missouri Reports. When he came to Washington in 1878, he brought eggs of his Osage orange race with him, and the rearing of silkworms was carried on at the Department in Washington. When Riley resigned in the spring of 1879 Comstock, who succeeded him, continued the work, Riley hav- ing published during his term of office a manual of instructions in silk culture which was generally distributed. When James Wilson came to Washington as Secretary of Agri- culture he took, during his early administration, a journey to the South, and came back filled with the idea that the poor people of the South might take up silk culture as a household industry and find a small profit in raising cocoons. He therefore secured an appropria- tion from Congress, which was repeated for a number of years. Before this, however, Riley, on his return to the Department in 1881, had secured the interest and services of Philip Walker, a Harvard graduate, whose uncle, Edward A. Serrell, resident in Paris, had invented an electric silk reel which reduced the labor of reeling cocoons, Congress at that period made appropriations for several years, one of the Serrell reels was set up in the Department of Agri- culture, eggs were purchased from abroad and distributed to all applicants; and the cocoons that they raised were bought by the 162 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 Department at current European prices, reeled at Washington, and the reeled silk was sold in the open market. In this way it was dem- onstrated that silk culture could not be made to pay under the then existing conditions, and, since the tariff was at that time being revised by Congress, the statement was made to the Appropriations Commit- tee that an import duty on raw silk would probably result in estab- lishing the silk raising industry in the United States. This item was naturally antagonized by the silk manufacturers, and no provision otf the sort was made. Under the new appropriations requested by Secretary Wilson, a somewhat more elaborate test of the situation was made. I went to Europe in 1902, looked into the questions of silk culture in Italy and France, purchased at Lyons for the Department a five-basin reel of the latest pattern, and also brought over two expert reelers. This machine was established at the Department; one Italian girl, resi- dent in the United States, and two American girls were taught the reeling operations ; eggs were sent out as before; and an estimate of the cost was weighed against the sums received from the sale of the reeled silk. Conditions were found so absolutely jike those of 20 years earlier that even Secretary Wilson was convinced that people could not be kept interested in raising cocoons, and his requests for appropriations for this purpose ceased. Quite in contrast in results to the investigations of silk culture, have been the investigations relating to bee culture. Work on both of these beneficial insects belongs naturally to the Bureau of Entomology. Some money was spent on bee culture during Professor Riley's administration, the investigations being carried on largely by Nelson W. McLain. This work was begun in 1885, and was carried on at Aurora, Illinois. The main objects were, to introduce and domesti- cate new races of bees, to experiment in crossing and mingling races, to try to bring about artificial fertilization, to study bee diseases, and finally to settle the greatly discussed question of bees versus fruit. Several reports of Mr. McLain’s were published, and Mr. McLain’s location was changed from Aurora to Hillsdale, Illinois, in 1887, and the work soon ceased thereafter. In 1891 some work was done for the Department by Prof. A. J. Cook at Lansing, Michigan, and by Mr. J. H. Larabee of Vermont, and on July 1 of that year Frank Benton, a well known apiculturist, was appointed for the purpose of carrying on further investigations, and was stationed in Washington. He was largely engaged in the preparation of a manual of bee culture during the following two years. This bulletin was finally published as Bulletin No. 1 of the New WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOW ARD 163 Series of the then-called Division of Entomology in 1895. It was a good bulletin and had a very large distribution. Mr. Benton con- tinued in office until 1907, when he was succeeded by his assistant, Dr. E. F. Phillips, a well trained morphologist, who had joined the service in the spring of 1905. Doctor Phillips continued in office until the autumn of 1924, when he resigned to become Professor of Apiculture in the College of Agriculture of Cornell University. Doctor Phillips was eminently successful in his work for the Department. He conducted many in- vestigations of great value, and published many important bulletins and reports, as did also a number of his trained assistants. During his term of office, Doctor Phillips’ work greatly strength- ened apiculture in the United States. The industry increased in character and size; and the advent of the World War, with the con- sequent scarcity of sugar and increased prices due to this scarcity, turned the attention of many people to sugar substitutes, honey natu- tally being the most prominent. Doctor Phillips was succeeded in 1924 by Mr. J. I. Hambleton, who has very competently conducted investigations relating to the honey bees that are assuming more and more prominence. The new century brought new problems in addition to the three great ones earlier mentioned (the gipsy moth, the San Jose scale and the cotton boll weevil), and the service soon began a phenomenal growth. The larger appropriations really began with the realization of the cotton boll.weevil menace. The failure of the legislature of the State of Texas to adopt a law stopping cotton culture in the signifi- cant infested area was followed by State appropriations controlled by State officials and the rather speedy realization that the spread of the insect was not to be controlled except possibly by the aid of Federal funds. Congress was therefore urged to make large appropriations to enable the South to meet the emergency, but these appropriations were largely granted to the Bureau of Plant Industry, in the endeavor to bring about more diversified farming, thus relieving the South frum the one-crop condition that existed largely. Certain of the funds were also used by the Bureau of Plant Industry in efforts to breed resistant cotton plants and to investigate the effect of different crop- ping methods. A small portion was given to the Bureau of Ento- mology for strictly entomological investigations. As time went on and as the weevil advanced, larger appropriations were given to the entomological service which was made a Bureau in 1904. 164 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VoL. 84 In 1905 the Federal Government entered upon the gipsy moth work. It seems a pity now that the government did not take hold at the start, for surely the gipsy moth might have been exterminated in the United States in the early 1890’s. But we thought that the State of Massachusetts could and would do it. Again, when the State stopped its appropriations in 1900 the Federal Government should have taken it up. After a study of the situation in 1897, I had concluded (see Bul- letin 11, new series, Bureau of Entomology) that extermination was not far distant. However, this was not done, and in 1905, when appro- priations began to be made to the Bureau for this purpose, the insect had spread from a confined territory of 400 square miles to a range of 4,000 square miles. From that time Federal Government appropri- ations increased rather rapidly for a number of years, and during the later years there has been a constant appropriation of large sums of money, not for extermination, but distinctly in the effort to prevent spread. The gipsy moth has become well established over the greater part of New England, and is there considered principally on the basis of a native pest, the States themselves assuming its control while the Federal Government is trying to prevent its spread into New York and regions further west. But the people and the government were becoming more and more aware of the possibilities of very great loss by insects, and pressure on Congress was having increased effect. New problems concerning native insects, like the plum curculio and the peach-tree borer, were arising, as well as new problems concerning well established insects from vastly older importation dates, like the Hessian fly and the codling moth. Moreover, other dangerous and new pests made their appearance. In 1906 it began to be evident that a leaf-hopper was causing the disastrous curly-leaf disease of sugar beets. In 1909 it appeared that the Argentine ant, accidentally imported some years before, was becoming a very serious matter. During the same year it was found that an imported insect known as the alfalfa weevil had begun to cause great damage to the alfalfa crops in Utah and had begun to spread. In 1912 the passage of the Federal Horticultural Act enabled the country for the first time to take adequate measures against the introduction of the Mediterranean fruit-fly, and investigations were begun in Hawaii. In 1917 two serious imported pests were found, the European corn borer in Massachusetts and the Japanese beetle in New Jersey. In the same year the Mexican bean beetle proved itself very injurious in Colorado and New Mexico, and in 1920 it was re- ported from Alabama, from which place it spread rapidly to the north. WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 165 In the meantime many other questions of almost equal importance arose, and the work of the Bureau comprised many scores of different projects. Some important questions were solved. The New Mexico range caterpillar offered a threatening problem in 1909. The pear thrips problem in California was solved in the same year, although in the Santa Clara Valley especially it threatened the extinction of the pear industry. In 1912 the onion thrips problem was solved, and important advances were made in many directions. The work of the Bureau spread out enormously. It became ap- parent not only that insect damage as a whole was increasing but that most of the measures that had been adopted were emergency methods and were very expensive, the majority of them being chemical or mechanical. And it began to be realized that infinitely more funda- mental work was necessary. The consideration of natural control was elaborated, and a great deal of work was done in the way of importing, from their native homes, the parasites and predators of the gipsy moth, the brown-tail moth, the alfalfa weevil, the European corn borer, the Japanese beetle, the European earwig, and other acciden- tally introduced pests. Work on even more fundamental aspects was begun, such as the physiology of insects and their reactions. And it was found necessary to enlarge the facilities of the Bureau in its taxonomic work. This work, consisting of the accurate identification of insects, has developed very greatly. A wise cooperation has existed between the United States National Museum and the Federal Bureau of Entomology, which has resulted in the building up of a very great collection of identified insects, housed in the fireproof National Museum and pre- sided over by competent specialists in the different groups, paid by Department of Agriculture funds. This service has been of the most important help to the more strictly economic workers of the Depart- ment of Agriculture; and it has spread far beyond this, since it has been of assistance to the economic entomologists of the different State Experiment Stations and Agricultural Colleges. Complaint has been made in some quarters of the delayed service of this branch of the work, but the demands have been too great from institutions through- out the States, and the Museum force of the Bureau will undoubtedly be enlarged. I cannot well carry this account beyond 1927, but, although the insect menace has not diminished (in fact, it is rapidly increasing), the country is fast appreciating the danger and is preparing itself to overcome it. 166 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 Witness the following contrast: I am writing this in May, 1929. Within the past two weeks Congress appropriated $4,250,000 in the effort to exterminate a just-discovered outbreak of the Mediterranean fruit-fly in Florida. Two years ago Congress appropriated $10,000,000 in the effort to retard the spread of the European corn borer to the west. Contrast with this the effort made in 1875 to secure an appro- priation of $25,000 to investigate the outbreaks of the Rocky Mountain locust or Colorado grasshopper, an insect which had devastated the growing crops of four western States, causing ruin and starvation among the farmers. Congress finally passed a bill on March 3, 1876, but the pitiful amount (judged by modern standards) of $25,000 was cut down to $18,000. Comparing these events, a great change is evident, but there has also been a great change in conditions—in the population of the country, in the area devoted to agriculture, in rapidity of transporta- tion, and in an infinite number of other things—so that it is not at all sure that we have yet reached the proper appreciation of the situation. To my mind, insects must be studied more intensively and by a vastly greater number of men than at present. Looking toward the future, it seems obvious that in the long run the large sums of money now being appropriated in emergencies would be more pro- ductive if more of it were spent in the effort to learn more fundamental things about insects. . This will be a good place to introduce a table showing the appropri- ations for the Bureau of Entomology year by year from 1879 to 1930. What seemed to us then very considerable variations were made, for one reason or another, by Congress during the earlier years, and as an explanation of the comparatively small amounts appropriated for a few years after 1904, it should be said that this was during the second Cleveland administration when instructions had been given to all departmental heads to scale down their funds to the lowest possible amounts, and that the then Secretary of Agriculture prided himself on the economy with which his Department was administered ; in fact, a distinct effort was made to turn back into the Treasury as much as possible of ‘the amounts actually appropriated by Congress. There was apparently a feeling in the Cabinet that the Secretary who was able to turn back the most money into the Treasury was the most efficient executive. The following table has been drawn up for me by Mr. A. J. Leister. ; ‘ WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 167 Appropriations for Bureau of Entomology by Fiscal Years Year Amount Year Amount TOZO Mase Oia ke ere eietereeieis| 2s STOOOON ZEOOS) sa cinch chevererers oes voreras $82,450 TOSOMMC Are see aie ws CYOOO 1! LOOO nara 's ces rare oyenenniy norsk eis 84,470 TOO eee Perotave revel oheiekeoe Glavore ene TF. OOO, W LOO Zi mieteicions chekelotorege \etelnets 262,110 OSA wee eer eee leat sictrs feta eile 23200) HIGOS37cbdciicke temas ae eres 320,010 MOG GAM ei rele a oue eae iaro 2 QOO! LOO mesic ctersenctorere ke tecorers 424,960 TOS AN ase Weep AR toe sia) oye. ets avaiatale syenies ZU OOO! ALOIO! SV asonjarentarcie ctemreeteekee 527,860 MSS Sate eterno ters Mi poeactisicen AZ OOOr, TOLL: se. sareiaccysesearaisetoer overs 532,180 MOM Oumenrate cnclencierar. sarerevs areeeiatcas he ATOOOM VOEZ Gas oes crete ata ciensss 601,920 TS eet EMS Sapte oe Ae sist o. aosd ha BOSS ATOMS? .2c'h sree se eee 682,340 TOGO meee ee rene eat WA 2S Qu LOLA Nossa cic ratsetariatati safe 752,210 OG Ours ere Serre sci cal ove tha teatorare ais COS Os LOU, cate caren eemnaeta res 828,720 IASON Prearcr GReCRCL CPE ERC TENA Choke ic BU 3O00 ) LOLOr ss cicite esse neereeree 820,900 OOM RH yee taco ci eeereuel casiciolisheneNs AZ‘OOOE ei QL ‘hers aia lacayarers coven sheyss steton ke 868,880 TOO ee cay Slee ay oxtyeterche AZ BOOR SLOTS: vetedeiseiaicl aiethelete serie ees 1,077,255 * TitSLOVG aaseecac reo ARN RA ORO eae 32300 ATOM OR aiececerele slesnreeccrent: 1,208,680 ” MOQ cme erste ciate titers lots ZO SOOE MIOZO! epetis, csoarcce shore ata aes 1,411,360 OOS UNA Lia teen Taste aces ZOSOO™ MLOZT coher cevaterers cere earnetes 1,748,460 IROOM Ah a A DRO ABER RB care ote DOCOO!N LOZ AI WS aycieierovonsiateco stoh srenshelens 1,769,280 elo ys. Ay bis citnn HA REP ORO eRe ee ZO OOW MALO 23 5 sore ehans areal ovsmein cael 2,053,080 MSO e cease Resa eV er HRs oIsT eye Pais oe ZOIGOOW WH LOZA circa Sncha, cs. sale aejenaneceits 1,797,880 POOQOMC AC Eten otto nts 2OMS OOM MOLDS mois svacreess a aeneietotenels 2,065,848 TOOOM Rai che eer Bie e BO OOM PRIO2ZO\ otis cuniseicisiere ciaa tete ek 2,554,743 LOOM theists tevstn eect acta ee QAP 2OO WR HEOZ7. Maslstaysnartcttens siesta auets 12,140,668 ° TOO Zu che they steve thenty SaLUNGR ais eleieeels 365200) TO2Z81, Fis oe. ole cnt ais eseot ones 284,265 OO Sede ye celles och omted velar Phx cays OAOSmEELOZO Mees a sarere eerie 2,060,728 * MOOAW eeeeye fiat ey) coaleveyel wie ys tee eeees RAS Ole LO SOC ie) a1 « tereneucrcrenegesone choo) sie 2,311,764 @Includes $145,775 allotted to the Bureau from a fund for stimulating agriculture on account of the war. » Includes $222,000 allotted to the Bureau from the fund for stimulating agriculture. ¢ Appropriation of $10,000,000 for Corn Borer Control 1927-1928, of which amount $9,592,000 was allotted to the Bureau of Entomology. 4 For the fiscal year 1929 the appropriations for the Bureau of Entomology were reduced by $1,472,720, by transfer of this amount to Plant Quarantine and Control Administration; nevertheless there was an increase in the appropriations for this year of $258,183 for re- search work by the Bureau of Entomology. When in 1904, as has been shown, the Division of Entomology was made a Bureau and its branches of work were grouped together into definite sections, only two of the older men to whom especial reference has been made in an earlier part of this story were made chiefs of sections. These were Doctor Marlatt and Doctor Chittenden and of these men we have written somewhat at length in earlier pages. Some brief statements may well be made here of the other men who were appointed to corresponding positions at that time or a little later. It would be very difficult, in fact impossible, for the writer to express in words at all adequately his estimate of the work done by the many other scientific men in the service during the past 20 or more years. There have been very many of them, and they have done 168 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS vou, 84 an enormous amount of important work. But something surely must be said especially of F. M. Webster who was placed in charge of the Section of Insects Affecting Cereal and Forage Crops, of A. D. Hopkins who took charge of forest insect matters, of A. L. Quain- tance who has had charge of the important Section of Insects Affect- ing Deciduous Fruits since its beginning, of W. D. Hunter who had charge of Southern Field crop insects until the time of his death, and of A. F. Burgess, for many years charged with the investigations of the gipsy moth and brown-tail moths. Professor Webster was a veteran entomologist, born in 1849, who had been Assistant State Entomologist of Illinois, a Special Agent of the United States Department of Agriculture, Entomologist of the Ohio Agricultural Experiment Station, and an assistant on the Bio- logical Survey of Illinois. He had also been Professor of Economic Entomology in Purdue University and Consulting Entomologist of the Indiana Experiment Station. During his work as Special Agent of this Bureau from 1884 to 1892 he paid especial attention to the insects of forage crops, and made many important discoveries. Notable among these was that of seasonal dimorphism in the old genus Isosoma, the larvae of which are known as joint-worms. He had published many papers and was very well known in agricultural circles. He took charge of the new section, chose competent assistants, established a number of field laboratories, and built up his section into one of much promi- nence and great usefulness. He died in 1916. A rather full biography will be found in the Proceedings of the Entomological Society of Washington, Volume 18, No. 2, pp. 79-83 (1916). Dr. Andrew D. Hopkins was born in 1857; was Entomologist of the West Virginia Agricultural Experiment Station from 1890 to 1902 and Professor of Economic Entomology in the University of West Virginia from 1896 to 1902. In the latter year he was taken over into the Federal Bureau of Entomology, in charge of its inves- tigations of forest insects, and on the establishment of the Section of Forest Entomology in 1904 he was, naturally, in charge. He remained chief of this important section until 1923, when he resigned as chief of section and has since that time been devoting himself, still as an expert of the Bureau, to special research in bioclimatics, a subject which he has largely developed and which has already shown itself to be of the greatest interest and the broadest bearings. Dur- ing his 19 years of work on forest insects he did many great things. He knew his forest, and he worked with enormous enthusiasm on its entomological problems. His vivid interest took him into many aspects of the work. Impressed by the enormous importance of the WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 169 bark-beetles of the genus Dendroctonus, he wrote a monograph of the beetles of this genus, and he studied their bionomics and estab- lished a number of broad principles that proved of much practical value when thoroughly understood and upon which much practical work was based. In spite of the fact that Dr. A. S. Packard was the author of the big volume on forest insects published before Doctor Hopkins entered the field, Hopkins was really the big pioneer forest entomologist of the United States and his work was of such a char- acter as to make everything of the kind that had been done before seem very small. He showed himself always to be a man of vision. He knew the forest entomology of Europe from personal study, and realized from the start that, while forest conditions are absolutely different in this country, we must gain here a knowledge of forest insects at least comparable to that of the European workers. Of his newer field—that of bioclimatics—it is unnecessary to speak, since the results of his work will doubtless soon be published in book form. Dr. A. L. Quaintance was born in 1870; was Entomologist of the Alabama Polytechnic Institute in 1894, of the Florida Agricultural College and Experiment Station from 1895 to 1898, of the Georgia Agricultural Experiment Station from 1899 to 1901, and Professor of Entomology in the Maryland Agricultural College and State Ento- mologist of Maryland from rgor to 1903. He was a Special Agent of the United States Bureau of Entomology in 1903, working on cot- ton insects in Texas, and was placed in charge of deciduous fruit insect investigations in 1905. In 1924 he was made Associate Chief of the Bureau in charge of research work, Doctor Quaintance has been a very notable figure in the recent history of the Bureau. He is a man who is not only filled with the research spirit but who has also a keenly practical mind. He is an admirable administrator and has shown his ability in many directions. A thoroughly sound entomolo- gist himself, he has conducted personal research in an especially diffi- cult group of injurious insects (the Aleurodidae) and in the biology of various insects, and has shown himself an inspiring and sympa- thetic leader of research in the important branches of his work. He has built up modern field laboratories and has directed plans of re- search that have brought very important results. His keen apprecia- tion of the value of fundamental studies has led him to initiate work through ably trained assistants in directions that had not been pushed by other workers, and many of the strong ideas adopted in prac- tice by the Bureau have originated with him. Dr. W. D. Hunter was born in 1875. He was educated at the University of Nebraska, and after graduation held an instructor’s 12 170 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 position in entomology. In 1900 he became an assistant in the Iowa State Agricultural College. During the years 1897 and 1898, while still in Nebraska, he acted during those two summers as Special Agent for the United States Department of Agriculture and made investigations upon the Rocky Mountain locust in different: parts of the West. In the spring of 1g01 he was again made Special Agent and put in charge of work against the cotton boll weevil in Texas. From that time until his death in October, 1925, he remained in charge of this vitally important southern work. With the establishment of the Section of Southern Field Crop Insects, he was put in charge of this section, and later was also charged with the work on insects affecting man and animals. He built up a large force of excellent assistants, at first at Victoria, Texas, and later at Dallas, Texas. He made an extraordinary record during his nearly quarter of a cen- tury in the South and made a remarkable impression upon the people of the Southern States. He spent much time in travel throughout the South, and was in Washington at frequent intervals. With Doctor Marlatt and Doctor Quaintance, he made an advisory committee of three to consider the work of the Bureau as a whole. He was a sound entomologist, with great breadth of view, and possessed the all-important characteristic of impressing people whom he met with his ability and his sound and careful judgment. At his untimely death in 1925 many of us realized for the first time the extraordinary number of friends he had made in the South and his great influence in the development of economic entomology in that important section of the country. A. F. Burgess was born in 1873, and graduated at the Massachu- setts Agricultural College. He was an Assistant Entomologist to the Massachusetts State Board of Agriculture from 1895 to 1899, Assis- tant Entomologist to the Illinois State Agricultural Experiment Sta- tion in 1899 and 1900, and Inspector of Nurseries and Orchards in Ohio in 1900 to 1902; then Chief Inspector and later Assistant Ento- mologist in the Federal Bureau of Entomology. His work in the Bureau from the start was in New England, and he made his way up in the service rapidly until in. 1916 he was placed in charge of the project entitled “ Preventing Spread of Moths,” which included only the gipsy moth and the brown-tail moth. This was one of the largest projects of the Bureau and carried the largest appropriations. It developed rapidly under Mr. Burgess’ hands, and sound investiga- tions were carried out of many new aspects of the problem. He became known as one of the soundest and most reliable of the Ameri- can economic entomologists ; was for many years the Secretary of the es WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 171 Association of Economic Entomologists during a period when it grew rapidly in importance, and was later the President of the Asso- ciation. In 1928 he was transferred from the Bureau of Entomology to the Plant Quarantine and Control Administration with the grade of Principal Entomologist and retained charge of the project of gipsy moth extermination. The research work on the gipsy moth and brown-tail moth was transferred to the Section of Forest Insects of the Bureau of Entomology. ADDENDUM : AN INTERESTING COMPARISON Dr. Vernon L. Kellogg, a graduate of the Kansas State University, a graduate student at Cornell, and later Professor at Stanford Uni- versity, is a man who has done admirable work in several branches of entomology and who was a very prominent teacher down to the time of the World War. From the standpoint of the entomologists, it is greatly to be regretted that his efforts were diverted from our science at that time; but as patriotic citizens and as men who ought to be interested broadly in all science, we rejoice in his subsequent career. He was one of Herbert Hoover’s righthand men through all the wonderful relief work carried on in Europe, and subsequently became Permanent Secretary of the National Research Council, an organization formed during the war and which has grown in a very wonderful way and. now is exerting a great influence in American science. In 1925 Doctor Kellogg planned an extensive review of the advarice in all branches of science in America during a period of 50 years, and he asked me to write for him in condensed shape something that he might use in regard to entomology. The paragraphs that follow were done at that time and have remained in Doctor Kellogg’s hands for nearly five years. He has just written me that his duties have been such that he has not been able to carry out his plan of 1925, and, since the statement is at the same time rather analytical and condensed, it seems appropriate to me that it should be published here. AMERICAN ENTOMOLOGY IN Firty YEARS In 1875 there were in America almost no professional entomolo- gists and almost no teachers of entomology. Our knowledge of American insects was mainly due to the work of amateurs, and the collections were practically all the private property of these amateur collectors and workers. A number of men of very different occupa- tions had collections of Coleoptera and Lepidoptera, but the other orders had received comparatively little attention. The American 172 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 Entomological Society, of Philadelphia, and the just-founded Cam- bridge and Brooklyn Entomological Societies were the only societies of entomologists, and there were no journals except the Canadian Entomologist and Psyche, the organ of the Cambridge society, started in 1874. There were practically no books except Harris’ well known “Insects Injurious to Vegetation” and Packard’s “ Guide to the Study of Insects,” and no transactions or proceedings except those of the Philadelphia society started in 1861. The economic entomologists had recently made their appearance. Asa Fitch was closing his work on the farm and orchard insects of New York; Benjamin Dann Walsh and William LeBaron had pub- lished reports in Illinois, and C. V. Riley had issued seven of his ex- tremely fine annual reports in Missouri. All this was in sharp contrast to conditions in Europe where there were literally hundreds of books and dozens of entomological socie- ties and probably thousands of collectors. A bibliographical list pub- lished by Hagen in 1862 comprised two fat volumes covering more than a thousand pages. This contrast at that time was probably due largely to the want of books on American insects and of catalogues and check lists in the different orders to encourage young collectors. And then, teachers were wanting. Aside from Dr. H. A. Hagen at Harvard, there were no teachers, and as a matter of fact he had practically no students. Comstock at Cornell and Fernald at Orono, Maine, were soon to begin their teaching, and Packard had given a course at Orono; but at this period, although there were professors of what was then termed “natural history” or “natural philosophy,” few or none of them knew enough about insects to give any broad instruction. Years before, Doctor Harris, while Librarian at Harvard, gave talks to limited classes and took them on brief field excursions, and is said to have been a most inspiring teacher, but none of his students took up entomology seriously at a later date. The only collections worthy of note at that time and which may be termed public collections were those at Cambridge, in the recently founded Museum of Comparative Zoology, and at Philadelphia, in the building of the Academy of Natural Sciences. Until one has assembled these data, or considered them, it is impossible to realize the comparative paucity of our knowledge of American insects only 50 years ago. A great many of them had been described and named, but largely by European entomologists, and the descriptions were published in European magazines, transactions, or proceedings ; and it is pitiful to note what a large proportion of WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD Ts these species were collected by European travelers in America and how few were sent over there, for identification, by local workers. Contrasting these conditions in 1875 with the conditions that ex- isted in 1925, it is evident that there has been a change that is little less than startling. America has assumed a commanding position in the field of applied entomology, and in the so-called more strictly scientific aspects of the study has gained a very high rank. This is not the place to-search for the cause of this extraordinary happen- ing, yet it cannot be gainsaid that it has happened. At present there are numerous large and fairly competent public collections of insects in different parts of the country—Cambridge, New York, Brooklyn, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Washington, Chi- cago, and San Francisco—while the collections of many of the uni- versities and colleges have assumed commanding rank, notably those at Cornell, University of Illinois, Massachusetts Agricultural College, Kansas State Agricultural College, Stanford, and the University of Minnesota. There are more teachers of entomology in the universi- ties and colleges of the United States than there are in all the rest of the world put together, and there are almost as many publishing entomological societies in our country as there are in all Europe. Perhaps the basic reason for this rapid change has been our cry- ing need for relief from the enormous damage done by insects. This need has led to a demand for economic entomologists. The eco- nomic entomologists once found, these men in their work at once felt the need for consulting taxonomists, for large permanent col- lections. And as the multifarious projects opened up it became evi- dent that the workers needed a broader and sounder training and that very many more workers were needed. And so the college training improved and the classes grew larger until at the present time it would seem that there are perhaps more entomologists than workers in any other field of biology in the United States. But more workers are needed. The conditions of life, our methods of growing crops, the tremendous upset we have given to the balance of nature has resulted in such an increase of insects as Mother Nature herself never expected. And many more trained and capable men are needed in this field. Perhaps we need them just now more than any other country. Surely we appreciate their need more than any other country. And that is the reason why the United States stands at the head in applied entomology. The great advances in general entomology have been as follows: (1) The publication of many books and monographs. (2) The building of a large number of great collections. (3) The founding of numerous entomological societies. 174 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 (4) The teaching of entomology in all of the State universities and colleges and the consequent coming of many specialists and many workers. (5) The description of many thousands of species. (6) The publication of studies of the life history and ecology of a great number of forms. (7) Careful work on the physiology and pathology of a number of insects. In agricultural entomology the advance has been, in a general way, as follows: (1) The institution of research work in economic entomology at practically all of the State Agricultural Experiment Stations. (2) The growth of the Federal service from a single worker to a body of about 300 trained men working with a large annual appropriation which in 1925 exceeded $2,500,000. (3) The passage of the so-called Hatch Act which resulted in a Federal appropriation by means of which an Agricultural Experiment Station was started in each State in the Union, practically every one of them demanding the immediate services of an economic entomologist. (4) The forming of the American Association of Economic Entomologists, an organization which brings together the 600 or more workers in this field and which, through its committees, watches closely the trend of investigation, and which, through its regional meetings keeps the workers closely in touch. (5) The discovery of many new insecticides and improved means of applying them, such as hydrocyanic-acid gas, the oil emulsions, the different arsenicals, spraying machinery, dusting machinery, the use of the airplane in arsenical dusting, paradichlorobenzene, and many others. (6) The development of the study of natural control, especially by the intro- duction of parasites for the control of imported pests. (7) The development of the idea of variations in crop methods to reduce or prevent insect damage. In medical entomology (a branch of the subject which has come to the front in the last 30 years) some of the American contributions (aside from the discovery by Theobald Smith of the carriage of Texas fever of cattle by a tick, the discovery by Reed, Carroll, and Lazear of the carriage of yellow fever by a mosquito, and the dis- covery by Ricketts of the carriage of Rocky Mountain spotted fever by a tick) have been as follows: (1) Publication by the Bureau of Entomology of a bulletin giving the biology and classification and remedial treatment for American mosquitoes, elaborating control measures especially (1808). (2) Publication of a much larger book on the same subject (1901). (3) Publication of a large, four-volume monograph of the mosquitoes of North and Central America and the West Indies (1912-1917). (4) Publication of several bulletins by the Department of Agriculture and of a large book on the house fly as a carrier of disease. (5) Extensive experimental. work carried on against malaria in the delta region in Mississippi as a study of the economic bearing of malaria under plantation conditions. WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOW ARD 175 (6) A study of the Rocky Mountain spotted fever, a tick-borne disease. (7) Publication of a large number of reports giving the results of the work of trained medical observers in the United States Public Health Service on insect-borne diseases. (8) Publication of five general works on the subject of medical entomology, as follows: Doane, R. W. Insects and disease. New York. Herms, W. B. Medical and veterinary entomology. New York. Riley, W. A., and Johannsen, O. A. Handbook of medical entomology. Ithaca, New York. Pierce, W. D. Sanitary entomology—the entomology of disease, hygiene, and sanitation. Boston. Chandler, A. C. Animal parasites and human disease. New York. It has become apparent in this extraordinary growth, and more especially of late years, that the study of all aspects of entomology is of the very greatest importance. We are realizing today that we must know everything about insects, and that, therefore, the somewhat arbitrary classification of entomologists into economic or general, or “pure,” is wrong, since in the last analysis all entomologists are economic workers. LATER WORK IN THE STATES I remember very well that when Doctor Escherich’s book entitled ‘Die angewandte Entomologie in den Vereinigten Staaten” was published, the Russian entomologist Emelianoff, who had been in the United States for some time, criticised it by stating that in compari- son with its full treatment of the Federal service it did not say enough about the work done in the States, which was really quite as good and quite as deserving of extended consideration. Emelianoff was right, although as a matter of fact he himself had studied the State work and not that of the Federal Government. But the fault was not Esche- rich’s. I have taken it on my own shoulders in my brief account of the history of applied entomology in the United States published in Doctor Friederichs’ big recently published book entitled (translated ) “The Fundamental Questions and Legal Measures of Applied Zo- ology in Agriculture and Foresty.”” I accompanied Escherich on his journey through the States, and showed him, very naturally, the things in which I was most interested, in which I had a personal con- cern, although we did visit several State stations and he met a number of the State workers. In just the same way I fear that I have laid myself open to criticism in the present work. But I am not able to write as intelligently and with as much detail concerning the growth of the science in the dif- 176 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 ferent State institutions. That will be taken for granted, and indeed to follow the progress in each State would be a task I could not possibly undertake. In previous sections I have expressed my high opinion of the work done in the State Experiment Stations, in the State Agricultural Colleges, and by the other State workers. The results reached by these individuals and institutions have been pub- lished and are all matters of record, easily consulted and widely known and appreciated among the economic entomologists of the world. Therefore details should really not be expected in this volume. Of course, the workers under the Federal Government apparently have great advantages over the others. As against the men in the Agricultural Colleges they have apparently the advantage of undivided time—they have no teaching to do. As against the workers in the Experiment Stations and in the offices of the rare State Entomologists they have the advantage of greater numbers and of greater financial means. The purchase of apparatus, the access to great collections and to an extremely competent library, the possibility of buying at once everything needed, are undoubtedly great advantages. The constant meeting with fellow workers for purposes of consultation and encour- aging conversations is more possible with the Federal men. There is in fact only one drawback about the Federal work, and that is that as soon as a man displays especial ability that seems to point towards administrative capacity he is put ahead and soon finds his time so occu- pied by the red tape of Government methods that his time for research is greatly lessened. Nevertheless, as we look over the field for the past 30 years it must be admitted that not only have the States brought out a great mass of valuable results, but that in comparison this mass has equaled in importance that coming from Federal laboratories. This would be the place for a somewhat detailed consideration of the growth and accomplishments of each State station, so that the accomplishments of the group as a whole could be contrasted with those of the Federal Bureau. But I have not the time or the facilities for a proper study of this kind, nor is there room to print it in this perhaps too broadly planned volume. Future writers will do this ; and in fact in each station some one some day will display historically the achievements of his own service. The day will come when a record of the valuable work done in each State organization will fill a book as big as this one.’ *Dr. A. C. True, in his excellent “ History of Agricultural Education in the United States 1785-1925” (Miscellaneous Publication No. 11 of the United States Department of Agriculture), gives three pages to a cursory account of WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOW ARD WHe7, STATE DEPARTMENTS OF AGRICULTURE AND STATE SOCIETIES HAVING OFFICIALS PAID BY THE STATE While Asa Fitch was entitled “ State Entomologist ” and was paid a salary by the State his reports were published in the Transactions of the New York State Agricultural Society and this Society was responsible for his original appointment. His successors, both en- titled State Entomologist, Dr. J. A. Lintner and Dr. E. P. Felt, were stationed in the State Bureau of Education. Dr. A. S. Packard who was termed State Entomologist of Massa- chusetts during 1870 and 1871 published his reports as parts of the Annual Report of the Secretary of the Massachusetts Board of Agriculture. B. D. Walsh, who published the first annual report on the noxious insects of the State of Illinois, was called State Entomologist, but his single report was published in the Transactions of the Illinois State Horticultural Society for 1867. There have been other officials paid by the State, either connected with the State Department or State Board of Agriculture, whose reports were published in official documents or in the transactions of large State boards or societies of agriculture or horticulture. The famous nine reports by C. V. Riley on the insects of Missouri were made to the State Board of Agriculture and were published by the State in the Board reports. As we have seen in an earlier section of this book, entitled “‘ The Hatch Act,” etc., there was, prior to 1880, apparently a State Ento- mologist of Alabama, J. T. Humphreys, but I have been unable to learn the facts, and I make this statement from the printed letterheads used in correspondence with Washington. the development of entomology, perhaps especially from the experiment-station standpoint, which is natural enough, since Doctor True was for many years the head of the Office of Experiment Stations of the Department. In this state- ment he mentions the following facts: In 1888 there were 25 men doing entomological work in 20 Experiment Stations. In 1890 there were 35 ento- mologists in 28 states. In 1894 the Experiment Stations in 42 States and Terri- tories employed 28 entomologists and 40 other persons doing entomological work in connection with zoology, botany, horticulture, etc. In 1912 there were 101 ento- mologists on the Station staffs, and not less than 112 persons were engaged in entomological work in the Agricultural Colleges and State Universities. In 1912, Doctor True states, the Federal and State funds devoted to instruction, research, and inspection work aggregated about $1,600,000. We have shown in another section that in 1912 the Federal Bureau of Entomology had an appropriation of $601,920. There was, therefore, the sum of one million dollars during that year “oe spent by the States for “instruction, research, and inspection.” 178 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS voL. 84 I have been through the Directory of Agricultural and Home Eco- nomics Leaders of the United States and Canada (Tenth Edition, Cambridge, Mass., 1928) and I find the following : Alabama: A Chief Apiarist. Arizona: A Commission of Agriculture and Horticulture having on its staff among others a State Entomologist, a District Entomologist, a Bee Inspector, and a Chief Crop Pest Inspector. California: Under the State Department of Agriculture there is a Division of Plant Industry containing a Bureau of Plant Quarantine and Pest Control. In this Bureau there is an Entomologist and two Assistant Entomologists. Georgia: Under the Department of Agriculture, there is a State Entomologist. Illinois: A Division of Apiary Inspection, a Chief Plant Inspector. Indiana: Under the Department of Agriculture there is a Division of Plant Pest Control employing several entomologists. There was at one time a so- called State Entomologist. Kansas: Under the Board of Agriculture there is a specified Entomologist. There is, moreover, a State Entomological Commission of five men under this Board, and two of these are entomologists. Louisiana: Under the Department of Agriculture and Immigration there is a Division of Entomology with a State Entomologist. Maine: Under the Department of Agriculture, Division of Plant Industry, there is one entomologist with the title of Field Agent Gipsy Moth Work. There is also a corps of field inspectors. Maryland: Under the State Board of Agriculture there is, in the State Horticultural Department, a State Entomologist and an Assistant. Massachusetts: There is under the Department of Agriculture a Division of Plant Pest Control with a Director and one or more assistants. Michigan: There is a force of orchard and nursery inspectors. Mississippi: There is a State Plant Board with an Entomologist and six or more assistants. Missouri: There is a State Apiarist. New Hampshire: A State Entomologist (O’Kane). _ New Jersey: A State Entomologist with an assistant in gipsy moth work and one in Japanese beetle work. There is also a Japanese Beetle Suppression Agent, and a Bee Inspector, as well as Nursery Inspectors. North Carolina: The Department of Agriculture has an official with the title Entomologist (Leiby). Ohio: Under the Department there is a State Apiarist with five deputies. Oklahoma: A State Bee Inspector, under the State Board of Agriculture. Pennsylvania: Under the Department of Agriculture is a Bureau of Plant Industry in which there is a Chief Entomologist with five assistants and a Chief Apiary Inspector. ° Rhode Island: Under the Department of Agriculture there is a Chief of the Bureau of Entomology and Plant Pathology. Tennessee: The Department of Agriculture has a Division of Plant Disease Control with a State Entomologist, and an Assistant State Entomologist. There is also a State Apiarist. ee WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—-HOW ARD 179 Texas: The Department of Agriculture has an Entomological Division, the Chief being R. C. McDonald. Vermont: Under the Department of Agriculture, Harold L. Bailey carries the title “ Department Entomologist.’ There are also three Apiary Inspectors. Virginia: In the Department of Agriculture there is a Division of Botany in which the Chief Botanist, G. Talbot French, is also State Entomologist. There is an Assistant Entomologist. West Virginia: Under the Department of Agriculture is found W. E. Rumsey, Entomologist. Wisconsin: Under the Department of Agriculture there is a Section of Insect and Plant Disease Control, with E. L. Chambers as State Entomologist, and an Assistant and a Chief Apiary Inspector. From this it appears that in 1928, 27 of the 48 States were employ- ing one or more entomologists in their Departments or Boards of Agriculture. And in each of these same States were one or more other organizations, such as the State Agricultural College or the State Agricultural Experiment Station, also employing entomologists. In the other 21 States the entomological work is done by the officials of the Agricultural Experiment Stations partly supported by the Federal Government. There is, of course, some overlapping, and in some of the States the chief entomologist of the State Experiment Station also holds from the State Department of Agriculture the title of State Entomologist. It is safe to say, however, that the bulk of the research work on injurious insects in the United States is done by the officials of the State Experiment Stations and by the force of the Bureau of Ento- mology of the United States Department of Agriculture. THE SALARIES OF ENTOMOLOGISTS To the physician, to the lawyer, to the commercial man, in fact to almost every even moderately successful individual, the salaries paid to entomologists in this country down to very recent times must have seemed pitifully small, but those who held this estimate have over- looked the fact that most of the men working in economic entomology were engaged in the pursuit they loved best. In other words, they were gaining a living, even though a poor one financially, by doing just what they wanted to do. So that, instead of leading, as some have expressed it, self-sacrificing lives for the benefit of the public, they have really been leading in a way self-indulgent lives of pleasure which might almost be termed selfish lives. It will be interesting to make a brief survey of the range of salaries, in so far as the facts are available, during the last 50-odd years. We have mentioned the compensation given to Harris for his report on 180 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 ‘“Tnsects Injurious to Vegetation ” in Massachusetts. The salary paid to Asa Fitch, the first State Entomologist, was $1,000. The salary paid to Townend Glover in 1863-1877 was $2,000. The salary paid to Riley when he succeeded Glover was $2,000 a year. That paid to Comstock during his two years as chief entomologist to the United States De- partment of Agriculture was $1,900 and $2,000. When Riley returned to the Department in 1881, the salary was advanced to $2,500, and there it remained for many years and was my own salary when I succeeded him in 1894. In 1902 it was increased to $2,750; in 1904 to $3,250; in 1906 to $4,000; in 1911, to $4,500; in 1919, to $5,000 ; in 1924, to $6,000, and in 1925 to $6,500. During all these years the salaries of the principal assistants in the Bureau were being gradually raised from $1,200. The salaries at the present time are in very marked contrast to those of earlier years. The Chief of the Bureau now receives $8,000. There are two who receive $6,400 a year each; one who has $6,000, two have $5,800, six have $5,600, one has $5,200, two have $5,000, and forty-six have from $4,000 to $4,600, no less than twenty-eight of these receiving $4,600 each. Of course, the compensation in other walks of life has also in- creased, either correspondingly or much more greatly. The vastly increased cost of living brought about largely by the World War is naturally responsible for much of these increases, but I like to think that the good work done by the economic entomologists and the rapidly increasing appreciation of the value of these services on the part of the intelligent public have been measurably responsible. In other branches of scientific work under the government similar increases have been made, but I am inclined to think that the contrast between earlier conditions and those of the present are even more marked with the economic entomologists than they are in many other branches of science. I recall very well when in the 1880’s Dr. William Trelease was made Director of the Shaw Botanic Gardens in St. Louis he was given a salary of five thousand dollars a year, and at that time that sum seemed princely. It stood out painfully alone among the salaries paid to biologists. As tothe salaries paid to the men working under the States, either in the colleges or in the experiment stations or under the State Depart- ments of Agriculture, I have no sure information. That many of them have been absurdly underpaid is certain. I remember that in one case that came to my attention a few years ago a man who had long held the position of State Entomologist, had done service of the highest rank and had reached a commanding position in the scientific world, WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 181 told me that he had worked for years and had raised and educated his family of children on a salary of $2,500 a year. In 1929 a report was published by Congress entitled “ Report of Wage and Personnel Survey,” drawn up the Personnel Classification Board. From this report it appears that the salary figures presented for the comparable grades indicated that the government salaries were superior to those paid by the universities, and that in the case of land-grant institutions the workers in every rank were receiving con- siderably less than government employees holding approximately cor- responding positions, the differences in the respective instances varying from $761.66 to $900.85. The opportunities for outside work during the long summer vacations, however, undoubtedly have resulted in the reduction of this apparent discrepancy. It is interesting to note from this report that whereas 69 per cent of those in the Federal service received $3,500 or less per annum, only 46 per cent of those in educa- tional institutions received this figure or under. In a general way, of course, these figures hold for the men doing entomological work. Such cases as that cited in the next to the last paragraph were I believe not exceptional. But rather recently there has come a change and the men in the colleges and stations are much better paid. For principal men, salaries ranging from $4,000 to $5,000 are not uncom- mon; in fact, I believe that there is one at $6,000, and even one in a State university at $6,500. Here, however, and in fact in many cases the duties of the officials combine teaching with research and the di- rection of research. I do not wish the inference to be drawn that the salary situation is satisfactory in the States or commensurate with the value of the services rendered, for I am informed that there are several important posts in the entomological service of the State Ex- periment Stations that are still underpaid, a number of. salaries ranging below $4,000, in one case as low as $2,700. These statements regarding States have all concerned head men in entomology. The assistants, even the principal ones, were very poorly paid as a rule prior to, say, 1920. In one of the prominent midwestern States, for example, the highest salary paid to a principal assistant prior to 1920 was $1,800 a year. But since that date the rate of com- pensation has increased considerably. In the same State under con- sideration at the present time field men are being paid from $2,700 to $3,000, research men $3,000, and so on. From the financial point of view it seems strange that more of the promising and competent young men have not left the Federal Govern- ment and the States to go into commercial work such as the great and rapidly growing industries dependent on the warfare against 182 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VoL. 84 insects. There have been instances of this kind, and in fact instances in which the financial urge of a rapidly growing family has turned men into quite different pursuits. It may incidentally be stated that it is encouraging to the men who have stuck by research to note that in some instances such men have voluntarily returned to re- search work and have taken positions once more in Federal or State laboratories. A notable instance of the rapidly growing appreciation of the value of the services of an expert entomologist of high scientific rank has just come,to my attention. Dr. Royal N. Chapman, of the University of Minnesota, is stated by the newspapers to have been engaged by the Pineapple Growers Association of Hawaii for a period of some years at an annual salary of $20,000. I have referred in a former paragraph to the love of their work that has kept most salaried entomologists happy in the face of small finances. No married man can be happy, however, unless his wife is contented or unless she conceals from him any discontentment she may feel. And this leads me to pay a tribute to the wives of the entomologists. Those I have known have been apparently contented and therefore have been true helpmeets. CANADA Canada very naturally has to meet many of the same insect prob- lems as at least the northern tier of the United States, and, since the people of the two countries are much alike, the development of eco- nomic entomology in both regions has proceeded in a nearly parallel manner. It is true that the necessity for Federal legislation in supply- ing adequate appropriations came much earlier in the United States, and possibly for this very reason Canada for a number of years lagged behind, since, the problems being practically identical, their solu- tions reached in the United States would be immediately at the dis- posal of our Canadian neighbors. But after a comparatively long period of this at least partial reliance upon the United States, the Canadian Government found itself in a position to support a compe- tent service, and of late this has grown until the whole entomological world is proud of its activity and of its accomplishments. There were no very early writers on economic entomology in Canada, but there was one publication of especial note which was pub- lished in 1857. It was entitled “ Essay on the Insects and Diseases Injurious to Wheat Crops.” The author was H. Y. Hind, Professor of Chemistry at Trinity College in Toronto, And this essay was given first prize of a series offered by the Bureau of Agricultural Statis- WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOW ARD 183 tics of the Canadian Government in August, 1856. The Hind essay was published in excellent form in Toronto, in an attractive red cloth binding. It covers 139 pages and carries a few very fair wood- cuts. I do not know that Professor Hind ever wrote anything else on entomology, but he appears to have made an extensive study of his subject before writing this essay. It is rather discursive, but then that was the custom in those days; and it goes into other subjects to some extent. The opening chapter considers the general subject of injurious insects, the second chapter discussing classification of insects, and the third taking up the Hessian fly. Chapter IV is devoted to the wheat midge ; Chapter V to the wheat stem fly and other depre- dators ; Chapter VI to rust, smut, pepper brand, and ergot; and the final chapter gives four pages to the subject of insects affecting stored grain. Chapter II contains two very interesting paragraphs relat- ing to the former poor public opinion of entomologists and to the fact that the science of entomology during the preceding 50 years had been “ slowly giving way to a more correct appreciation of its value and of the benefits which a general study of its details might confer upon mankind.” The author of this interesting volume seems to have read extensively and to have absorbed the works of Harris, Fitch, Curtis, and Kollar, and to have gone further back in his study of the older European entomologists. He seems to have been especially impressed by the writings of Harris and Fitch, and brings together many Canadian reports as to damage, and to have altogether prepared an essay which was extremely creditable for that period. The following year (1858) there was published at Toronto another essay on the same subject, this time by G. S. J. Hill. The biblio- graphical records show that it contained 52 pages and was illustrated. I have not seen this work. Public support for economic entomology in Canada began in a very small way in 1870-71, when the legislature of the Province of Ontario incorporated the Entomological Society of Ontario and gave it a grant of $500 per annum from the provincial treasury. In 1884 the Department of Agriculture of Canada established the office of Honorary Entomologist, and this office was filled by the appointment of Mr. James Fletcher, at that time an employee of the Government Library at Ottawa and already widely known in ento- mological circles. A large share of the credit for the founding of the Ontario Ento- mological Society and for the subsequent Government support is due to Rev. C. J. S. Bethune, for many years head master of the Trinity College School at Port Hope (on the shore of Lake Ontario, not far 184 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 from Toronto), and Dr. William Saunders, at one time a druggist, but also interested in insects, plants and agriculture generally.” To Doctor Saunders is given the credit for the origin of the experimental farms system of Canada and the establishment of the Central Experi- mental Farm near Ottawa, of which he was the first Director. There should also be mentioned here the writings of the Rev. T. W. Fyles who published some good economic papers at an early date. Notable among them is his pamphlet entitled “Some of the Insects that Frequent the Orchard and Garden,” Montreal, 1879. The illustrations are borrowed from Riley’s Missouri Reports. In 1887 Mr. Fletcher was transferred to the staff of the Central Station as Entomologist and Botanist, and from that time on, for very many years, his status was practically identical with that of ento- mologist to one of our State Experiment Stations except that his field was much larger. He published a report yearly in the Annual Report of the Experimental Farms. He showed himself to be a man of extraordinary energy, a most entertaining writer, and a most careful observer and one who kept the practical part of his work foremost in view. Unlike most of the American workers, he saw the necessity for keeping in personal touch with the farmers. He gave frequent talks on injurious insects at farmers’ institutes, and in that way built up a very large circle of friends and admirers among the most intelligent agriculturists of the Dominion. His reports constantly improved in character. The agriculture of Canada developed enormously. The country became richer, and more funds were devoted to the experimental farms system, but the amount that was placed at Fletcher’s disposal seemed by no means commen- surate with the demands of the situation. Fletcher’s energy, however, his broad grasp of the subject, and his indefatigability as a writer Doctor Bethune had been writing extensively on the injurious insects of Canada from the spring of 1867 when his first paper, entitled “ Cutworms Destroying Spring Wheat” was published in the Canadian Farmer. He con- tinued to write extensively for this journal until the Entomological Society of Ontario was founded, and after that his papers are to be found in the Reports of the Society. Doctor Saunders began to publish the year after Doctor Bethune. He also used the Canadian Farmer first, but with the founding of the Canadian Ento- mologist in 1868 he began an extensive series of papers published in that journal for many years. In 1883 he published an excellent illustrated book entitled “Tnsects Injurious to Fruits,” 436 pp., 440 figs., J. B. Lippincott & Co., Phila- delphia, of which a second edition was published in 1880. WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOW ARD 185 and public speaker enabled Canada to keep herself abreast of the times, largely by the adoption and assimilation of American methods. The writer considered Fletcher as one of his warmest personal friends. He always attended the meetings of the American Associa- tion of Economic Entomologists. In fact the two of us during a never-to-be-forgotten summer in Washington drafted the original constitution of this organization which was effected in fact at Toronto in 1889. Fletcher’s visit to Washington during that particular summer was a great joy to himself and to the men here who met him for the first time. He had never been so far south before, and every insect and every flower and every tree and almost every person he met inter- ested him enormously. He would stop colored boys on the street and hold long talks with them. He would spend an hour looking over the bark of a shade-tree. It was almost impossible to get him home to dinner. His enthusiasm was infectious. Every one loved him at sight, and it is no wonder that when he died in 1908 he was mourned not only over the whole Dominion of Canada but throughout the United States. So competent a man was Fletcher and so great was his personal influence, and so completely did he adapt himself to the situation as it existed in his country, that the necessity for additional funds for entomological research in Canada was by no means as obvious as it would have been had he been a man of different character—the people were so satisfied with Fletcher and what he was doing. On the death of Doctor Fletcher in 1908, following an operation, the authorities evidently devoted serious consideration to the choice of his successor. The question was indeed a serious one, since no one could expect to fill the place that Fletcher had won in the minds and in the hearts of his constituency. Arthur Gibson, who had been his sole entomological assistant, a well-trained entomologist and an indefatigable worker, was thought to be too young. The Ministry corresponded with the Chief of the Bureau of Entomology at Wash- ington, asking for advice as to possible American entomologists who might be induced to take the place. There was a feeling, however, that the Dominion should rely on the old country as much as possible in such matters, and in consequence the man who received the ap- pointment was Dr. C. Gordon Hewitt, at that time connected with the University of Manchester, who had done some sound original research work in entomology and who was said to be a most promis- ing man. Many people were disappointed when the announcenient of this appointment was made, and Hewitt surely confronted a diffi- cult situation when he came to Canada and Fletcher’s old friends 13 186 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VoL. 84 could not help but compare the apparently rather diffdent young man with their old, big, broad, genial Fletcher. In December, 1909, I met Hewitt for the first time at the Boston meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Sct- ence. I too was struck by the contrast, and was disappointed. This, however, was only a temporary feeling, and Hewitt soon showed his worth as a sound thinker and a remarkable organizer. He rapidly gained the confidence of the Ottawa people and began to make broad plans for the extension of the entomological service. Mr. Gibson remained as his assistant. The following winter the Canadian Legisla- ture passed an important law entitled “ The Destructive Insect and Pest Act,” aimed against the introduction of certain specified insect pests. The passage of this act enabled Hewitt to add to his staff a number of trained men as inspectors and field officers, and by 1914 he had succeeded in establishing entomological field stations at nine points reaching from Nova Scotia on the one side to Vancouver, British Columbia, on the other. And the service continued to grow. In 1914 the permanent staff numbered 20. In 1927 it numbered 58. Hewitt succeeded in forming four definite Divisions in the service, based to some extent on the organization of the Bureau of Ento- mology at Washington. These were, a Division of Field Crop and Garden Insects, a Division of Forest Insects, a Division of Forest Pest Suppression, and a Division of Systematic Entomology. But Doctor Hewitt was not allowed to develop his broad plans to the fullest extent, for in 1920 he died. During his 11 years of service he had developed economic entomology from a small division attached to the Experimental Farms Branch to an important branch of the Department of Agriculture. Moreover, he had made friends every- where. He was a frequent visitor to the States, and was held in very high esteem by the workers in this country—so much so, in fact, that in 1916 he was made the President of the American Association of Economic Entomologists. It is possible that some other appointee could have accomplished the results which Hewitt brought about, but it seems unlikely. He was more than a laboratory entomologist ; he was a broadly trained zoologist and a field man as well. His published reports were admirable. He was the author of an authoritative book on the house fly, published in England, and during the closing months of his life he prepared a manuscript of a valuable book on “ The Conservation of the Wild Life of Canada” which was published after his death. In 1916 he was appointed Consulting Zoologist to the Canadian Government and was the Canadian representative on the International Commission for the Protection of Nature. In this i i WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—-HOW ARD 187 capacity he worked hard on the Migratory Birds Treaty, and he drafted for Canada what is now known as the Northwest Game Act. The book just mentioned was finally published by Scribner’s of New York in 1921, and contains a preface by his widow which gives an intimate and charming view of his character and career. When Hewitt died in 1920 there was no longer any necessity for the authorities to ask the home country or the United States for any advice as his successor. There were numerous experienced and well trained economic entomologists in their own service, so admirably had this developed during Hewitt’s administration. Several of them had already gained a high rank in the profession. It is a pleasure to record the fact that they were governed by the admirable civil service principle of promotion, and that Arthur Gibson was chosen. Gibson had been the righthand man both of Fletcher and of Hewitt, and assumed the chiefship with a perfect knowledge of Canadian entomological problems and of the people, and also with an under- standing and appreciation of Hewitt’s plans and ambitions for the service. As a result the work has gone on steadily and harmoniously and with an increasing realization of its importance on the part of the Canadian agriculturists. There can be no doubt that Canada’s entomological problems are now competently handled by her own men. I attended an annual meeting of the Ontario Entomological Society at Ottawa in Novem- ber, 1927. This was the occasion as well for a conference of practi- cally the whole staff of the Entomological Branch. It was with satisfaction and with admiration that I listened to the sound, practical, and scientific discussions, and I left with the feeling that, if there exists such a thing as a friendly rivalry for the greatest results, the United States must exert every effort if she is to hold her own. All through the periods of Fletcher and of Hewitt, and now of Gibson, there has been the most perfect spirit of cooperation between the Canadian service and that of the United States. Nothing could be more ideal than the conditions in this respect that have existed. Not only has perfect confidence in the ability and honesty of purpose of their neighbor held on both sides, but a warm friendship and a general spirit of camaraderie grew up rapidly and is taken on at once by the new workers who join the forces on both sides. Our problems are the same; our ends are the same, and of course we are aided in this community of spirit by the common language and by very similar methods of training. It seems to make no difference to either service whether a desirable man is a Canadian or an American; such men are employed irrespective of their birth countries by both services. 188 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS vo. 84 As to the education of the Canadians: There are 23 universities in the Dominion, of which six are state-controlled, four others are non- denominational, and the rest are denominational. The agricultural colleges are institutions which are more or less independent, such as those called Nova Scotia, McDonald, Oka, St. Anne Pocatiere, On- tario, and Manitoba. However, these agricultural colleges are practi- cally all affiliated with some university empowered to give degrees. Thus, McDonald Agricultural College is affiliated with McGill Uni- versity, Oka Agricultural College with the University of Montreal, and St. Anne Pocatiere with Laval University. All of the agricultural colleges teach entomology, and in the faculties of the universities that have no agricultural departments it is also taught to some extent. For example, the University of Toronto gives sound instruction in ento- mology under Dr. E. M. Walker; and Dr. Norma Ford of that university has done some admirable research work. A number of the agricultural colleges, such as the Nova Scotia College at Truro and the very well known Ontario Agricultural Col- lege at Guelph, give two-year courses and grant associate diplomas. The final two years are taken at other institutions in order to get the degree. In the case of Guelph, the final two years are taken at the University of Toronto; in the case of Truro the candidate may go elsewhere. A notable example of an associate-diploma man from Truro is Loren B. Smith, of the United States Bureau, who later took his degree at Cornell. In fact, a number of good Canadians have finished their courses at American universities. Dr. A. C. Baker, of the Federal Bureau, a Guelph man, is a notable example; as also is Dr. W. R. Thompson, for many years in charge of the United States }ureau’s laboratory in the south of France and at present Director of the Parasite Laboratory of the Imperial Bureau of Entomology at Farnham Royal, England. Doctor Baker has called my attention to one idea adopted by the Canadians which, it seems, might well be used in the United States. A young man entering a Canadian agricultural college, looking towards a degree, must give evidence that he has a practical knowl- edge of all the usual agricultural operations. If he has been raised on a farm, this is taken for granted, but if not he must give evidence that he has worked on a farm and must bring with him a certificate from the farmer with whom he has worked that he is familiar with all farm operations. Doctor Baker himself was reared in towns and cities, and, wishing to take work at the Ontario Agricultural College, had to hire out as a farm laborer with a progressive farmer for a sufficient length of time to get experience in everything, such as WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 189 plowing, seeding, harvesting, etc. In mentioning this idea to the writer, Doctor Baker said, “All this may seem rather absurd in train- ing for a technical profession, but I am convinced that it is a good thing, because in research work in after years it tends to keep one from flying off at an impracticable tangent. A man who has personally handled all of the various types of work on the farm has a very good idea of what he can or cannot recommend from a technical viewpoint.” It seems that the University of Saskatchewan goes even further, and requires students in agriculture to spend their summers at work upon a farm. If not, they must spend their summers in lines of work which are approved by the faculty. It will perhaps be interesting to add some facts concerning insect damage in Canada. Mr. Gibson published an article in Scientific Agriculture for July, 1927, entitled “ What Our Insects Cost Us,” which should have been and probably was read with much interest by the farmers and fruit-growers of our northern neighbor. He shows that the value of the field and fruit crops of Canada, accord- ing to the official estimate at the end of the year 1926, amounted to $1,140,772,251. It has been estimated in the United States that in- sects destroy from 10 to 20 per cent of the total value of these crops. Adopting this percentage, Mr. Gibson shows that the minimum annual loss in Canada is therefore $114,000,000; and he shows that to this large sum should be added the losses to forest and shade trees, stored products and many other things of value. In his opinion, dur- ing recent years the loss through insects to Canadian forests has undoubtedly averaged over $50,000,000 each year. He makes an interesting comparison between the amount spent on the war and demobilization during the years 1915 to March, 1926, and insect damage. The war expenditures amounted to $1,694,557,000. During this same period the losses in Canada from destructive insects, adopting a minimum estimate of $125,000,000 a year, would for the II growing seasons amount to $1,375,000,000. It is obvious that his estimate of insect damage was too low, and there can be little doubt that, without in the least realizing it, Canada suffered as much finan- cial loss during that period from insect damage as she did from war expenses which seemed almost crushing in amount. As was naturally to be expected, Mr. Gibson shows that the biggest losses have been due to pests introduced accidentally from other coun- tries, but he gives important details as to losses from native insects and also points out savings through intelligent insect control work. For example, he shows that in work against grasshoppers in the prairie provinces from 1919 to 1923, more than $77,000,000 was saved to the 190 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 farmers by the use of 72,000 tons of poison bait prepared and spread under the direction of his branch of the Dominion service. He also shows that during 1925 and 1926 the red-backed cutworm damaged the grain crops of Saskatchewan to the amount of $6,000,000 ; in 1921 the western wheat-stem sawfly damaged Saskatchewan to the extent of $12,000,000 ; and the spruce bud-worm is said to have destroyed 150,000,000 cords of pulp-wood in Quebec. He adds the interesting statement that this amount of wood manufactured into paper at today’s price would represent a loss of $7,000,000,000. MEXICO I made three official visits to Mexico before the outbreak of the great revolution which ended the long Diaz administration. In 1898, when the subject of quarantine against injurious insects was receiving much attention (emphasized, of course, by the gipsy moth damage, the appearance of the Mexican cotton boll weevil in Texas, and the embargoes placed by foreign countries upon American fruits on account of the San Jose scale danger), the State of Cali- fornia had become alarmed at the possibility that the so-called More- los orange fruit-fly of Mexico would sooner or later infest the Citrus orchards of that State, and the State had quarantined against Mexi- can oranges and lemons, The Mexicans claimed that this was purely a trade quarantine, since Mexican oranges from the State of Sonora had been taking the early market away from the southern Cali- fornians; and the Mexicans claimed further that the orange fruit- fly did not exist in northwest Mexico. In October, 1898, I started out with E. A. Schwarz from Washing- ton. He left the train in Arizona to go to Williams, and I continued to Nogales, thence taking the direct southern line though Hermo- sillo, Sonora, to Guaymas on the Gulf of California. I spent some days at each place. There was at that time a very considerable indus- try in oranges at Hermosillo and a lesser one at Guaymas. I did con- siderable collecting at each place, but failed to find a trace of the fruit-fly. Incidentally, the news came of the battle of Manila Bay while I was doing some beach collecting at Guaymas. The news was received with surprised rage by the Mexicans, and a semi-intoxicated indi- vidual, recognizing me as a Gringo, drew a large knife and attempted to assassinate me. I had no hesitation, under the circumstances, in exhibiting my ability as long-distance runner. Incidentally also, I studied the tree cotton at San Jose de Guaymas, thinking that per- WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD IQI haps the cotton boll weevil would occur there. None was found. Incidentally also, during this trip I made my first acquaintance with one of the kissing-bugs (Rasahus biguttatus). In 1902 I made a second trip to Mexico, largely for the purpose of trying to find whether the cotton boll weevil is parasitized to any extent there. In the City of Mexico I had the pleasure for the first time of meeting Prof. A. L. Herrera, who was then the leading eco- nomic entomologist of that republic. I found him to be a man of wide reading and excellently well informed concerning the insect prob- lems of Mexico. I called with him on the Minister of Fomento (Senor Limantour, as I recollect) and talked at length on the general problems of economic entomology. My Spanish was practically neg- ligible, and the conversation was carried on in French, Herrera at that time spoke no English and very little French. His wife and his sister, however, spoke good French, and there was little difficulty in our mutual understanding. With Herrera’s help, I went south to Oaxaca, met Mr. Grandison, a prominent cotton broker, and took a trip to the east to a cotton- growing region, and not only failed to find the boll weevil but also failed to find anybody who knew anything about it or had ever heard of it. On my way back to the States from the City of Mexico, I stopped at Guanajuato to pay my respects to the veteran entomologist, Alfredo Dugés. Doctor Dugés had for many years been known as the most prominent entomologist in Mexico. He was French by birth, and for many years had held the position of French Consul. He taught sci- entific subjects in one of the educational institutions, and had long been an ardent collector and student in many branches of natural history. He was the teacher, in fact, of Professor Herrera. I found him in his own home, crowded by natural history specimens. Snakes in alcohol, stuffed birds and mammals, boxes of insects, and plant herbaria occupied most of the available space. He managed to find a seat for me, and we chatted for a long time, particularly, as I recol- lect it, on the subject of mosquitoes, and mosquito-borne diseases. My third and last trip to that country was made in 1904, the object being again boll weevil parasites but more particularly the distribution of the yellow fever mosquito at Mexican elevations above 3,000 feet. Again the results were negative as to the boll weevil, but some very interesting points were gathered concerning the mosquito. I went slowly down from the City of Mexico to Vera Cruz. The yellow fever mosquito of course was very abundant in Vera Cruz, also at Cordoba, and less so at Orizaba. The people at the latter place told 192 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 me that this mosquito had been present at Orizaba only during the past few years. It had evidently been brought up from lower eleva- tions on railway trains and had established itself at first near the railway station and gradually spread out into the city, breeding in domestic water receptacles as is the custom of this species. Before leaving the City of Mexico I had an interview with Dr. Eduardo Liceaga, the President of the Superior Board of Health, whom I had met the previous year at a Pan-American sanitary con- gress at Washington. Doctor Liceaga had been among the first to accept the conclusions of the United States Yellow Fever Commission regarding the sole instrumentality of Aédes aegypti as the vector of this disease. He told me of his widespread plans to control this mosquito, and enumerated the number of inspectors which were employed by his department at the different points in the yellow fever zone. I searched for such inspectors on my trip, but found none. At Orizaba I mentioned to a prominent physician the fact that Doctor Liceaga had told me that there were 18 inspectors employed at that place, and, after inquiry, he finally found a friend who had seen one Indian with a quart kerosene can and an official badge on his som- brero, It seemed to me that, although Doctor Liceaga’s plans were sound, officialism in at least certain parts of the republic must have been devoted largely to the drawing of salaries. I was told that Herrera did not dare to leave the City of Mexico for fear that when he returned some one else would be holding his position; and my informant suggested that, although Doctor Liceaga was the personal physician and warm friend of President Porfirio Diaz, a similar fear held him to his post in the city and prevented inspection tours. The result of the investigation of the distribution of the yellow fever mosquito justified the conclusion previously reached that it breeds throughout the year in only tropical, subtropical, and lower Lower Austral life zones. This was the year of the yellow fever outbreak at Laredo, Texas, and Nueva Laredo just across the Rio Grande in Mexico. Although it was five years after the demonstration of the sole carriage of yel- low fever by Aédes aegypti (then known as Stegomyia fasciata), I realized that should I return by land I would be quarantined at the Mexican border, and I therefore took passage from Vera Cruz to New York by sea. I have elsewhere told of our stop at Havana and of my call on Dr. Juan Guiteras at Las Animas Hospital, and of the up-to-date policy of the Cubans, in contrast to the reactionary policy of the Texans, in their. thorough acceptance-of the truth of the findings of Reed, Carroll, and Lazear. WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 193 When the revolution came to Mexico many things were upset and remained in an upset condition for many years. During the Huerta administration conditions became such in the City of Mexico that Herrera disposed of his property and started for Vera Cruz about the time of the landing of the Americans at that port. His train was stopped, and he and his family remained in Cordoba for some months while he was recovering from an attack of brain fever which came upon him. Eventually they reached Vera Cruz in a sad condition. He managed to cable to Washington, and word was wired to General Funston in command of the American expedition to the effect that Herrera had been of much assistance to the United States Government and that it was desirable that he should be cared for. No reply came, but I understand that the Herreras were relieved at once by the Ameri- can forces. Eventually, when quieter times came, they returned to the City of Mexico, and since then Herrera has regained his health, and become director of a general biological service which includes a number of branches. In the summer of 1922, to the great delight of many of the natu- ralists in this country who had corresponded with Herrera and who knew his writings, he was commissioned by the Mexican government to visit the United States. He came accompanied by his youngest daughter, and spent some weeks in the eastern United States, accumu- lating information. which he put into play immediately on his return and started a number of movements which have already developed important results and promise much for the future. In the meantime Mexico has had a number of serious entomological problems and has developed a few good men of her own, and has utilized the services of Dr. A. Dampf (a German), the latter es- pecially in the serious problem of an invasion by migratory grass- hoppers of some of her southeastern States. A Mexican worker, Sam. Macias Valdez, has been doing excellent work with the insects affect- ing live stock ; and other younger men are coming forward. Mexican officials have always been exceedingly courteous to Ameri- can official entomologists who have visited that country on various missions connected especially with the investigation of the boll weevil, the pink bollworm, and the orange fruit-worm, and have shown the most intelligent and cordial wish for close cooperation. It is true that rather uncomfortable incidents have occurred ; such, for example, as the temporary arrest of Hunter and Coad by a party of revolu- tionistas, and another time the execution, by hanging, of one or more unfortunate Mexicans on a tree immediately in front of the temporary 194 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 laboratory of the United States Bureau of Entomology in the La- gunas district. It might be worth while also to mention that I was myself arrested in Cordoba while collecting insects at night on the white wall of a building under an are light. I had climbed up on a barred window to reach a highly placed specimen, when I was caught by the police and carried off to the cuartel. I showed my specimens and tried to explain, but without effect. I had met the Jefe Politico in the morning and had his card in my pocket. When I produced it, they sent for the high official, who liberated me with apologies and who later gave me an official document entitling me to the freedom of the city and the right to collect insects anywhere. The point of the whole episode was that the building on which I was climbing was the prin- cipal bank of the town. Shortly after this last visit to Mexico the serious revolutionary troubles began that resulted in the overthrow of the Diaz administra- tion and in a long period of great unrest in which administration followed administration. At this distance I have during these years been confused as to conditions in the neighboring republic although from time to time men connected with the Department have gone down there on one mission or another. I have been fully aware, however, that important movements in applied science have taken place, and just now (April, 1930) I have been placed in possession of a comprehensive statement drawn up at my request by Dr. Alfons Dampf, on the basis of which I have constructed the following para- graphs. Many of the sentences are in Doctor Dampf’s own words, and | thank him very heartily for his sympathetic courtesy. There seems little doubt that both the Aztecs and the Mayas suffered from locust invasions. Among the Mexican antiquities, stone carvings of grasshoppers are occasionally found, and the beautiful presidential residence near the City of Mexico bears the name Chapul- tepec which means “ grasshopper hill.” Therefore, primitive applied entomology was evidently of pre-Columbian origin. At the time of the conquest by Cortez, the Spanish writers, Hernandez, Sahagun, Clavijero, and others, give data concerning insects gained from the Indians. The famous Father Antonio Alzate, after whom the well known scientific society of Mexico is named and who died in 1795, observed the pulsation in the dorsal vessel of a caterpillar and pub- lished an extensive work on the cochineal. Great collections of insects among other objects of natural history weré made in Mexico during the past century, and particularly when the great work by Godman and Salvin was carried out, resulting in the publication of the famous ‘ Biologia Centrali-Americana.” The entomological parts of this work WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOW ARD 195 are indispensable to the broad taxonomist, but there are no biological data whatever nor is there any indication that any of the species mentioned are of economic importance. : The publication known as “ La Naturaleza”’ should be mentioned. Doctor Dampf calls it ‘‘ the valuable Mexican scientific review.” It was published from 1869 to 1914. Doctor Dampf also refers to the various agricultural journals (Boletin de la Sociedad Agricola Mexi- cana, from 1879; La Revista Agricola, from 1885, etc.) and to the official publications of the Secretary of Agriculture. In these publi- cations there are many articles on pests, with recommendations for control, but they are mainly taken from foreign publications. In 1900 the “ Comision de Parasitologia Agricola” was established in Mexico City as a branch of the Mexican Department of Agricul- ture (Secretaria de Fomento) and, under the leadership of Prof. A. L. Herrera, began active work, taking up at once the so-called Morelos fruit-worm (Anastrepha ludens). The inspectors and entomologists of the Commission comprised the following individuals: Amado F. Rangel, L. de la Barreda, Oliverio Tellez, Guillermo Gandara, An- selmo Neraz, Carlos Macias, Gabriel Blanco, Julio Riquelme Inda, Dr. Silvio J. Bonansea. The following were honorary collaborators: Dr. Alfredo Duges, Man. Tellez Pizarro, Dr. Manuel Villada, Dr. José Ramirez. Between 1900 and 1907 there were published by the Commission four volumes (the last incomplete) of a Boletin de la Comision de Parasitologia Agricola and 75 circulars concerning insect pests and diseases of cultivated plants. In 1907 a new service was started and entitled ‘‘ Direccion General de Agricultura,” and all experimental and research work was con- centrated in a Central Agricultural Station in San Jacinto (D. F.) with many substations in various States. The old Parasitological Commission was incorporated in the Central Station under the name (translated) ‘ Division of Parasitology.” Professor Herrera re- signed, and Dr. Roman Ramirez, a phytopathologist, was appointed chief. In this Division were J. Riquelme Inda, G. Gandara and Leopold Conradt. In the winter of 1910 Professor Gandara and Senor Riquelme Inda visited Washington, and presumably other parts of the United States. At that time Professor Gandara introduced himself as Professor of Natural History and Plant Pathology, while Riquelme Inda attached to his name the words, “ Perito Agricola.” Mr. Conradt had been one of the collectors for Godman and Salvin, and was entrusted with the formation of the insect collections. 196 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VoL. 84 This Central Agricultural Station was closed in 1914, on account of the revolution, and all scientific work was stopped. In 1915 the Direccion General de Agricultura created a new department under the name ‘‘ Departmento de Plagas,” with Dr. Roman Ramirez as chief, and A. Madariaga, A. Nunez, O. Tellez and L. Conradt as collabo- rators; and in 1917 L. de la Barreda, one of the members of the extinct Parasitological Commission, joined the force. In 1919 the name was changed to “ Seccion de Plagas,” and in 1923 Doctor Ra- mirez resigned. In 1924 the office was removed to Chapingo and incorporated in the Agricultural College as a section of the Depart- ment of Laboratories, with Madariaga, Conradt, de la Barreda and Dr. Alfons Dampf as scientific staff. Doctor Dampf was a man of excellent training who had formerly been Entomologist of German East Africa and since 1920 had been the head of the Entomological Department of the Zoological Museum of Koenigsberg and lecturer on economic entomology. He was invited by the Mexican government to take the chair of Entomology in the National Agricultural College, and arrived in Mexico in September, 1923. There had, however, been political changes in the government, and the new administration could not fulfill the promises of the old one. He was temporarily offered a position as Microbiologist in the Department of Laboratories in Chapingo, but soon resigned and joined a commission of the Mexican Public Health Department which was going to the State of Vera Cruz to study the migratory locust which had invaded the State in a disastrous way. In the autumn of 1924 he traveled in the State of Vera Cruz, made observations on the biology of the Schistocerca paranensis, and published his results in 1925. In the meantime the Section of Parasitology at Chapingo had been suppressed by the government for lack of activity, and the new Secre- tary of Agriculture, Ing. Luis L. Leon, organized a new body entitled (translated) “ Locust Control Board,” with headquarters in Vera Cruz, Doctor Dampf being appointed Entomologist to the Board. Doctor Dampf started promptly and very wisely to Yucatan, British Honduras, and Guatemala, searching for the permanent breeding grounds of the locust. He found on the shores of Lake Peten in Guatemala a sedentary form of what appeared to be Schistocera para- nensis. By later breeding experiments in Vera Cruz he showed the existence of two forms of the same species, just as has been done with the migratory locusts of Europe, Asia and Africa by Uvarov, John- ston, Faure, and others. In 1926 another expedition was made to the highlands of Chiapas. WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOW ARD 197 At the close of the year 1926 the locust outbreak had lost its dangerous aspect and the Control Board was about to be dissolved, but convinced by a memorial submitted by the chief of the Board (Ing. Francisco Garcia Robledo), President Calles established the “ Oficina Federal para la Defensa Agricola”? which began operations in Janu- ary, 1927. Senor Robledo was made director of the Office, Doctor Dampf Chief of the Department of Research and Pest Control, and Ing. E. Coppel Rivas Chief of the Department of Quarantine and Inspection. On the Ist of January, 1930, the Office was divided into three departments: (1) Research, with a staff of 15 persons; (2) Quarantine and Inspection, with 14 persons in the central office, and 60 inspectors; (3) Pest Control, which commands the nearly 2,000 rural associations for plant protection and organizes the campaign against dangerous outbreaks of agricultural pests like locusts, rats, etc. There is a section for publication and propaganda, and an administrative section. Quite recently the United States Bureau of Entomology has entered into an interesting and possibly very important plan of cooperation with the Mexican government. Realizing the great desirability of a laboratory in central Mexico which should be devoted to fundamental studies on fruit-flies, a proposal was made to the Mexican govern- ment, and a prompt agreement was reached. Two laboratory buildings of the former Veterinary School in San Jacinto were taken in hand by the Mexican authorities, funds were appropriated and the buildings were put into first-class shape for modern work; so that eventually two modern concrete buildings and suitable grounds were turned over to the workers of the United States Bureau of Entomology for as long a period as desired. The Mexican officials took great pains to equip these buildings to receive the most up-to-date type of laboratory apparatus, and cannot be too highly praised for the rare vision that induced them to authorize this move in the interest of cooperative entomological research. To go back a bit: Especial mention, perhaps, should be made of articles by L. de la Barreda and A. Madariaga in the Agricultural Review of Mexico for 1919, and an article in the same Review for 1922 on cotton insects by G. Itié. In 1921 important articles on injurious insects were published by R. Ramirez and J. R. Inda; and Sefior Inda published independently, under the Antonio Alzate Society, in 1927, a report on the enemies of chick-peas. At least two experts from the United States have worked upon certain insect problems in Mexico, entirely aside from the investiga- tions made by Hunter, Coad, and others of their assistants in the 198 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 course of their cotton insect work. For example, R. H. Van Zwalu- wenburg worked in Mexico for some time in the employ of an American company in the State of Sinaloa, and in 1926 published a report on the insect enemies of sugar cane in western Mexico. A. W. Morrill was also for several years in the employ of a great American company in Mexico largely engaged in the growing of vegetables. He has published several articles upon his work, an especially notable one being an account of the use of the airplane in dusting large plan- tations of tomatoes. In a special publication of the California De- partment of Agriculture in 1927, Doctor Morrill gives the result of five years’ experience in conducting a general survey of the pests of crops on the west coast of Mexico. An important publication which we have not yet mentioned was published by the office of Defensa Agricola in 1929. It is entitled (translated) “Arsenic and Its Derivatives as Insecticides.” It was written by two chemical engineers, Pablo Hope y Hope and Manuel de la Lama, both connected with the service. Part II EUROPE PS all oe he i Lae ae Ph Hi pi A eo ond ae tr oe ih sea dae PREFACE Large as this book has grown to be, I am very conscious of its omissions, and as I send it to the printer I am fully convinced that I have not done justice to certain countries and to certain individuals. Aside from North America, I have not traveled much, although I have visited nearly all of the European countries except Greece, Rumania, Denmark, Sweden, and Norway. It is true that many entomologists from the British and Dutch colonies, from South American countries and from the Orient have visited Washington; that our correspon- dence covers the whole world; and that the Bureau library is supposed to be very complete. In spite of all this, however, I have not been able to satisfy myself and surely will not have satisfied a number of good workers in certain other countries. To these I offer humble apologies. I have written hundreds of letters asking for further information ; but in some cases I must have chosen my correspondents unfortu- nately. Perhaps they were dead; perhaps they were ill; perhaps (as is undoubtedly the case with some people) they preferred other kinds of work to letter-writing. One thing, however, is certain: that criti- cisms of this publication will be printed and that the next historian of economic entomology will have an easier task. OLD EUROPEAN WRITERS ON ENTOMOLOGY I have a reverence for the fine old European writers on entomology. It has been with me from my early days. Reading only English, French, and Latin as a youth, I read Kirby and Spence at first, and Rennie’s “Insect Architecture” and the English translation of Figuier’s ‘Insect World” and the translation of Van Bruyssel’s “Population of an Old Pear Tree” and the Rev. James G. Wood and Duncan’s adaptation in English of FE. Blanchard’s “ Meta- morphoses des Insectes”’; then Réaumur and Lyonnet, and so on into the more technical works of the masters of classifications in several languages which I learned to translate on the basis of my col- lege Latin, French, Italian, and German, untjl I thought of the great old European workers in the museums and universities as a race of supermen. I have never lost this feeling. Looking back from this distance, I appreciate these men and their work more than ever. All of them studied insects from choice. They were fascinated by their beautiful and strange forms and by their marvelous habits and lives. They worked arduously and with indomi- 14 201 202 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 table and splendid zest, often in spite of the unconcealed derision or pity of their friends and families. Many of these old writers wrote about other branches of natural history as well; but of those who practically confined their investi- gations to insects the following names stand out: Goedart, Swammer- dam, Ray, Vallisnieri, Madame Merrian, Réaumur, Frisch, Clerck, Roesel von Rosenhof, Lyonnet, DeGeer, Bonnet, Scopoli, Goeffroy, Iabricius, Olivier, Kirby, Meigen, Fallen, Latreille, Wiedemann, St. Fargeau, and the small army who published in the early nineteenth century. And then such fine men followed them! Large groups were admirably monographed by them. They were learned masters in a way, but although the group that appreciated and honored them was world-wide, it was a very small group, and the world at large was ignorant of their existence, ignored their writings, and largely ridi- culed the highly important field of investigation in which they spent their productive and useful lives. Most of these men must have been keenly aware of the popular estimation of their work. Numerous writers on entomology of all nations in those days introduced their volumes with words, not of excuse, but of explanation, to justify their importance. The rating of entomology in the public mind at the beginning of the nineteenth century was well expressed by Kirby and Spence in 1815 in the following words: One principal reason of the little attention paid to entomology in this country, has doubtless been the ridicule so often thrown upon the science. The botanist, sheltered now by the sanction of fashion, as formerly by the prescriptive union of his study with medicine, may dedicate his hours to mosses and lichens without reproach; but in the minds of most men, the learned as well as the vulgar, the idea of the trifling nature of his pursuit is so strongly associated with that of the diminutive size of its objects, that an entomologist is synonymous with everything futile-and childish. Now, when so many other roads to fame and distinction are open, when a man has merely to avow himself a botanist, a mineralogist, or a chemist—a student of classical literature or of political economy—to ensure attention and respect, there are evidently no great attrac- tions to lead him to a science which in nine companies out of ten with which he may associate promises to signalize him only as an object of pity or contempt. Even if he have no other aim than self-gratification, yet “ The stanchest stoic of us all wishes at least for some one to enter into his views and feelings, and confirm him in the opinion which he entertains of himself”; but how can he look for sympathy in a pursuit unknown to the world, except as indicative of littleness of mind??* * Preface to Vol. 1 of the “ Introduction to Entomology.” Mr. Spence wrote this preface (see Proceedings of Entomological Society of London for August 5, 1850, Transactions, Vol. 1, new series, page 20). WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 203 An incident peculiarly significant of popular ideas occurred more than a hundred years before this statement by Kirby was published. A record is found in Moses Harris’ “ The Aurelian” (1776), fac- ing his plate of a butterfly that he called “the Glanvil Fritillary.” Harris’ statement is as follows: This Fly took its Name from the ingenious Lady Glanvil whose Memory had like to have suffered for her Curiosity. Some Relations that was disappointed by her Will, attempted to set it aside by Acts of Lunacy, for they suggested that none but those who were deprived of their Senses, would go in Pursuit of Butterflies. Her Relations and Legatees subpoenaed Dr. Sloan and Mr. Ray to support her Character. The last Gentleman went to Exeter and on the Tryal satisfied the Judge and Jury of the Lady’s laudable Inquiry into the wonderful Works of the Creation, and established her Will. We may approximate the date of this trial. Ray died in 1705, and had been invalided during his later years. Sir Hans Sloan was not knighted until 1716. His degree of M.D. was given him in 1683. He is referred to by Harris as “ Dr. Sloan.” It is therefore safe to suppose that the trial at Exeter occurred between 1683 and 1700. Going back to the early part of the nineteenth century, Mr. H. J. Carter of Australia, formerly President of the Linnean Society of New South Wales, has called my attention to the article “ Ento- mology’ in the Oxford Encyclopaedia of 1828. There the condi- tion at that time is well expressed in the following words: “ There is not, perhaps, any branch of natural history the study of which has been so generally regarded with indifference and contempt. The insect hunter is not infrequently treated with ridicule and his pur- suit branded as frivolous.” Mr. Carter is responsible for the Aus- tralian story that not many years ago a naval officer who was also a distinguished entomologist narrowly escaped being locked up by the Gosford police as a person of unsound mind. One of the old writers mentioned in a preceding paragraph was Johann Wilhelm Meigen, a remarkable worker on the Diptera, known to all subsequent workers in systematic entomology. I am reverting to him because his life was lived at that very interesting period of European history, 1764 to 1845, and because he lived at Stolberg near Aachen in the center of the revolutionary happenings of the Napoleonic wars, a region which was first German, then French, and much later once more German; and also because a rather full and very charming account of his life was written by a fellow townsman, J. A. Foerster, which should be read by all entomologists who know German. Apparently it has never been translated into English. It will be found in the Stettiler Entomologische Zeitung for 1846, pages 204 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 66 to 74 and 130 to 140. The story of the poor boy with his love of nature—of how he became interested in the flies and how his origi- nal attempt at classification led to his broadening of the characters used to differentiate genera—of how he first attracted the attention of Lacepéde and of how he secured through him his first magnifiers— then of how Illinger met him and helped him to publish his first paper—and then the visit of Fabricius, who came from Paris to Stol- berg to see him—the whole story is fascinating. He was poor all his life, but happy in his work. When he was 76 years old he was given a pension of 200 thalers a year by the Crown Prince of Prussia, and on his 83rd birthday the University of Bonn gave him a doctorate. His was a good, productive, and useful life, and in his devotion to his work he was typical of probably most of the entomologists of his day who have left notable publications. Another case was that of Pierre André Latreille, one of the great- est systematists in entomology. He was born in 1762, and was such a modest man, so absorbed in his work and so indifferent to other matters that he remained for 30 consecutive years attached to the Museum of Natural History in Paris in an inferior position in spite of his extraordinary merit. This is a wonderful contrast to the younger men of the present age who expect to reach first rank very speedily. A writer in Miscellania Entomologica twenty-odd years ago says of his work (translated): “ He explored it (entomology) as a connoisseur, studied like a Benedictine monk, and described as a poet the interesting world of insects which he classified.” Latreille’s pecunt- ary reward came only when he reached the age of 65, and in 1827 he was given one of the two chairs of the Institute. He enjoyed this advanced position for only six years, and died in 1833. In the old days, just as in recent days, the collecting and study of insects attracted people of the most diverse occupations and social standing. I have just told the story of Meigen who, beginning as a poor boy, died as a poor man, unconsidered by the rank and file of his contemporaries, but who nevertheless worked out things and published them that are today considered of high value and that must be con- sulted often. And with Latreille we have shown much the same thing. In fact, nearly all entomologists have been poor men—very many of them, possibly, poor because they were so vitally interested 1n entomology. But there have been some wealthy men of high position who have been attracted to this study, some as dilettante collectors, and others as ardent and intelligent workers. And this held for the old days just as it does for recent days. WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 205 I have, for example, on the wall of my library, two pictures. The one is a painting, picked up many years ago in Vienna, of the type of entomologist who was misunderstood and ridiculed and therefore became typical of a popular idea. He is an elderly man of some period more than a hundred years ago, careless in his attire, running through a field with a butterfly net, collecting insects, chasing an elu- sive specimen. The other picture, an old colored lithograph, shows a collector, past middle age but dressed in the height of style of the period of Buffon (1707-1788) or perhaps of Cuvier (1769-1836 )— a Compte or a Baron surely—also with a butterfly net, standing in a forest glade, examining a specimen with a large hand-glass. Possi- bly at the time when this lithograph was drawn on stone entomology was stylish at the French court. Possibly the man was so highly placed that he could stand any ridicule of his occupation. No one knows which. At any rate, here and there one of the nobility took up the subject. Seventy years or more ago, a London banker named John Lubbock became interested in ants. He was subsequently knighted, and later became Lord Avebury; was made a member of the Royal Society, and ranked high among England’s scientific men. A man of much older title was the late Thomas Lord Walsingham who, although an ardent sportsman and distinguished in many ways, became a world authority on the Microlepidoptera and was quoted in entomological publications all over the world. The Russian revolution brought about the death of another distinguished Lepidopterist, the Grand Duke Nikolas Michailowich, a grandson of the Czar, Nikolas I. He was a man of rare culture, whose leisure was devoted both to ento- mology and the study of history. He published a magnificent series of memoirs on the Lepidoptera, illustrated by superb plates. For his historical work he was made a member of the Institut de France, and for his entomological work an honorary member of the Entomo- logical Society of France. King Ferdinand of Bulgaria is another Lepidopterist of a royal family, but he does not confine his interest to insects alone, since he has always been a student of birds. Col. Thomas A. Casey, the distinguished American Coleopterist, used to think that he was alone among the military men who were interested in entomology, but there are historic precedents, and I add, in concluding this section, two anecdotes of French officers of distinction, that I have gathered from the Transactions of the Ento- mological Society of France, that concerning Dejean in the volume for 1845, and that concerning Pradier in the volume for 1875. 206 ’ SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS vou. 84 Count Dejean, General of the Empire and Aide-de-camp to Na- poleon 1, was the owner of one of the greatest collections of insects that ever existed. He was an ardent collector, and never lost a chance to add to his collection. Boisduval tells the story that at the battle of Alcanizas, which Dejean won after a very hard fight in which he took a great number of prisoners, he suddenly saw near a little brook a brilliant and rare insect which was lacking in his collection. It was Cebrio ustulata, and it was resting on a flower. The Count was at the head of his troops, facing the enemy, and was about to give the signal to charge, but, seeing the insect, he at once dismounted, captured it, pinned it in his helmet, remounted his horse, and gave the order for one of the most vigorous charges of the campaign. After the battle he found that his helmet had been “ horriblement maltraité” by a cannon-ball, but his precious Cebrio was retovered intact. Boisduval states that all of the soldiers in the regiment commanded by Dejean learned to collect beetles, and each one was given a little vial of alcohol in which all the insects they collected were placed. This eccentricity of his was known to everybody—even to the enemy. So, after a battle, those who found dead soldiers on the field having with them a little bottle containing insects in alcohol, no matter which side won the victory, would always carry the little bottle to General Count Dejean. (Ann. Soc. Ent. Fr. 1845, p. 502.) In his zeal as a collector of insects, Gen. E. E. Pradier of the French Army (born in 1813, prominent in African wars and in the war of the Crimea) was almost equal to Dejean. H. Deyrolle relates that once, in Algeria, at the beginning of the French occupation, at a time when there was a price on the head of each Frenchman, Pradier could not resist his collector instincts and often wandered far from camp. One day he was suddenly surrounded by a group of Arabs who made him understand that he should follow them. Resis- tance was not possible—all the more so since he was not armed. But he had taken the precaution to dress in the uniform of a medical officer (that of one of his friends), thinking that there was a chance that he would be respected as a doctor, since the Arabs allowed only men of that profession any facility in coming and going. When they arrived at the first Arab camp he was taken into a tent where there was a Moroccan woman in child labor, and he was told, in his role of physician, to do what was necessary. He was only a lieutenant at the time, and his embarrassment was very great. He did not know whether to try the midwife act or to allow his head to be cut off. Suddenly the idea occurred to him to try to make the Bedouins under- stand that he had not the necessary instruments with him and that he WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 207 would have to go and get them. So they let him go, and naturally he did not return. He used to laugh heartily in telling this story, at the idea of a French lieutenant becoming an Arabian accoucheur. (Ann. Secs Ent. lr, 1875, p.251-) EARLY EUROPEAN ECONOMIC ENTOMOLOGY We have been accustomed of late years to think of economic ento- mology as an American product. On account of its very great devel- opment in this country, far beyond that in any other country, its recent developments have overshadowed a great deal of important work that was done in Europe long before agriculture in America had assumed a very great importance—when the American population was small and when only a small portion of the land had been turned into farms. American economic entomologists have grown too patriotically ego- tistical. Look back 60 years and read what Dr. A. S. Packard said in the introduction to his “ First Annual Report on the Injurious and Beneficial Insects of Massachusetts ” (1870). He complains that we are not making investigations in economic entomology at all com- parably with the Europeans, and states that in Europe the subject “has always attracted a great deal of attention.” He goes on to make the astonishing statement that “in the densely populated countries of Iurope the losses occasioned by injurious insects are most severely pelt.’ For very many years we have not glanced at the early publications of European writers; we have forgotten that there were so many. The average American worker of today may remember to have seen Curtis’ ““ Farm Insects” or Kollar’s ‘‘ Treatise on Insects Injurious to Gardeners, Foresters, and Farmers,” but that is all, unless he should be interested in forests, since the works of Ratzeburg, Eichhoff, and others are well known to all foresters. Hagen, in preparing his great “ Bibliotheca Entomologica” for publication, evidently spent a great amount of time in his analysis of the mass of works listed, and he published at the end of his second volume more than a hundred pages in fine type of what he called a Sachregister. Examining this part of the Bibliotheca carefully, the modern entomologist will be surprised to find that there had been published prior to 1863 a very large number of papers on the different kinds of damage done by insects—so large a number in fact that Hagen devotes 11 double-column pages to their mere listing under appropriate names. All these years we have been considering this work of Hagen’s (it has become known colloquially among the workers in this country 208 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 as “the entomologists’ bible”) as very complete, and we have all been surprised and delighted with the recently published Index to Entomological Literature brought out by Drs. Walther Horn and Sigmund Schenkling. These indefatigable workers have found no less than 7,929 articles not listed by Hagen and all published prior to 1863, and they have brought the total number of articles on ento- mology published before that date from 17,300 up to 25,229. More- over, they have discovered that there were no less than 3,326 authors writing on entomological topics prior to that date whose names do not appear in Hagen. The authors of the Index have not been able to take up the laborious task of preparing a Sachregister supplemen- tary to that published by Hagen, but there are doubtless in the nearly 8,000 additional titles many that are directly or indirectly concerned with economic entomology. Of course, the list includes American writers as well as those of the Old World. As a matter of fact a great many of these articles amounted to little from the modern point of view. The remedial measures sug- gested in practically all the general books and papers on economic entomology in Europe prior to 1870 have been comparatively unim- portant and ineffective. A modern entomologist has spoken of them comprehensively as “old Scotch gardeners’ stuff.’ Nevertheless, the entomologists of those days did their share in making known the life histories and seasonal habits of the insect enemies of the gardens and fields. They were not farmers or gardeners themselves as a rule, although Bouché was Gartendirektor in Berlin, and they knew little of such arts. Boisduval puts it very pleasantly in the preface to his ‘““Entomologie Horticole” (1867) as follows (translated) : This book will meet with the same reproach that. has been applied to all its predecessors. They complain that, while we describe the damage the insects do, we do not always point out the remedy. To this we reply that the same observer cannot do everything, and that we have always helped the horti- culturists by showing them the habits of the insects against whose ravages we have not always been able to suggest remedies. In their own ranks there are many excellent observers who will soon discover how to free their gardens from these pests for which we have been able to suggest nothing. We must not, however, fail to mention the fact not only that some common pests were rather well understood, but that there were here and there general regulations or decrees or laws calling for the hand destruction of certain forms at certain stages of their growth. Bouvier, for instance, has called attention to the old French law of the 28th Ventose, year IV of the Republic (March, 1796) especially enacted against the brown-tail moth and requiring the collection and destruc- WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOW ARD 209 tion of the winter nests of this insect. This very old law, I under- stand, still holds, but its enforcement has “ gone out of style.” That it may still be enforced was seen in the region of Angers in 1910, and Bouvier in 1920 showed the necessity for its enforcement in the vast domain bequeathed to the French Academy near Montmorillon, De- partment of Vienne. In the section on Sweden I have spoken of “ Noxa Insectorum”’ printed at Stockholm in 1752, as probably the first paper on applied entomology prepared by a thoroughly scientific man; but Doctor Kemner reminds me of the paper by A. F. Krafften published in Nuremburg in 1712 and 1713. Hagen’s “ Bibliotheca Entomologica ” mentions three titles by Krafften, but possibly all three are the same paper. I have been unable to consult them, but it is likely that they contain nothing especially significant. The Swedish paper, although it is supposed to have been written by Linnaeus, contains little of a practical nature, and in fact from the standpoint of the economic entomologist is not of very much greater significance than the early book by Conrad von Magenburg (1309- 1374) entitled “ Das Buch der Natur,” known to us through Hugo Schulz’s edition (Greifswald, 1892). In this book the chapter on ‘“ Worms ” includes sections on the bee, the spider, the silkworm, the glow-worm, the dog-fly (probably Stomoxys), midges (including mosquitoes, etc.), gadfly, the hornet, the cabbage worm, ants, the ant- lion, grasshoppers, flies (including the house fly and the flesh flies), the flea, the louse, the water striders, the ground beetle, wood-boring larvae, the meal-worm, and the insects injuring furs (Dermestes, Pyralis pinguinalis), and the wasp. After writing thus far the natural thought comes to me (it should have come at once) that of course people had to fight insects before they knew anything about them. So some sort of applied entomology must have begun before a true study of insects was taken up. Much light is thrown upon this subject in a just-published work. Dr. F. S. Bodenheimer, of Palestine (The Hebrew University, Jerusalem), has published two large volumes entitled (translated) “ Material for the History of Entomology before Linne.”’ Volume 1 was published in 1928, and Volume 2 in 1929. The work is one of extreme interest, and Doctor Bodenheimer has evidently spent a great deal of time and a great deal of patient research. Volume I contains 498 very large octavo pages and is illustrated by 155 text figures and 24 plates. Volume 2 has 436 pages, 100 text figures, and 4 plates. In Volume 1 he speaks especially of agricultural entomology known to the Romans and to the Arabs, and also of agricultural entomology as 210 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 treated by Aldrovandus, Crescentius, and Mouffet. In the second volume, his opening section is devoted to economic entomology, and he devotes 76 pages to this subject. Of these 76 pages, however, 10 are devoted to silk culture and 10 to bee culture. The greatest space is devoted to locust years, and about 25 pages are given to this sub- ject. The years of great locust invasion for many countries are given. The earliest of the writers on agricultural entomology mentioned especially is Johann Colerus whose “ Haushaltsbuch ” was published about 1590. This writer was born in Silesia and died in Mecklenburg in 1639. He seems to have written about a number of garden insects and to have mentioned remedies for chronological use in the garden, something on the style of one of our farmers’ almanacs. These volumes by Doctor Bodenheimer are full of important infor- mation. He has done an enormous amount of painstaking and valua- ble work. He has done it so thoroughly that probably no writer will for many years treat of early entomology without using this remark- able work. It has not yet been translated into English. I hope that some one will make such a translation and publish it before many years. In the meantime, those who have difficulty with the German language will do well to consult the rather full reviews published in Nature, both written by Dr. F. A. Dixey. The first volume is reviewed in Nature for June 22, 1929, pp. 935-937. The second volume is reviewed in Nature for March 29, 1930, pp. 483-485. In the second volume Doctor Bodenheimer calls especial attention to a very early book published in England. It is entitled “A Treatise of Buggs,” by John Southall, and it was published in 1730. Boden- heimer devotes considerable space to a description of this little book, a copy of which is, fortunately, in the Congressional Library in Wash- ington, where I have been able to consult it. The author is described as “ Maker of the Nonpariel Liquor for Destroying Buggs and Nits.” His story is that while living in the West Indies he learned of a compound for destroying bugs from an ancient Jamaican negro. Of course the bugs referred to are true bedbugs (Cimex lectularius). A good description and figures of the insect are given with an account of its development. The author states that he will use his remedy for people at the rate of ten shillings and six pence for a certain type of bedstead and five shillings for ordinary bedsteads without furniture. The value of the book consists solely in its accurate plate and its account of the development of the insect. Dr. Walther Horn, in a.paper read at the Third International Con- gress of Entomology,at Zurich, showed that in the old times of the WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—-HOW ARD 21 Greeks very careful and very strong proscriptions by law existed against locusts at Lemnos, in Syria, and even in Cyrenaica. But after all, these early publications were very elementary. They did not foreshadow in the least the development of the true economic entomology. They showed something about the ravages of insects, and, where they had remedies in mind, they were immediate remedies. I have been delighted, therefore, to find in W. M. Wheeler’s remark- able chapter on “ The Life and Work of Réaumur,” published in his book on “ Natural History of Ants” (1926), a paragraph about that wonderful Frenchman in which he shows that what interested Réaumur most in the insects was their industries, their “ genie,” and that he demonstrated through his work “that it is only through such studies [as Réaumur’s| that we can control and utilize these diminutive engineers to our own advantage. His insistence on this matter is so obvious that he may truly be said to be the creator of eco- nomic entomology.” This is going very far, but if Réaumur was not the creator of economic entomology, he was apparently at least the first man to show, what is becoming so obvious today, that we cannot control insects until we know all about them. Wheeler shows in a footnote that J. Rabaud is also of his opinion, and he quotes from the latter as follows: “ We must also maintain that Réeaumur was the first to demonstrate the practical usefulness of the study of insects. Certain caterpillars, for example, which devour the leaves of cabbages, flee the light and bury themselves in the ground during the day. The depredations are noticed, but their authors will remain unknown as long as this peculiarity of their mode of life is unknown.” The work of Réaumur was not only well known but was greatly admired by the English authors Kirby and Spence, who also evi- dently knew very well the work of other writers on entomology, and, possibly influenced by the work of Réaumur, there were several of them who held the same views as to the economic importance of the study of insects. The four-volume work by these English authors, entitled “An Introduction to Entomology,” the first volume of which was published in 1815, is well known to all entomologists ; but the man is rare who has of recent years read the wise words of these men. No one knows which parts of this great work were written by Kirby and which by Spence. They refused to differentiate these portions, and each one is supposed to have shared in the production of each chapter. But the old masterpiece is full of wise arguments concerning the importance of the study of insects from all points of view, perhaps especially from the economic point. They knew the views of Réaumur and the small group of writers that followed him, 212 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 and they elaborated these views in the most convincing way. Many important points were brought out by them that hung around the consideration of the danger from insects. They seem, for instance, to have elaborated at this early date the “ balance of nature ” idea which has become so important in discussions of late years either by the name just given in quotation marks or by the somewhat wiser sound- ing “biocoenotic equilibrium.” To whoever may be reading these words I suggest that he will probably improve his time and enjoy himself much better if he will lay this aside and take up the first volume of Kirby and Spence. THE PHYLLOXERA OF THE GRAPE AND ITS INFLUENCE ON EUROPEAN, APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY The grapevine Phylloxera occurs upon the roots of the grape in one form, and in galls on the leaves in another form. It is an insect apparently of American origin. It was first described in 1854 by Asa Fitch from the gall form on the leaves, and he named it Pemphigus vitifolii. It seems probable that it made its first appearance in France in 1863, but its first appearance is generally attributed to 1867. In Eng- land it was found at Hammersmith near London in 1863, and was described by Westwood as Peritymbia vitisana. In 1868 a French commission was appointed to investigate the trouble, which was though to be a disease. J. E. Planchon was one of the commissioners. He found the insect and gave it the provi- sional name of Rhizaphis vastatrix. Specimens were sent to Signoret in Paris, who decided that the insect belonged to the genus Phyl- loxera. In the meantime Westwood had continued his observations in Eng- land and had studied insects both from France and the United States. Valéry Mayet states that the English author announced at the meet- ing of the Entomological Society of London, February 1, 18609, that he recognized the identity of the American and the French insects. It is interesting to note, however, that the published proceedings of the London Society of that date do not report Westwood as having made this statement. It is perfectly obvious that the grapevine Phylloxera should be known as Phylloxera vitifolii (Fitch). Nevertheless, the name Phyl- loxera vastatrix given it by Planchon 14 years after Fitch’s descrip- tion was the one used in all. of the literature for many years. Valéry Mayet justifies his own use of the latter name on the ground of the WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—-HOW ARD 213 admirably descriptive term vastatrix and “usage, that grand mas- ter * * * has consecrated the cognomen repeated by the press of the entire world.” In 1870, Riley in Missouri established the identity of the Euro- pean and American forms, and the identity of the root form and the leaf form. He confirmed his conclusions in a journey to France in 1871. The most important observations on the life history of the Phyl- loxera were carried on probably by Balbiani and Cornu. The spread of the plague was rapid. Its original home was obvi- ously the United States east of the Rocky Mountains. About 1869 it was strongly established in the Southeast and Southwest of France. The two points of introduction were at Roquemaure and at Floirac, both shipments coming in from Bordeaux. By 1878 practically the whole of France was involved, and Corsica as well. Later Algeria was invaded. To independent introduction on American plants was probably due the appearance of the insect in Portugal and in Spain. It was first recognized in Switzerland in 1874, and about the same time it appeared at points in Germany. In Austria and Hungary it was prob- ably introduced from America in 1868. In Italy it was first noticed in 1879. In the Crimea and in Caucasia, the principal regions in Rus- sia for vine culture, it appeared in 1880; and in 1886 it was appar- ently introduced into Bessarabia by the introduction of root stock from Erfurt, Germany. The Danube provinces, Rumania, Moldavia, European and Asiatic Turkey, in the period between 1883 and 1885, were found to have been invaded. Australia was found to have introduced the plague as early as 1875. Although not native to the country beyond the Rocky Mountains, and although grape growing, and especially the cultivation of the European vine (Vitis vinifera), had become a great industry in Cali- fornia, nevertheless, by commerce in root stocks, the Phylloxera was introduced and established in that State apparently some time in the 1890's. _The alarm caused in France by the Phylloxera is difficult to exag- gerate. It had many disastrous effects. Aside from the absolute destruction of the vines as early as 1884 over a territory comprising 1,200,000 hectares, a monetary damage which was estimated at 7,200,000,000 francs, there must be added the consequent necessary importation of wine and of dried grapes to make wine, which cost France over 2,800,000,000 francs, and the total loss by 1884 of ten billion frances (two billion dollars). 214 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 That this catastrophe should have occurred just when it did was particularly insupportable. The Franco-German War began in 1870, monopolized the whole strength of the French Empire, and left the nation at its conclusion enfeebled to such an extent and burdened with such a debt that this added crippled condition of one of her most flourishing industries, was crushing. The whole world marveled at the rapidity of France’s recuperation. Enormous indemnity to Prussia was paid in a marvelously short time, and it is safe to say that the discovery of the means of repairing the damage done by the Phylloxera and of restoring French wine cul- ture to its former prosperous condition helped greatly not only to pay the enormous debt but to restore the confidence of the people, politi- cally experimenting as they were with their new republican form of government. When we consider the waste occasioned by the very great number of unfounded remedial plans that were tried and the overwhelming number of suggestions that came in from ignorant people, all of which had to be passed upon, it becomes a question as to whether the French government was wise in offering large prizes as it did for the discovery of a competent remedy. One takes this view particularly when he remembers how simply the whole matter was solved. It seems that Monsieur Laliman of Bordeaux was the first to point out the resistance of the American vines to the Phylloxera in France. In 1862 rooted American grape-vines had been introduced at several places in Europe. The idea of grafting occurred to Monsieur Gaston Bazille, President of the Society of Agriculture of Herault. In 1871 he succeeded in such grafting, and at the same time Planchon and Lichenstein achieved success in the same effort. Riley in America had pointed out the resistance of the American vines; and in 1872 and 1873 vines chosen by Riley were sent to France. In the latter year Planchon was sent to America to study the American vines in their indigenous habitat. From that time on, the course was plain. Gradually the old roots of the European vines were replaced by American roots upon which the European vine was grafted, and French vine-culture was on the high road to reéstablishment. The same process was adopted in other countries, and the Phylloxera scare virtually became a thing of the past. rance at least has shown herself very grateful to the United States for its assistance in bringing about this wonderful result. Riley was decorated by the French government, and there was erected at the great School of Viticulture at Montpellier a very beautiful WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 215 marble statuary group. The latter represents an old, decrepit, emaci- ated, nearly nude female showing illness and despair in her attitude and in every feature, but supported by another female figure, also nearly nude, but young, strong, full of vigor and life, and very beautiful. The group symbolizes the American vine coming to the rescue of the French vine. On one of my visits to Montpellier, Mon- sieur Havas, the long-time Director of the Viticultural School, re- marked to me, “ The symbolism is very beautiful and very apt, but whoever saw a French woman as homely as that?!” We have mentioned the waste of time in France in considering a very great number of unfounded remedial plans, and have suggested that perhaps it was not wise of the French government to offer large prizes ; and on this subject we wish to say a little more. On a smaller scale of course, this prize offering for remedies has been tried elsewhere ; in fact, the State of Texas tried it 30 years ago in search of a competent remedy for the cotton boll weevil. The prize offered was $50,000, and the State officers were overwhelmed by applicants who suggested plans of which the majority were non- sensical but of which many needed careful test by conscientious and trained people. It is not surprising that the offer was withdrawn in a year or two, nor is it perhaps surprising that for many years after- wards the idea that a prize had been offered drifted about the world and the officials of the State of Texas and of the United States Government were pestered by a very great number of applicants. So far as I know, not a single sound, practical idea was sent in. The experience of France was very well described by J. KE. Planchon in an article in the Revue des Deux-Mondes of January 15, 1887, as quoted in Prof. Valéry Mayet’s book ‘‘ Les Insectes de la Vigne”’ in which Valéry Mayet himself says, ‘“‘ What tides of ink, what floods of ineptitudes, what foolish suggestions, have been inspired by the prize of 300,000 francs!’’ Planchon says: To fish out a sound idea in this torrent of fantastic lucubrations, one must impose upon himself the task of removing floods of ignorance. It will be necessary to speak of the toad, living under the soil to attract to himself the venom with which the diseased vine is affected; it is necessary to remember that the sick vine should be watered with white wine or with an emollient mixture of which mallow is the principal ingredient. In the deluge of recommendations the greater part are from those who confound the Phylloxera and the Oidium fungus or who have never seen either of these parasitic diseases. The stripping from this dossier of all the foolish things gives one a very sorry opinion of the knowledge of the great public in scientific matters. These suggestions come from all social ranks and from all corners of Europe. Those most forcefully recommended to the Ministry of Agriculture are usually the most ignorant. The 216 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VoL. 84 most tenacious are those men who are possessed with an idea which they urge to the limit of folly. Happily, as observation and experiment press more closely upon the problem, the dreamers pass. out, idle discussions give place to the study of facts, useful research concentrates upon points still obscure, leaving in full light those that science admits as sufficiently plain. Present-day workers in economic entomology, especially those who have been connected with any of the major projects such as the cotton boll weevil, the San Jose scale, the gipsy moth, the European corn borer, or the Japanese beetle, will recognize from this quotation that the same sort of thing has occurred over and over again and that subjects of this kind must be studied by competent men who must pay little attention to the suggestions of the obviously ill-informed. I have given so much space to this consideration of the Phylloxera in Europe for the reason that serious work in economic entomology, supported by Federal appropriations, originated in many European countries as the result of this extraordinary check to viticulture by the pest introduced from North America. We have been coming to believe in the United States that such scourges, even though they have caused enormous loss for a while, are really blessings in disguise, since they have added greatly to our knowledge of the best methods of fighting insects, have shown the people the faulty ways in which they have been carrying on the industries affected, and have awakened the people to the necessity for scientific work on a large scale. In this same way the Phylloxera experience was probably in the long run good for most of the European countries. As an example, the Phylloxera Commission in Hungary, headed by Dr. G. Horvath, was, when the Phylloxera problem was solved, turned into a perma- nent service for the study of injurious insects, with J. Jablonowski at its head, Horvath himself retiring to his technical work in the Hun- garian National Museum. In the same way, other European services were started. GREAT BRITAIN England has been a center of entomological studies for very many years. The Entomological Society of London is one of the oldest of the world’s entomological societies that are still in existence. But for a hundred years or more before this Society took form there were entomologists who were greatly interested in insects, and there were publications about insects in England that took a very high rank. As a matter of fact the Society of Aurelians was in existence in the eighteenth century and held its meetings at the Swan Tavern in Change Alley. Its collections and books were burned in the great fire WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 217 of March 26, 1748. In 1780 “The Society of Entomologists of London ”’ was formed, but it had no long existence. In 1801 “ The Aurelian Society ” was formed, and out of it grew the Entomological Society of London. It is worth while to quote the objects of the Aurelian Society, since they indicate an appreciation of the injuries done by insects and a desire to counteract them: To form a complete and standard cabinet of the entomological productions of Great Britain:—To ascertain their names, uses, and distinctions :—the places and times of their appearance, food, economy, and peculiarities:—and to point out to the public the readiest and most desirable methods of destroying such as possess properties that are inimical to the welfare of mankind. In 1812 a single volume was published as Volume 1 of the Trans- actions of the Entomological Society of London, but the present Entomological Society of London dates from 1832. It brought to- gether a number of admirable men, and this number increased rapidly during the rest of the century. These men studied with great care practically all of the insects of Great Britain. The Irishman, A. H. Haliday, and the Scotchman, Andrew Murray, were included in the long list of British entomologists whose researches spread out far beyond the insect fauna of the British Isles and resulted in the publi- cation of very many volumes on the classification of insects and on other aspects of entomological science. Probably no other language is quite as fortunate as English in the possession of two such comprehensive and inspiring works as Prof. J. O. Westwood’s “An Introduction to the Modern Classification of Insects Founded on the Natural Habits and Corresponding Organi- zation of the Different Families,” published in London in two volumes in 1839 and 1840, and the much later work, also in two volumes, by Dr. David Sharp, published in 1895 and 1899 as Volumes 5 and 6 of “The Cambridge Natural History.” Both Westwood and Sharp were men who had been students of insects all their lives and who had - published very many important papers on different aspects of ento- mology before bringing out these large works. Both works may be said to be epoch-making, and each author summarized in a most admirable way not only the results of his own long labors but the status of entomological science in general at the period at which they wrote. And now to go into strictly applied entomology: One of the early practical books was published in London in 1829 and was written by Joshua Major, a landscape gardener. The title of the book is “A Treatise on the Insects Most Prevalent on Fruit Trees and Garden Produce, Giving an Account of the Different States They Pass 15 218 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS voL. 84 Through, the Depredations They Commit, and Recipes for Their Destruction, Including the Recipes of Various Authors, with Remarks on Their Utility ; also.a Few Hints on the Causes and Treatment of Mildew and Canker on Fruit Trees and Cucumbers, etc.” In his introduction the writer is apologetic, but insists on the importance of the subject; acknowledges that he has not been in the habit of writing but hopes that the usefulness of the information “ will apologize for the defects of style and composition.” It occurs to us that he perhaps ought to have apologized for the length of the title. The different insects are considered under their host plants, and the remedies are described at length. He takes up one proposed remedy after another and gives the result of his experience. As would naturally be supposed, they are gardeners’ remedies. The book is worthless from the present standpoint, but is interesting and curious as indicating many of the remedies used by gardeners at that time, the majority of which were based upon erroneous ideas as to the biology of the insects. In 1860, John Curtis’ famous volume “ Farm Insects” was pub- lished by Blackie & Son, Glasgow, Edinburgh and London. Nothing quite comparable to this book had been published before in any language. It is difficult to see why John Curtis made such a mark in economic entomology. He was not a farmer; he was not trained scientifically, but was simply apparently a born naturalist who loved insects and who excelled in delineating them. Curtis was born in Norwich in 1791, and died in London (I think) October 6, 1862. From the age of four, he loved plants and animals, and began a collection of butterflies. At 16, he was placed in the office of a Solicitor, and at 18 he left that office. He became acquainted with Mr. Simeon Wilkin, the possessor of a fine collection of insects, and resided with him as curator, meeting from then on most of the “cc ’ London entomologists. He became a very competent draughtsman, and in 1819 came to London and was employed as an entomological draughtsman. He began to illustrate the genera of British insects for Stephens, and continued in this work for 16 years. His drawings are the most perfect and beautiful ones that had ever been seen by his colleagues. During this time he began to write for the “ Gardener’s Chronicle” on insects injurious to agriculture, and in this famous journal he published 120 papers signed “ Ruricola.’’ He also pub- lished, in the Journal of the Royal Agricultural Society, a series of “ Reports on the Economy of Insects Obnoxious to the Farmer and Gardener,” and on these reports was based his famous volume. WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 219 The influence of this book on Walsh, Fitch, and Riley in this country was very great. I believe that Riley got some of his earliest and soundest ideas here. The combination of Curtis’ book and his own personal acquaintance with Walsh gave Riley a great start. Curtis’ book was far ahead of any written up to that time in any language. It went way beyond Harris’ “ Insects Injurious to Vege- tation” in this country in its practical features. It is extremely interesting, after the lapse of more than 75 years, and after the enormous growth in our knowledge of insects from a practical point of view, and the tremendous advances in methods of study and in the all-round scientific requirements of the modern entomologist, to examine Curtis’ book and see how unerringly he pointed out a lot of basic things. For example, in his introduction (written in 1857) he points out very plainly a fact which in later years I have had difficulty in pre- senting in a perfectly clear way to administrative officers and legis- lative committees, namely the importance to the practical man and to the economic entomologist of the museum worker, the desk naturalist, the taxonomist. Read the following: In perusing this volume, the reader who wishes to make himself acquainted with the economy both of his insect friends and enemies, whose histories are the subject of the following chapters, ought not to pass over as useless the descriptions of the various species. It is a great mistake to suppose that scien- tific descriptions and correct nomenclature ought to be employed for the use of those only who are specially engaged in the study of natural history. If insects be not thus accurately and scientifically described, and their names carefully learned, the facts noticed by practical observers are generally worthless, and may tend to mislead, by the confusion of one species with another, and the consequent adoption of improper remedies. It is thus that I have found, in my extensive reading on these subjects, that a very large amount of the information given by practical agriculturists and gardeners, has proved valueless in cases where, if the particular species alluded to could only have been identified, it would have been of great value in furthering subsequent investigations. Writing from the modern standpoint, one is especially impressed by the plan which Curtis adopted in his “‘ Farm Insects,” of introduc- ing a summary at the end of each chapter, in which he displayed in short, two-or-three-line paragraphs the facts brought out in the chapter. This general plan was not adopted at all generally by sci- entific writers until very many years later. It was unfortunate that this general plan was not carried out systematically by Curtis through- out the entire volume, but in the earlier chapters the plan plainly proves its enormous advantages. Several points suggest themselves in going through these sum- maries. The most important is that variations in agricultural prac- 220 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 tice were insisted upon by Curtis as a means of avoiding insect dam- age or lessening it. This is a fundamental idea which received mature and careful consideration by American economic entomologists only at a much later date. Curtis was also one of the early writers accurately to define the situation as regards natural control. The following words occur on page 23: * * * for it is a wise dispensation of Providence to keep every animal in check by some other that is either more powerful or more sagacious than itself; and this coynteracting effect is produced in a degree equal, or eventually superior to the noxious animal, so that in a greater or less space of time the destructive power may be rendered no longer formidable, or be absolutely annihilated by the attacks of its parasites. This natural process, though never failing, is often too slow in its operation to secure immediate relief; the farmer must, therefore, devise means, if possible, for the more speedy destruction of the enemy. The final sentence in this quotation contains an idea which I have myself frequently in late years put into words when referring to bio- logical control, without, however, the slightest idea that Curtis had written it prior to 1860. The volume “Farm Insects” is a collection of the articles that Curtis had published in the Gardener’s Chronicle and in the Journal of the Royal Agricultural Society. It was chiefly on account of the value of these articles that he was awarded a pension from the Civil List He died October 6, 1862. Some time before his death he suffered complete loss of sight. The government, with a care unknown in this country, augmented his pension when this occurred. It is generally agreed that “ Farm Insects ”’ is the most beautifully illustrated standard work in English on the subject down to the time of the perfection of the photo-engraving process. Great Britain, however, with the exception of this great work by John Curtis, did practically no important work in economic ento- mology before 1880, Professor Westwood, it is true, had written many short articles for the agricultural press concerning individual injurious insects, and the farmers, and especially the gardeners, seemed to have evolved methods of culture that afforded their crops measur- able protection from insect attacks to a point at least where the sim- plest hand operations were all that were necessary as a general rule. There was not, however, any especial Government appropriation for work in economic entomology. In 1885 Mr. Charles Whitehead sug- gested to the Lords of the Committee of Council for Agriculture that it would be valuable to publish reports on insects injurious to vari- ous farm crops. He prepared, and the Council published, a series of WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 221 four reports, and in 1886 he was formally appointed Agricultural Adviser, and published another report. In 1889 the Board of Agri- culture was formed, and Mr. Whitehead was retained as Technical Adviser and prepared several annual reports and a number of leaf- lets and special bulletins.” There was no specific law authorizing the expenditure for this work, but he continued it on an annual compen- sation of 250 pounds for many years. In the meantime a wealthy lady, Miss Eleanor A. Ormerod, who had long been interested in entomology and whose brother Edward, a physician, had written the monograph, “ The British Social Wasps,” was appointed Honorary Consulting Entomologist to the Royal Agri- cultural Society in 1877. She conducted the correspondence of the Society on the subject of injurious insects and published at her own expense a series of annual reports, 17 in number, which contributed very largely to the diffusion of knowledge concerning injurious insects among the farming classes. She had a most conservative class of people to deal with, and encountered many obstacles. She showed herself possessed of great enthusiasm and unlimited perseverance. She studied many of the English crops de novo; she popularized the work of other English entomologists, and made accessible to the farmers the work of John Curtis and Professor Westwood. Her papers were all well illustrated, and her sister, Miss Georgina Ormerod, drew many of her figures. Moreover, she adopted and strongly advocated measures found to be successful in other coun- tries, especially. in America. She conducted a very large correspon- dence with entomologists in other parts of the world, perhaps most voluminously with Dr. James Fletcher and Dr. C. J. S. Bethune of Canada, and Professor Riley and myself in the United States. Her hardest struggle in England was to introduce the use of Paris green. English gardeners and orchardists and the authorities were all against her. But she finally succeeded, and always considered it one of her greatest triumphs. During this period also she published a large Manual of Injurious Insects (1892). It contained 230 pages and was illustrated by 160 figures. She also published in 1898 an excellent volume entitled “ Handbook of Insects Injurious to Orchard and Bush Fruits.” This book covered 286 pages and was very well illustrated. She also pub- lished smaller works relating to the Hessian fly, sugar cane insects, and the injurious insects of South Africa. Miss Ormerod died in * Miss Ormerod, mentioned later, helped him in this work. This help was not acknowledged in print, but is mentioned in Miss Ormerod’s published correspon- dence with Dr. James Fletcher. 222 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 1g01, and her partly completed autobiography was extended and published under the editorship of Prof. Robert Wallace. It is a very interesting volume, and includes extracts from her correspondence with many scientific men.’ In 1894 the office of Honorary Consulting Entomologist of the Royal Agricultural Society, that she had held for so many years, was changed to Consulting Entomologist, or rather Zoologist, and the position was made a salaried one. Mr. Cecil Warburton received the appointment. It should be stated here that in 1877 a strong effort had been made to secure the appointment of a Government entomologist. A confer- ence was held at the Society of Arts which was largely attended and was presided over by the Duke of Buccleuch. The most important paper was read by Andrew Murray, resolutions endorsing the propo- sition were passed, and the Government was urged to take up the subject at once. However, no action on the part of the Government followed. Mr. Warburton became connected with Cambridge University, and for many years was employed by the Board of Agriculture at an annual salary of 200 pounds. He advised in matters relating to ento- mology, and published a certain number of good reports. Later, economic work was taken up at the University of Birming- ham by Walter E. Collinge and at the Southeastern Agricultural College at Wye by F. V. Theobald. Mr. Collinge wrote some impor- tant papers; and Professor Theobald before the end of the last cen- tury had begun the publication, in the journal of his College, of a series of important articles on agricultural entomology. These ap- peared at intervals of approximately six months. He also prepared an exhibit of the injurious insects of England -for the British Museum of Natural History, but he was not permitted to expand it as he would have liked, which seems a great pity. *Miss Ormerod was a most charitable person. She once sent me a large sum of money for the relief of the suffering at the time of the Johnstown flood (May, 1889). What I wish especially to record here, however, is the fact that in April, 1900, the University of Edinburgh gave her the honorary LL.D. I think this was the first time that this degree was conferred by Edinburgh upon a woman. At the ceremony (as she wrote me on April 30, 1900) she sat next to Mr. Choate, then Ambassador from the United States to England. Miss Ormerod wrote, “ As I took my seat by him after receiving the degree, he gently whispered, ‘I congratulate you; you did it splendidly,’ and I thought it very interesting that my first congratulation should be so kindly given me by the Ambassador of the greatly advanced country to which I am so indebted for help in my work.” WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOW ARD 223 Immediately after the discovery of the carriage of malaria by mos- quitoes by Ross in 1898, Professor Theobald was commissioned by the Royal Society to prepare a monograph of the mosquitoes of the world, which was published by the British Museum in several vol- umes between 1901 and 1905—a most notable piece of work and of the very greatest use in medical entomology. Prof. L. C. Miall’s little book published in 1902 in London and entitled “ Injurious and Useful Insects—An Introduction to the Study of Entomology ” should not be overlooked. It is a duodecimo of 250- odd pages, well illustrated, and includes in its anatomical and classi- ficatory features information necessary to the true student of applied entomology. Professor Miall was a keen student, but by no means to be considered as an economic entomologist. The brief chapter on remedies is for the most part drawn from the publications of the United States Department of Agriculture. In 1912 an Imperial Bureau of Entomology was formed in London, This Bureau has been of immense service to the economic entomolo- gists of the British Empire, and in fact to the economic entomologists of all countries. With its headquarters at the British Museum of Natural History, it is able to secure identifications of injurious insects sent in by the colonial and dominion entomologists. But its greatest service to economic entomology has been in the establishment of a Review of Applied Entomology published each month in two parts, the one Agricultural Entomology, and the other Medical and Vet- erinary Entomology. This Review is a great boon to all English- speaking entomologists. Its staff of compilers is able to read and digest articles in many languages unknown to the average worker. An event almost concurrent with the founding of the Imperial Bureau of Entomology has much interest. Lord Cromer, on his return from his wonderfully successful administration of affairs in Egypt, was made the Chairman of the Central Africa Research Com- mittee. Andrew Carnegie, being in London, met Lord Cromer and inquired about his new work. His Lordship replied that it was broadly planned and promised great results. In the study of the agri- cultural resources of Africa, however, it had been found that England did not have the men to handle the matter of insect damage to the crops which they hoped to grow in many parts of that fertile continent. “We have not,” he is reported to have said, “any men trained in work of this kind, such as you have in such numbers in America.” Mr. Carnegie at once replied that he would gladly pay the expenses of a number of young Englishmen who should be selected to go to the United States and study American methods. This proposition was 224. SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 accepted, and it was arranged that three selected Englishmen—one from a Scottish university, one from either Oxford or Cambridge, and the third from one of the agricultural or industrial colleges— should be sent to America for one or more years, and that this sending should be repeated as often as desirable. In this way was begun one of Carnegie’s extremely useful philan- thropic measures which is not generally known and of which he never made the slightest display. Seven of these men came to the United States prior to the outbreak of the World War, and five others came during the early part of the war. After Mr. Carnegie’s death, some funds were remaining in England for this purpose, and two men were sent from England, two from South Africa and two from Canada. It is certain that this action on Mr. Carnegie’s part has already resulted in great good. Unfortunately, three of the men who came over before the war have died—Andrew Rutherford in Ceylon, C. W. Mason in Africa, and G. D. Grosvenor in England. All were men of very great promise. Others have been sent out to colonial possessions and are doing excellent work. It will be well worth while here to record these so-called Carnegie Students, as it will be the first published record of this one of Andrew Carnegie’s wise acts. Each of them spent at least a year in the United States, some of them going to a university over here for part of the time, but most of them studying in the laboratories of the Bureau of Entomology both in Washington and in the field. They were as follows: Andrew Rutherford, January 30, 1911, Scotland. Edgar H. Strickland, January 30, 1911, Kent, England. G. D. Grosvenor, 1911, Cambridge, England. Malcolm E. MacGregor, December 10, 1913, Cambridge, England. C. W. Mason, December 10, 1913, Wye College, England. Archibald H. Ritchie, January 8, 1914, Edinburgh and Glasgow, Scotland. Edward R. Speyer, July 20, 1914, Oxford, England. Ernest Hargreaves, September 3, 1914, Imperial College of Science, London. George H. Corbett, September 15, 1914, Trowbridge, England. C. B. Williams, September 30, 1914, John Innes Horticultural Institution, England. H. G. Champion, November 4, 1914, India Forest Service. F. W. Dry, February 27, 1915, Leeds University, England. F. O. Bain, October 4, 1920, Kilmarnock, Scotland. J. C. M. Gardner, December 4, 1921, Cambridge, England. R. O. Wahl, February 16, 1922, Middellberg School of Agriculture, South Africa. A. E. Lundie, October, 1921, South Africa. There were also two Carnegie Students from Canada after the war: W. H. Brittain, of Nova Scotia, and A. B. Baird. WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 225 It should be stated moreover that Mr. Carnegie’s interest in this matter did not end with this sending over of the Englishmen. He paid the expenses of K. Escherich’s three months of travel in this country in 1911, and those of Paul Marchal in 1913 for a journey of the same length. While none of the Englishmen have published specific accounts of their work in the United States, both Escherich and Marchal published important books. That of Escherich’s is entitled ‘ Die angewandte [entomologie in den Vereinigten Staten.”’ It is a fully illustrated, royal octavo book of nearly 200 pages and was published by Paul Parey, Berlin, 1913. Marchal’s book is even larger. It is entitled “‘ Les Sciences biologiques Appliquées a |’Agri- culture aux Etats-Unis.” It is also a fully illustrated volume, and covers nearly 400 pages of royal octavo. It was originally published as a part of the Annales des Epiphyties, Volume 3, Paris, 1916. The influence of both of these books in Europe and other parts of the world has been very great. It might be of interest to relate an incident apropos to Carnegie’s assent to my proposition that he make it possible for Marchal to come over. In France, in the summer of 1912, I asked Marchal whether he would like to visit America if I could arrange the financial side. He said yes; and on my return I wrote to Mr. Carnegie and asked him if he would pay the distinguished Frenchman’s expenses. He wrote me a characteristically brief reply in the following words: “Certainly. How much?” I answered that the three months’ trip would probably cost about a thousand dollars but that, in order to make it perfectly safe, he might send me his check for twelve hundred. I do not know whether there was anything characteristically Scotch in his action, but he split the difference and sent me his check for eleven hundred dollars! The remarkable work that has been done in the British colonies and dominions will be treated rather specifically in other parts of this volume, but, since we are considering Great Britain here and as very many of the workers in the dominions and colonies have come from the British Isles, this in an appropriate place to pay general tribute to their competence and to express my admiration for the wonderful work they have done. During the last 15 or 20 years many of them have passed through Washington, all having come to the United States to study American methods in insect warfare. I remember very well the visits of the following : W. W. Frogatt, New South Wales. T. F. Dryer, South Africa. T. J. Anderson, British East Africa. 226 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VoL. 84 F. W. Urich, Trinidad. G. E. Bodkin, British Guiana. Henry Tryon, Queensland. T. Harvey Johnston, Queensland. | Robert Veitch, Fiji Islands. C. P. Lounsbury, South Africa. H. A. Ballou, Barbados. H. Maxwell Lefroy, South Kensington, England. R. J. Tillyard, New Zealand. C. H. Gowdey, Jamaica. Philip Buckle, Armstrong College, England. A. J. Nicholson, University of Sydney, Australia. H. Hargreaves, Uganda. W. F. Schlupp, South Africa. G. S. Cotterel, West Africa. J. G. Myers, New Zealand. A. D. Imms, Rothamsted Station, England. Alan P. Dodd, Queensland. H. Bennett Johnston, Sudan. L. F. Hitchcock, Australia. D. Morland, Rothamsted Station, England. Stanley Garthside, Sydney, N. S. W. Karl Jordan, Tring, England. F. G. Holdaway, Australia. W. H. Thorpe, Cambridge, England. F, P. Jepson, Ceylon. David Miller, New Zealand. The Entomological Research Committee (Tropical Africa) was appointed by the Colonial Secretary, with Lord Cromer at its head, as early as 1909. It soon began to publish, under the title Bulletin of Entomological Research, the results of some of the best research work on agricultural and medical entomology. Volume 1 bears the date 1910-11. After the founding of the Imperial Bureau of Ento- mology in 1912, its imprint took the place of that of the Entomological Research Committee, and the Bulletin of Entomological Research has been published steadily ever since. It contains articles of the highest value, and it goes into the problems of applied entomology from every point of view. In a way, it takes the place of the Journal of Economic Entomology and the Annals of the Entomological Society of America, and every worker in any of the broader aspects of eco- nomic entomology, no matter where situated, should have access to this important work. England has, in fact, become one of the world centers of interest in economic entomology. H. Maxwell Lefroy, after some experience in the West Indies and a longer period of productive work in India, WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 227 was appointed Lecturer on Entomology at the Imperial College of Science in London in 1912. He was an energetic, insistent, and forceful man, with strong individualistic ideas. He was fond of lecturing on the subject of “ The Training of an Economic Ento- mologist.”’ In these talks he told some very pertinent truths about the difficulties of an entomologist’s tasks, especially in the tropical colonies, based upon his own long experience. He taught some good men and made his name well known, and might have gone far except for his death in 1925 which was caused by accidental gas poisoning in the course of some insecticidal experiments. A very sound and appreciative account of his life and work, by Dr. A. D. Imms, will be found in the Annals of Applied Biology, Volume 11, No. 4, pp. 548-549, November, 1925. Economic entomology has been pushing forward with rapid strides at the old Rothamsted Experiment Station at Harpenden of late years under Dr. A. D. Imms. Doctor Imms has a large staff and they are putting out work of the highest character. Imms himself is a man of sound training, broad experience and great knowledge. His “General Text Book of Entomology,” published in 1925, is an advanced and very sound volume, containing in its nearly 700 pages a vast amount of information arranged in the most practical way and accompanied by wonderfully full bibliographical lists. F. V. Theobald still continues his instruction at the Agricultural College at Wye, and has published many important papers. The University of Cambridge broadened its Department of Zoology to include more entomology as early as 1912. One of its sound young men, G. B. Grosvenor, was sent to America as a Carnegie Student, but unfortunately died not long after his return to England. Since that time Cambridge has been devoting more and more attention to economic entomology. George H. Carpenter has returned to England from Dublin and has been stationed at the Museum in Manchester where he has been publishing several sound books on insects and has delivered some public lectures on economic entomology. In Edin- burgh, R. Stewart MacDougall has been giving up-to-date lectures for many years. He has recently retired and has been succeeded by C. B. Williams. And there are other institutions and organizations that are promoting the work. Very recently the Empire Marketing Board* has appropriated a *This is but one of the minor activities of the Empire Marketing Board, an institution that has the broadest plans and really constitutes one of the most important developments in agricultural research in the whole world. It is stated that the dominating motive in this large enterprise is that of making the British 228 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS voL. 84 large sum of money for the use of the Imperial Bureau of Ento- mology, and with these funds a large and well equipped station for the study of the parasites of injurious insects has been established at Farnham Royal, at first with Dr. S. A. Neave in charge, and later with Dr. W. R. Thompson as Director. J. W. Munro, a very competent man who had begun the teaching of forest entomology at Cambridge, was, on the death of Maxwell- Lefroy in 1925, appointed to take up the economic part of the latter’s work at the Imperial College of Science at South Kensington. It has been somewhat difficult for me to understand the exact relationships between the different institutions that are doing more or less work in economic entomology in England and Wales at the present time. It has been explained to me by Doctor Imms that the establishment of the phytopathological service (including agricultural entomology) for England and Wales was originally due to the passing of the Development Fund Act in 1909 which provided financial re- sources for a definite scheme for research and advisory work. It seems that this service is now divided into two sections—one official and one non-official. The official section is directly controlled by the Ministry of Agriculture (formerly the Board of Agriculture) and is divided into the Pathological Laboratory at Harpenden, an adminis- trative unit in London and a staff of inspectors of about 30. The Pathological Laboratory is under a Director, Dr. J. C. F. Fryer, who is at present the official Government Entomologist, and there is a small staff of entomologists and mycologists. The non-official section is distributed through various universities, colleges, and institutes in the country, and consists of research and advisory divisions. While financial support comes from the Govern- ment, the actual duties are carried out largely without State super- vision. There are five research centers, namely the Phytopathological Research Institute attached to the Rothamsted Experimental Station, the Long Ashton Station at Bristol, the Fruit Station at East Malling, and a Lea Valley Station for glass-house crops at Cheshunt. The advisory division is located at 14 centers or provinces, each center being established at a university or agricultural college. There are thus constituted in a way 14 provincial entomologists. These appear in the published list of reporters, but they actually represent a far Empire more self-sustaining in the matter of food stuffs, and to that end the development of an imperial consciousness and unity of effort is sought. From July, 1926, to May, 1928, the Board allotted no less than $5,000,000 for research projects and institutions. Naturally, the results of research carried on under these funds will result in benefit to all nations. memepimeibnte WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 229 larger body of reporters whose names are not printed. Each pro- vincial entomologist receives regularly reports from people who correspond to the county agents in the United States and also from numerous growers, and bases his report to Doctor Fryer on the information so obtained in addition to that gained from his own personal experience. The five research centers above named are all doing admirable work. For example, there came to me quite recently from the East Malling Station a large bundle of entomological separates in which the entomologists, A. M. Massee and W. Steer, treat of a variety of important topics. In August, 1928, Doctor Fryer visited the Bureau in Washington and was kind enough to explain the present organization for applied entomology that exists in England, and it is partly from his explana- tion and partly from Doctor Imms that the preceding paragraphs have been written. Doctor Fryer, however, told me that the activities of the Royal Horticultural Society of England must not be over- looked, and fortunately I was able to consult Mr. G. Fox-Wilson who was also in Washington at the time. Both had been delegates to the Fourth International Congress of Entomology at Ithaca in August, 1928. It seems that the Royal Horticultural Society, founded in 1805 for the encouragement of horticulture and for the dissemination of knowledge relating thereto, completed in 1915 at Wisley, Surrey, large laboratories for the housing of departments of entomology, mycology, plant physiology, and soil chemistry, these departments being organized at that time. The first entomologist appointed was the late Professor Maxwell Lefroy, who held a dual appointment with the Society and, as I have elsewhere stated, with the Imperial College of Science in London, G. Fox-Wilson was a student of Lefroy’s and was his assistant at Wisley prior to the war. In August, 1915, Lefroy left to take up work in Mesopotamia, and Fox-Wilson was engaged on antimalaria measures in Egypt for the last three years of the war. In 1918 Lefroy severed his connection with the Society, and in April, 1919, Fox-Wilson was made Entomologist. In the Society’s Department of Entomology research work is car- ried on dealing with insect pests of horticultural plants. The labora- tory also advises amateur and commercial horticulturists, tests pro- prietary insecticides and fumigants, and gives instruction to students in applied entomology. The course of instruction consists of ele- mentary zoology, entomology including morphology, classification of insects, studies of the chief pests of plants, preventive and remedial 230 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 measures, legislation, etc. Advance courses in entomology are given to those students who are taking the national diploma in horticul- ture and the degree of bachelor of science in horticulture. An important movement to which we have not referred was the founding in 1904 of the Association of Economic Biologists. The call for the first meeting was issued by Mr. Walter E. Collinge, of Birmingham, and the meeting was held in his rooms in the University of Birmingham on July 18. Prof. F. V. Theobald was made Presi- dent of the newly founded Association. The inaugural meeting was held in London, November 8, 1904, at which papers were read and the Association was definitely started. Subsequent meetings were held from time to time at Birmingham, Liverpool, Cambridge, London, and Oxford, and the Proceedings were published. While the whole field of economic biology was covered, and while men of other spe- cialties than economic entomology were included from the start among its members, the Association has always been thoroughly com- mitted to applied entomology. The proceedings of the early meetings are published in separate pamphlets comprising four parts of a single volume. In 1906 the Association began the publication of an important periodical known as The Journal of Economic Biology. This jour- nal and the earlier proceedings were edited by Mr. Collinge. The Journal was succeeded in 1914 by the establishment of The Annals of Applied Biology, of which 16 annual volumes have been published, each volume containing four numbers, usually published in February, May, August, and November. This has always been a very note- worthy publication and has had the support of applied biologists all over the British Empire. It is beautifully done, from the printer’s standpoint, at the Cambridge University Press. It is of large size and unusually well illustrated. Some very noteworthy papers on ecc- nomic entomology have been published in its pages. An especially admirable feature of this publication is that, while the practical end is always in view, it presents in excellent shape the results of many basic studies, thus furnishing sound printed records which even- tually may assist in practical deductions of the greatest importance. Some of the best papers published anywhere have appeared in its pages. Scotland has had a number of very good entomologists, but in eco- nomic entomology little has been done north of the Cheviot Hills. Andrew Murray is one of the names, however, that is well known, and has been mentioned on an earlier page. R. Stewart MacDougall of recent years has been prominent through his writings and his atten- WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 231 dance at international conferences. He was for a time University Lecturer on Agricultural Entomology and Professor of Zoology and Botany in the Royal Veterinary College of Edinburgh, and held posts of that general character in the University until his retirement in 1928 when he was succeeded by C. B. Williams. Doctor MacDougall has published many articles on different topics in economic ento- mology in the Journal of the Board of Agriculture (London), in the Transactions of: the Highland and Agricultural Society of Scotland and elsewhere. He is a very forceful and charming speaker, and his - lectures at Edinburgh must surely have been productive of much good. I first met him at the conference of the Imperial Bureau of Ento- mology in London in 1920, and later at the Third International Con- gress of Entomology at Zurich in 1925, and again at the Interna- tional Congress of Zoology in Budapest in 1927. I was much im- pressed with his personality, his broad knowledge and his very effec- tive public discussions. Surely Great Britain, with its present organization in England, with its Entomological Research Committee, with its Bulletin of Entomological Research, its Review of Applied Entomology, and now with the Annals of Applied Biology issued by the Association of Eco- nomic Biologists, stands well in the forefront of the research now going on in the world and looking to the control of injurious insects. Added note—wWe have referred in the foregoing paragraphs to the excellent books written by George H. Carpenter, and to Dr. A. D. Imms’ admirable text-book. Other important books have been writ- ten of recent years. Two books, for example, we particularly mention. One is “ The Principles of Insect Control,’ by Robert A. Wardle of the University of Manchester and Philip Buckle of the University of Durham. The other is “ The Principles of Applied Entomology,” by Professor Wardle. Both of these are broad, far-seeing books and are indicative of a very perfect familiarity with previous work. During the year 1929 a somewhat less pretentious work, entitled “Agricultural Entomology,” was published in London. It is by D. H. Robinson of the Harper Adams Agricultural College and S. G. Jary of the University of Reading. This is a book of some 300 pages, illustrated by 149 text figures, very many of which are entirely new. IRELAND To the systematic entomologist, Ireland will always be famous as the home of A. H. Haliday whose taxonomic work with the parasitic Hymenoptera was admirable. He seems to have been especially inter- ested in the Chalcidoidea and to have worked cooperatively with 232 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 Francis Walker of the British Museum of Natural History. In fact, it is quite possible that the large amount of work done by Walker on the insects of this important and interesting complex was inspired by Haliday’s investigations. In strictly economic entomology, however, little work was done until 1890, when George H. Carpenter, a well trained biologist and entomologist of England, was appointed Consulting Entomologist to the Royal Dublin Society. As a supplement to the agricultural sta- - tistics of Ireland for the year 1889, there was published a “ Special Report on Insects, Fungi, and Weeds Injurious to Farm Crops,” illustrated with original drawings. The author was Robert E. Mathe- son, barrister at law and Secretary of the General Register Office. Mr. Carpenter helped in the entomological portions, which were largely compiled from Curtis, Miss Ormerod, and Whitehead. The six plates of illustrations are very fair, and the publication must have been a useful one. Carpenter’s first report on economic zoology was published in 1900, and a report of this character was thereafter submitted annually. These reports were published in the reports of the Council of the Royal Dublin Society, and reprints were distributed widely. At the time, Mr. Carpenter was Assistant Naturalist in the Science and Art Museum in Dublin. In 1900 a Government Department of Agriculture and Instruction was established, and to this Department were transferred many of the scientific institutions of Dublin where biological research was carried on, including the Museum of Science and Arts and the Royal College of Science. Down to the time of this transfer, the Museum staff was in the habit of receiving and answering inquiries about injurious insects, and with the establishment of the Department the number of these inquiries increased. Popular leaflets on common insect pests were prepared for the use of farmers throughout the country. In 1901 Carpenter was appointed Lecturer on Zoology in the Royal College of Science for Ireland, and entomology of course formed an important feature of the zoological course. In 1904 he was made a professor in the college, and good laboratory facilities and funds were placed at his disposal. He still retained the post of Consulting Ento- mologist to the Royal Dublin Society, which continued to publish economic proceedings and of course Carpenter’s yearly reviews of the injurious animals of Ireland. The yearly reports, issued as separates by the Royal Dublin Society. continued until 1920 and form a very important and useful series. They are well illustrated. Carpenter became interested at an early WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOW ARD 233 date in the warble flies and made a series of excellent observations on the life history of these destructive enemies to live stock. He was a naturalist during his whole career in Ireland and published many technical papers including a number of especial value on the Aptery- gota of different parts of the world. In 1921 Carpenter left Dublin and has since been working at Man- chester, England, in the Manchester Museum, where he combines fundamental work with a certain amount of applied entomology. He has published a number of books of great importance, among them “Insect Transformation ” (London, 1921), “ Insects, Their Struc- ture and Life” (London, 1924), and “ The Biology of. Insects” (London, 1928). At some time during his stay in Ireland Carpenter was Professor of Zoology in the Royal College of Science, Dublin. As part of his work, he gave a course in agricultural zoology to the agricultural students of the College, and naturally the greater part of this course dealt with economic entomology. There was no section in the College dealing with entomology alone, or even with agricultural zoology alone. Shortly after Carpenter left Ireland the Royal College of Science ceased to exist as a separate institution, and the National University of Ireland took over control of all of the work that had previously been done in the College of Science. This led to the estab- lishment of a new faculty of agriculture in the National University in 1927, and separate departments were created that had not existed previously in the College of Science. A separate Department of Agricultural Zoology was thus established. During the transition period (1923 to 1928) Mr. E. J. Sheehy, who had at one time been Carpenter’s assistant, continued to give the course in agricultural zoology that had previously been given by Professor Carpenter. This was a temporary arrangement, and during that period no attention was paid to research in entomology. Mr. J. Carroll, a young Irishman, in 1925 and 1926 had spent his time in London at the Imperial College of Science and Technology pursuing advanced study and research in entomology. In 1927 he was sent to the United States to continue these studies, and returned to Dublin after the Fourth International Congress of Entomology at Ithaca, New York in August, 1928. He was then given charge of the new Department of Agricultural Zoology. He writes me that the Department is not yet fully staffed but that it is making steady prog- ress. His work includes a course in agricultural zoology for the agri- cultural students of the University, and the greater part of this course, naturally, deals with economic entomology. Most of his time is free 16 234 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 for research, and the problems on hand at present and those contem- plated are mostly of an entomological nature. He also acts as Ento- mological Adviser to the Irish Free State Department of Agriculture. FRANCE AND HER COLONIES France has produced many very famous entomologists, and a number of great works were published in that country as early as the early part of the eighteenth century. As time went on a number of high-placed individuals took up the study of entomology, and it might almost be said to have become fashionable at one time. Cuvier and Buffon and their work excited much interest at court. Later Count Dejean, one of the generals of the first Napoleon, was a famous Coleopterist. The French have done much in economic entomology. One of the earliest and most important of all the early papers in economic ento- mology was that by Henri Louis Duhamel Du Monceau, who was commissioned by the Royal Academy of Sciences in May, 1761, to investigate in Western France a severe outbreak of a grain moth, now known as the Angoumois grain moth (Sitotroga cerealella). An admirable investigation was made by Duhamel and his assistant, Mathieu Tillet, and the results were published in Paris in 1762, a leather-bound volume of 314 pages illustrated by three plates of admirable drawings. Mr. Perez Simmons has published a_ short article, praising this monographic contribution, in the Journal of Economic Entomology for October, 1929. During the early part of the nineteenth century there were nine French writers on economic entomology who should be especially mentioned. J. V. Audouin (1797-1841) was Professor of Entomology in the Museum at Paris and wrote much on anatomical and taxonomical subjects and also published many interesting biological papers. His studies of the blister-beetles were important and were summarized in his “ Prodromus of a Natural, Chemical, Pharmaceutical, and Medical History of the Cantharides.” In 1835 he published a note on a larva that does great damage to oat fields. He also published on the woolly root-louse of the apple and a number of short papers on insects injurious to forest trees; also on vine insects, the hair-worm, parasites of white grubs, on the diseases of the silkworm of com- merce, on insects of the mulberry, and on the insects that attack wood used in building. His largest work of this character was published in 1840-42 and was entitled (translated) “‘ History of Insects In- jurious to the Vine, and Especially the Pyralis.” WHOLE VOL, APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 235 Eugene Robert, publishing between 1836 and 1847, wrote about silk culture and about insects injurious to the elms and oaks. He also wrote a paper entitled (translated) “ Methods Used to Destroy Insects.” F. E. Guérin-Méneville (1799-1874) wrote very extensively on entomology. He was, in fact, probably the most prolific of the French writers of his period. Horn and Schenkling list 406 papers by him. The character of his papers was extremely varied. He covered a very large field. He wrote many taxonomic papers on Coleoptera, and seems to have been a broad zoologist. In applied zoology, he wrote on the vine Pyralis as early as 1837. In 1842 he wrote about the ravages of Elachista coffeella in the coffee planta- tions of the Antilles. In view of the recent Florida outbreak of the Mediterranean fruit-fly, it is interesting to note that in 1843 he pub- lished a monograph of the genus Ceratitis. In 1842 he published a note on some insects injurious to wheat, rye, barley, and clover, and in 1844 on an insect that attacks the olive in south France. In 1845 he proposed that the Royal and Central Society of Agriculture should found a prize to recompense the farmers who should discover and put into practice the best means for destroying insects injurious to agriculture. Later he wrote short notes on insects affecting the vine, olive, potato, cereal crops; also on bark-beetles, insect damage to the sugar beet, the almond, and much about silkworms and their diseases. In 1848 he published an essay on useful and injurious insects (a long article) in the Modern Encyclopaedia. In 1850 he published a list of insects that feed on tobacco. The majority of his papers are short, but he seems to have had insect damage constantly in mind and to have continually brought notes before the Academy of Sciences on injurious insects. His later papers are concerned mainly with silk culture. He took up the question of the use of other species of silkworms, and wrote extensively about them. One of his latest papers was entitled “ Insects as Injurious Animals which ought to be Destroyed and as Useful Animals that ought to be Protected and Acclimatized.” J. Macquart, who died in 1855, published mainly about Dipterous insects, but also a series of papers on the trées and shrubs of Europe and their insects and on the herbaceous plants of Europe and their insects. Doctor Boisduval has stated that Macquart introduced in these works certain insects that are found only accidentally on the plants and should not be figured among the injurious species. J. J. B. Géhin (1816-1889) wrote mainly on Coleoptera, but pub- lished in 1857 a lengthy series of notes on the history of insects 236 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 injurious to agriculture, horticulture and silviculture in the Depart- ment of the Moselle. This publication is referred to appreciatively by Boisduval, who states that it relates principally to insects attacking fruit trees and is of great interest. In 1840 J. A. Fonscolombe published a work entitled (translated) “ Memoirs Concerning Insects Injurious to Agriculture, principally in the Department of the Midi of France.” Col. C. C. Goreau (1790-1879) was a very prolific writer and published many short papers relating to injurious insects. One of his interesting contributions was on the Diptera that mine the leaves of plants and on their parasites. He was a close observer of parasites. and he wrote concerning the species that attack the Hyponomeutas, and again, upon the ravages of Cecidomyia tritici and its parasites. In 1862 he published a large volume of 250 pages under the title “Injurious insects,” including accounts of insects injurious to fruit trees, vegetables, cereals, and forage crops. Later two supplements to this work were published. In 1867 Dr. J. B. A. D. Boisduval published a large book of 650 pages, with 426 excellent woodcuts, entitled (translated) ‘ Essay on Horticultural Entomology, Comprising the History of Insects In- jurious to Agriculture, with an Indication of the Best Means of Destroying Them.’ This book was prepared by Doctor Boisduval in order to meet the needs of a large number of members of the different horticultural societies. In the same year he started a journal called ‘“ Tnsectologie Agricole,” treating of useful insects and their products, noxious insects and their injuries, and practical means of combating the latter. Six volumes appeared, comprising the years 1867 to 1872. After the publication of his big book, Doctor Boisduval, greatly interested in the whole subject of the importance of insects to agri- culture, and being one of the Vice-Presidents of the Horticultural Society of Paris, organized a Society for Agricultural Entomology, of which he became President. This Society organized, during the month of August, 1868, an exhibition in the Palace of Industry in the Champs Elysées illustrating the destructive and beneficial habits of the different species of insects. It was the announcement of this exhibit in the Gardeners Chronicle that induced the Royal Horticul- tural Society of England to have a similar collection prepared and displayed in England, and this was one of the events that helped to focus the attention of the late Miss Eleanor A. Ormerod almost exclusively on agricultural entomology. It happened that the Maréchal Vaillant was President of the Horti- cultural Society of Paris at the time that Boisduval finished the prepa- WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 237 ration of his book, and the book was very properly dedicated to the Maréchal. In acknowledging this dedication with very gracefully expressed thanks, the Maréchal added the following striking and beautifully expressed paragraph: ; I have deplored for a long time the ignorance of people who occupy themselves with horticulture concerning the insects that do so much harm to our gardens and with regard to those insects which are our most useful helpers. We kill them all without distinction, or we kill none at all. Precious friends or terrible enemies, it is all the same; and if there are any exceptions these are due rather to beauty of form and to brilliancy of color than to useful qualities or hoped-for help. It is time that this should stop. Our teachers in the primary schools, if they could give their scholars some notions about, the insects that render so much labor useless and about the creatures which God has created to be our collab- orators, would merit our gratitude. Linnaeus, I believe, once said that the object of agriculture and horticulture is to make the lives of men more easy and more agreeable. How can we reach this end if we abandon the best part of the products of the soil without struggle and without effort to all these creatures which we know only through their damage? Prior to the publication of Doctor Boisduval’s important book, a plan had been elaborated by Emile Blanchard for the preparation and publication of a large work on agricultural zoology. This was car- ried into effect only so far as the publication of a certain portion, namely the insects injurious to ornamental plants. This was put out in beautiful form, in quarto, and was illustrated by a series of exqui- site colored plates showing the flowering plants with the insects. The bound copy of this work in the possession of the United States Department of Agriculture contains 192 pages of text and 19 plates. The writer is in doubt as to the date of publication of this volume. It is not indicated in the work itself. The British Museum Catalogue places it at 1854. Hagen’s Bibliotheca, in the appendix, places it at 1859, but refers only to Part 1 with eight colored plates. Boisduval, in the introduction to the work just cited, states that Blanchard com- menced the publication of the work in 1857. He writes concerning it (translated), “In 1857 M. E. Blanchard commenced the publica- tion of his Agricultural Zoology, a work whose beautiful plates make us regret that other labors prevented the author from following up this enterprise.’ It was an ambitiously planned work, and had its author been able to follow it through it would doubtless have been a great stimulus to agricultural entomology. In its introduction occurs a paragraph which indicates the condi- tion of knowledge at the time of writing. It is (translated) : “ Each year from every part of the civilized world one hears complaints of the ravages of insects upon vegetation, of damage to the plants that 238 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 have become precious to humanity. Those who see these cruel injuries turn towards science, but so far science has remained nearly mute.” Just as in other European countries, the discovery of the grape- vine Phylloxera in the vineyards of France in the late 1860’s resulted in a very great interest in at least one entomological problem—that is, as soon as it was discovered to be an entomological problem. Large sums of money were spent in investigations, and prizes were offered for the discovery of a remedy. At one time, it is estimated, 2,500,000 acres of vineyards had been destroyed, and this represented an annual loss in vine products to the value of $150,000,000. The French Government had expended up to 1895 over $4,500,000 in its efforts to control this insect, and had remitted taxes to the amount of $3,000,000 in addition. Hundreds of measures to control the pest were tried out. The best preventive measure was found to be the use of resistant American stocks on which to graft the European vine and the planting of vineyards in soil of almost pure sand. The most important remedies were the underground injection of bisulphid of carbon to destroy the root- lice and, where possible, the inundating of the vineyards at certain seasons of the year. C. V. Riley, then State Entomologist of Missouri, studied the insect in its native home, and was visited by European experts, notably Monsieur Foeéx of Montpellier. The combined advice of these two men resulted in the extensive importation of American root stocks into France, and largely by this method the wine industry was saved to France and to the rest of Europe. It may incidentally be men- tioned that in America Riley had found a predatory mite feeding upon the root form of the Phylloxera, and that he sent living material to Planchon and Foeéx for possible acclimatization in France. This happened to be one of the early attempts—probably the earliest—in the sending of beneficial insects to a foreign country. A very able zoologist, Monsieur Valéry Mayet, was connected with the National Agricultural School at Montpellier and was giving in- struction in economic entomology. Later he published a very impor- tant work entitled “ The Insects of the Vine.” Two very suggestive papers by M. M. Girard were published in the 1870's. The one published in 1873 considered the subject of use- ful carnivorous insects to be introduced into gardens to protect them against destruction by injurious insects. The second of these papers, published in 1876, relates to the transfer of insects by commerce in plants. Girard, therefore, pointed out two subjects that were in later years to receive great attention in the United States as well as in other countries. WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 239 In 1893 there was established at Paris an institution called the Laboratory of Vegetable Parasitology of the Chamber of Commerce. This institution was created in the interests of agriculture, of com- merce in grain and of all the agricultural interests of which the Bourse de Commerce is the center in Paris. Monsieur J. Danysz was appointed as Director, and several bulletins were published. Danysz was a great believer in the use of micro-organisms against injurious insects and other-animals, and he perfected a “ rat virus’ which has been apparently used with some success against field mice and rats, but in entomology he seems to have accomplished little or nothing. At this time Professor Brocchi, Professor of Zoology at the Insti- tut Agronomique in Paris, was charged with the founding of a Department of Agricultural Zoology for the purpose of identifying insects sent in for that reason by agriculturists and of pointing out means of destroying insect pests or diminishing their ravages. For some time previously Professor Brocchi had answered questions upon economic entomology referred to him by the Ministry of Agri- culture, and, as notably in the case of Ephestia kuehniella, upon which he published a report in the Bulletin of the Ministry of Agri- culture for 1888, he made occasionally reports upon various insects. The new Department was started in 1894, and it took the shape of the so-called Entomological Station of Paris, housed in and connected with the Agronomical Institute. The now famous entomologist, Dr. Paul Marchal, was the first holder of the directorship of this station. So thoroughly fine has been his career and so brilliant has been the work that he has turned out that I have devoted some pages to him, which will follow this general statement regarding France. Considerably later, around this central station at Paris ‘were grouped regional stations which were really installed in 1911 under the Mission for the Study of Cochylis and the Eudemis of the Grape. These stations were later made sub-permanent and extended their action beyond grape insects into the whole field of agricultural ento- mology. At present (1928) after several changes of location and the establishment of new stations, the organization includes, aside from the central station at Paris, regional stations near Bordeaux, near Lyons, at Rouen, at Challete-Montargis, and at Menton. The latter station was transferred at the close of 1928 to Antibes. An important center of silk culture studies has been organized at Alais. An api- cultural station was started near Montpellier where broad entomologi- cal studies had been carried on under the old installation of the Mission for the Study of Cochylis and Eudemis, first by Valéry- Mayet already referred to, and later by F. Picard, and still later by J. Lichtenstein. ‘ 240 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84. At the close of the World War the French Government appreciated the vital necessity of increasing her agricultural products, and added funds were given to the Ministry of Agriculture for expenditure along profitable lines. These regional stations in agricultural ento- mology resulted or were more adequately supported financially. Mar- chal has told me that after the war he had difficulty in finding men to place at the head of these stations, as there were practically no men trained in economic entomology in France. He had, therefore, to pick out men who could most readily acquire a proper knowledge and who had.been trained scientifically as a preliminary although mainly in other directions, For example, Raymond Poutiers, who was placed in charge of the Insectarium at Menton, although he had collected Lepidoptera as a boy and was a member of the Entomological Society of France, was really a trained industrial chemist; and Robert Regnier, who was placed at the regional station at Rouen, although an entomologist as a boy, had studied especially oceanography. Both of these men, however, as well as several others, found in economic entomology a field where everything they had ever learned came into play, and were fascinated with the possibilities of the great field opened up to them. The reputation which Doctor Marchal has made during his long term of office, largely by his discoveries in the field of pure science, has been a great impetus to the recognition of the value of economic entomology in France among scientific men in general. This reputa- tion has become world-wide and has done much to dignify the science in the minds of thinking people. The Agronomical Institute has completed elaborate research lab- oratories at Versailles and in this admirable installation economic entomology has received full consideration. Research laboratory buildings have been constructed which are quite the best in existence down to the present time. The assistant on whom Doctor Marchal relied in the planning and superintendence of this installation was Dr. B. Trouvelot. I visited the new structures in late August, 1927, and later Doctor Trouvelot received a traveling fellowship from the International Education Board and came to the United States where he spent many months, partly at Cornell University and partly in visiting field stations. He later proceeded to Hawaii, Japan, China, and India, and returned to Paris from the East. Another assistant who had for a number of years been Marchal’s chef des travaux, P. Vayssiere, visited the United States during the summer of 1928 as a delegate from the Ministry of Agriculture to the Fourth Interna- tional Congress of Entomology, and was able during his stay in this WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY: HOWARD 241 country to visit Washington and many of the State and Federal field stations. Doctor Marchal himself visited the United States for three months if the summer of 1913. The active force in France, there- fore, is not only composed of excellent men, but it has the advantage of personal knowledge on the part of two of the younger men of the present workers and the latest developments in applied entomology in North America. In addition to'the men already mentioned, Doctor Marchal has been fortunate in securing the services of F. Willaume at Paris, who has been studying especially the question of insecticides. He has also two first-class men in the persons of A. Paillot, in charge of the regional station at St. Genis-Laval, and L. Gaumont at Montargis.’ Paillot is studying especially the diseases of insects, and Gaumont has done admirable work with the plant-lice. Still another man not yet men- tioned is Prof. J. Feytaud, connected with the University at Bor- deaux, who has made some capital studies and who combines his uni- versity functions with the chiefship of the regional laboratory of the Ministry of Agriculture. Mr. Poutiers, previously mentioned, has been changed from Menton to Antibes, the westernmost point in the Riviera rather than the easternmost point. He acts as a general inspector in addition to his research in applied entomology. The first part of a practical handbook on the insect enemies of fruit trees, by H. Latiére, B. Trouvelot, and F. Willaume, was pub- lished in Paris in 1928. It comprises 97 pages, 7 plates, and 206 fig- ures ; but includes only the consideration of characters, classification, and methods of observation. Later parts will evidently make this an extremely useful work. Although as a rule scientific Frenchmen do not take readily to the English language, Marchal, Trouvelot, Vayssiere, and Poutiers all speak English with facility. We have just seen how the necessity for work in economic ento- mology was found to be very great at the close of the World War, on account of the absolute need of food increase for the people. We will see elsewhere how this awful war brought about increased study and attention to medical entomology ; and in much earlier pages we have touched upon the influence of the war upon economic ento- mology even in the United States. Two French incidents may not be amiss here: At the time when the German armies were approaching Paris, Prof. E. L. Bouvier of the Museum of Natural History hurriedly packed some of the most precious portions of the great and invalua- *M. Gaumont died in October, 1929. 242 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS voL. 84 ble collections of insects and personally conducted them to Toulouse in the effort to save them from the pressing danger. Of course, this was not distinctly economic entomology, but it will readily be real- ized that the economic entomologists depend enormously upon the great collections that have been studied by the authorities on the dif- ferent groups. Another story comes from Paul Marchal, via C. P. Clausen who was in Paris during the spring and summer following the war. It seems that during the airplane and artillery bombardments of Paris in the last years of the war Marchal was rearing Cryptolaemus mon- trousieri, a ladybird enemy of mealybugs, on a rather large scale. Whenever one of the bombardments was announced, or whenever the approach of enemy planes or Zeppelins was reported, the colo- nies of living Coccinellids were carried to the basements underneath the buildings of the city and kept there in safety during the course of the bombardment. This is probably the only case in history where living insects were protected from destruction during a great war by human beings. There have been in France, notably in the different universities, several men who have made important contributions to economic entomology, in addition to the men occupied at the regional labora- tories under the central Ministry of Agriculture. F. Henneguey, for example, did some extraordinary work of a fundamental character with insects. Prof. A. Lecaillon at the University of Toulouse has made many careful studies of several of the important insects of the South of France. The French colonies have had many good workers who have pub- lished articles of value. In Algeria the work of L. Trabut and M. Delassus must be referred to. An excellent report on the insects damaging cork oak in the forest of Mamora, Morocco, by J. de Lepiney, was published in Paris in 1927. In medical entomology, the Pasteur Institute of Algiers has long been a stronghold of advanced and practical research, largely conducted by the brothers Sergent. Out in the French settlements in Oceania, A. Brugiroux reported on some insects damaging crops. The French Government of Indo-China has apparently had the advice of good resident entomologists. L. Duport, before the World War, made a number of reports on the enemies of cultivated plants in the Far East. An especially full report was published in the Bulletin economique de l’Indochine for November-December, 1912, and in the following numbers. This report covers 147 pages and considers a large number of injurious insects attacking different crops. After the war, Mr. Duport again — WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY HOWARD 243 began publishing, and the Bulletin of the Agricultural Institute of Saigon contained articles by him as well as by J. Robin and F. Vincens. The great island of Madagascar with its dependencies has had crop troubles through insects. Years ago I had an interesting correspon- dence with the Rev. Paul Camboué, a missionary, who was greatly interested in insects. An important article entitled ‘‘ Insect Enemies of Rice in Madagascar ” (title translated), by C. Frappa, was pub- lished in 1929. It gives a summary of information on the insect enemies of standing and stored rice. It was published in the journal known as “ Riz et Riziculture”’ (1929, No. 4). PauL MARCHAL It is impossible for me adequately to express my admiration for Marchal. Following a correspondence beginning in 1894, I have known him personally since 1902, have often visited him in his laboratory and in his home, and spent the better part of three months with him traveling in the United States. Then too, in 1920 I took a long journey with him in France by automobile and by train, visiting the different stations which were operating under his general guidance. Again, in 1923 I traveled with him from Menton to Madrid and with him attended the international olive-fly conference held at that point. Later in the same season Marchal and his charming wife joined us at the International Congress of Entomology and Phytopathology in Holland. . I know nothing of Marchal’s boyhood (he was born in Paris in 1865). I do not understand why we have never talked about it. Possibly because we were so much more interested in other things. When I first knew him he was probably in his early forties, a slender, active man, who might have been a writer or an artist rather than a man of science, judging from his appearance. And in fact he com- bines with his indefatigability as a worker and genius as a thinker the imagination of a poet and an ability for self-expression to be found as a rule only with masters of literature. Some day perhaps he will tell me what led him into science. Marchal’s early studies were carried on at the University of Paris, where he became a licentiate in science in 1883, a doctor of medicine in 1889, and a doctor of science in 1892. In 1894 he was made Chef des Travaux at the Entomological Station of Paris under the Minis- try of Agriculture. In 1900 he was made Professor of Agricultural Zoology at the National Agronomical Institute, and in 1910 Director of the Entomological Station of Paris. His first important paper was published in 1897, ““A Study of Instinct with Cerceris ornata,” and 244 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 from that time on until he received his appointment in the Paris Entomological Station his writings related mainly to the anatomy and physiology of certain marine articulates and (toward the end of this period) to certain biological points concerning wasps. He has always been a rather prolific writer. In 1894 and 1895 his attention was drawn to certain Dipterous enemies of the small grains, and in his studies of the parasites of these insects he became greatly interested in the biology of the parasitic Hymenoptera. By this time he had married. I have seen a photograph of a group of workers and their families at the Marine Biological Station at Roscoff, Brittany, of which Lacaze Duthiers was the eminent Di- rector. Marchal and his wife were in this group. I forget whether they were married at that time, or were about to be married. At all events, when I first visited him, in the summer of 1902, he and his wife with four small children were living in a charming little villa at Fontenay-aux-Roses near Paris, and I think that hts widowed mother was living with them. Shortly before this he had published his paper entitled “‘ The Dissociation of the Egg into a Large Number of Distinct Individuals and the Evolutive Cycle of Encyrtus fusci- collis.” I had read this paper, and had strong doubts concerning it. I had reared many egg-parasites and had never found any that did not issue as adults from the parasitized egg of the host. That such a parasitized egg should hatch and that the eggs of the parasite should be retained in the body of the issuing caterpillar—that these should subdivide into a great number of competent embryos—that these in time should develop into larvae, and that eventually from the single egg deposited by the parasite in the egg of the host there should issue a very great number of adult parasites from the caterpillar of the host—all these things seemed absolutely incredible. However, on that memorable day in August, 1902, after a charming luncheon which all four of the children attended, we went into his little labora- tory on an upper floor and he showed me his specimens and his methods. I was at once convinced of the accuracy of his observations. His technique had been perfect, his scientific care admirable, and he had proved beyond all question a very extraordinary point in biology. His subsequent work confirmed this earlier work, and of course it is a matter of common knowledge that it has been confirmed and carried further by Silvestri in Italy, by Patterson in Texas, and by Leiby and Hill working for the Bureau of Entomology. By the time I returned to the United States, Silvestri’s large paper on this general subject had been published, and I wrote a long article for the journal Science describing these conclusions and also the WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 245 earlier work of Ed. Bugnion of Lausanne who had studied one phase of the development of this Encyrtus but who had not observed the egg dissociation and so missed the polyembryonic conclusion. This paper of mine was published early in December, 1902, and at the midwinter meeting of the American Association for the Advance- ment of Science I chanced to overhear a brief conversation among a group of prominent morphologists in which one of them said, “ Have you read Howard’s paper in Science?” “ Yes,” said another, “ What alcrazy, thine |?’ It did seem like a crazy thing, but what a wonderful story it all is! Marchal had found the eggs of a little Tineid moth—H yponomeuta padella—on the leaves of a currant bush in his little garden at Fon- tenay-aux-Roses. He had seen the little black Encyrtus puncturing these eggs with its ovipositor, and, with his admirable laboratory technique, he had followed the subsequent history of the two species. I frankly confess that, had the original observation been made by myself, or by Ashmead, or by Pergande, or any one who had fre- quently reared egg-parasites, the subsequent hatching of the Hypono- meuta larva would have meant to us simply that the parasite egg had failed not only to develop but had failed to injure the Lepidopterous embryo. It was a combination of scientific curiosity, of remarkable laboratory technique, of imagination, and, I may suggest, of relative unfamiliarity as to what would naturally be expected under the cir- cumstances, that produced a result which fixed the attention of the biological world on Marchal. I think there can be Jittle doubt that very largely on this work was based his subsequent election to the Académie des Sciences and so of the Institut de France and the various. elections to honorary membership in learned societies and other honors that have come to him in number. It’s an interesting story, isn’t it? I had the pleasure of visiting Ed. Bugnion at Aix-en-Provence in 1923. It was a delightful visit, and in the course of our talk I referred to his early work with these same creatures, in which he just failed of the discovery which had meant so much to Marchal’s glory. He shrugged his shoulders and said that he was not in the least jealous of Marchal, but that it was undoubtedly a combination of circumstances that prevented him from following through. His lectures in the University of Lausanne began at a time when he had to drop his investigations for many months. Before he resumed them Marchal’s paper had been published. Notwithstanding the fact that this extraordinary discovery of poly- embryony in a Chalcidoid parasite brought Marchal at once promi- 246 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VoL. 84 nently into the view of very many biologists who perhaps would not have heard of him for years, nevertheless he had already carried on certain investigations of prime importance, and he has continued to publish papers, differing in length, always of importance, and. all . touched with an originality and with an ability to look below mere observed facts and to delve into the reasons for things and their broad bearings. It is this that sets him apart from most other entomolo- gists. His broad biological training has something to do with it; but more than that, it is in the man himself. He makes what is apparently a simple observation ; and then he thinks about it, and it becomes a significant thing. A constant stream of papers has come from his laboratory, largely of his own authorship but sometimes in coauthorship with some one of his associates. Imaginative as he is, there is a conservatism about him which, combined with his broad knowledge, prevents him and his force and his institution from making mistakes, from taking up projects that are bound to fail. His visit to the United States in 1913 was a delight to all of us; and that it was a pleasure and an inspiration to him is beautifully set forth in his imposing volume entitled “ Les Sciences biologiques Appliquées a l’Agriculture et la Lutte Contre les Ennemis des Plantes aux Etats-Unis.” Traveling with him as I did through New England and then to the Pacific Coast, I was greatly interested to watch his methods. The experience was absolutely novel to him. Everything he saw was new. He was not disturbed; he did not become excited, and he missed nothing. I had arranged the journey in advance, and, as is my custom, had notified people along the route of the time of our arrival. As it turned out, this was not Marchal’s way; and as a result before half the journey was over we were two weeks behind our schedule. I expostulated gently, but while the expostulations were courteously received they were unavailing. He insisted on looking into each thing until he understood it thoroughly; and further than that, he took photographs and collected pamphlets and documents ‘and did a lot of other things that seemed really unnecessary. But when his book finally appeared a year later, it became perfectly obvious that every- thing he had done was with a distinct plan and that after all he had wasted no time. On the whole trip there were no enthusiastic ex- pressions of pleasure. That is not his way. But an occasional remark would show a very keen appreciation. He was looking at things com- paratively all the while. As we crossed desert regions he spoke of the similarity of the vicarious vegetation to that of Algeria. When WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 247 we were on the shores of the Pacific south of San Francisco, he spoke of the resemblances to the Riviera. The nearest approach to enthusiasm as shown to me was one evening at nightfall when we were climbing up the bench just outside of Pocatello, Idaho. After a long silence, he turned to me and said, “ I have often dreamed—” and, as he hesitated, I remarked cheerfully that I had often done the same thing. But Marchal has the power of absolute concentration. I believe that if one fired off a gun beside his ear it would not disturb his trend of thought. So he went on, “I have often dreamed that I was in a strange country where all the birds and all the flowers and all the insects were new, but—I have always awakened! Today I do not awake.” I had opportunity on this journey to show him something of the family life of the Americans, and introduced him a number of times into the homes of friends—sometimes of those who live very modestly, again of those who live on a grand scale. It may be worth while to mention one instance. We were lunching with one of the field workers in a California town, a young man recently married. The luncheon was perfect, beautifully cooked, charmingly served ; and the young wife did it all. Marchal was a little slow with his English and thought over his sentences before he expressed them, but presently he complimented the young wife on the delightful meal and the perfect service. “Oh,” said her husband, “my wife was a teacher of domestic economy in the University of ——-———— when I married her.” Marchal thought for a moment and then said slowly, “ Does madame like the practice of domestic economy as well as she liked the teaching?”’ The young bride blushingly confessed that she preferred the practice. The World War broke out the summer following Marchal’s visit to the United States. He was too old to be a combatant himself, but his only son went to the front at once, and was killed the first time under fire, in the autumn of 1914. I was not able to visit France again until 1920, but corresponded constantly with my friend during and after the war. His letters were of a most intense interest, and he felt the war conditions very keenly but did his full share in the all important sanitary work. After the soul-wracking strife was over, I visited him in 1920; again in 1923, 1925, and 1927. In 1920 we took a long trip together through the South of France, visiting his newly founded stations and seeing many thing of great interest. His assis- tant, Vayssiére, was studying the ravages of the Moroccan locust in a region north of the Gulf of Fos. The farmers of this Department had formed a syndicate, and the Government had loaned them soldiers, 248 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 and the soldiers were using their army flame-throwers to destroy the locusts in the early morning and just after sundown (when the insects were sluggish). I was told that the poultry of the region, although hungry for live grasshoppers prior to the coming of the soldiers, later, after tasting the insects when they had been killed by the flame, preferred the roasted locusts and would no longer eat the live ones. Marchal was received everywhere on this trip with the greatest respect. In spite of his extremely modest demeanor, his great worth had evidently become impressed upon all classes of people. Referring to this apparent shyness, he surprised me in 1923 when we attended the international olive-fly conference together at Madrid. He was made the chairman of the scientific section of the congress, and he presided with a dignity and a savoir-faire that commanded my surprised admiration. When in the autumn of 1928 he was elected President of the International Congress of Entomology to be held in Paris in August, 1932, he declined at once, and finally accepted only at the strong urging of his best friends and those who, therefore, knew him best. After seeing him in the chair at Madrid, I have no doubt of his perfect competence to conduct the presidential functions in 1932. ITALY Italy was early the home of many famous naturalists and physi- cians, and in entomology has produced many well known workers. Conte Carlo Passerini (1793-1857), Professor in the Museum of Natural History in Florence, was one of the early writers seriously to consider economic entomology. One of his very early papers treated of the olive-fly and was published in 1829. Later he wrote about the insect enemies of a number of cultures. Giovanni Passerini (1816-1893), Professor in the University of Parma, made an espe- cial study of the Aphididae and wrote a number of important papers. Prof. Camillo Rondani (1807-1879), also of Parma, wrote exten- sively on the Diptera, studied with care the parasitic families, and was one of the earliest writers to advance theories regarding natural control. Antonio Villa, a learned coleopterist, who began to publish in 1833, became interested in migratory grasshoppers in 1845 and in that year published a significant paper entitled ‘ The Carnivorous Insects Used to Destroy the Species Injurious to Agriculture.” This essay was instigated by the offer of a gold medal by the Society for the Encouragement of Arts and Crafts of Milan to the person who should undertake with some success new experiments tending to WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOW ARD 249 promote the artificial development of some species of carnivorous insects which could be used efficaciously to destroy another species of insect recognized as injurious to agriculture. Villa advocated the employment of climbing Carabid beetles for tree-inhabiting injurious forms, of rove beetles to destroy the insects found in flowers, and ground-beetles for cutworms and other earth-inhabiting forms. Ac- cording to Silvestri, this paper by Villa was praised in certain reviews and criticised in others. It has been entirely lost sight of in later years. A very ambitious and apparently important work which has been overlooked by entomologists in general is the entomological por- tion of a great work entitled “ The Science and Practice of Agri- culture,” started under the editorship of Dr. P. Palmeri and Prof. Marcello Pepe in Naples in 1889. A part of this great work entitled “The Injurious Insects of Our Gardens, Fields, Orchards, and Woods; Their Lives and the Methods of Fighting Them ”’ was begun by Prof. Agostino Lunardoni. The first volume was published in Naples in 1889 and is a large, rather sparsely illustrated volume of 569 pages. The second volume, published in 1894, is Part 2% of the 11th volume of the main work, under the same authorship. The first volume covered the Coleop- tera, and the second the Lepidoptera. Again the illustrations are rather scanty and the volume with index covers 287 pages. Circumstances that-he was unable to control forced Doctor Lunar- doni to discontinue the work, and it was taken up by Dr. Gustavo Leonardi, assistant in the Laboratory of Agricultural Entomology in the Superior School of Agriculture at Portici; and the third volume, 539 pages, was published in 1900. It covers the Hymenoptera and Diptera (including the fleas). The fourth volume, also by Doctor Leonardi, was published in 1901, covers 862 pages and completes the work. As a whole the work is a very admirable one. It covers the whole field in a competent way, and is more extensive than any similar work published in any other country at that time. There were five earlier Italian writers who should be mentioned. O. G. Costa (1787-1867) wrote on various entomological topics, and among others he published the results of his studies of insects injuri- ous to the olive. Michael F’. Buniva published between 1793 and 1809 six entomo- logical papers of a distinctly economic character. One was entitled (translated) “ Dissertation on the Insects that Damage the Wheat Harvest.” His largest paper, published in 1809, was a pamphlet of 17 250 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 78 pages entitled (translated) “ Memoir on Most of the More Strik- ing Insects that Attack the Plants from which Men Gain Their Nour- ishment in Piedmont.” P. Ricci, in 1810, published a study of the more injurious insects in the Department of Metauro. Bernardino Angelini, in the “ Bibliotheca Italiana” for 1827, pub- lished a paper entitled (translated) ‘‘ Concerning the Damage Caused Principally by Noctua gamma in 1826 in the Veronese Province.” One of the most learned of the Italian entomologists, Achille Costa (1828-1899), published many papers, of which a number were economic. One of them was an especially fine treatise on the insects that attack olive trees and their fruit. This covered 197 pages. A very good Sicilian economic entomologist, Francisco Muina- Palumbo, began to publish in 1852. He wrote mainly on the insects of the olive and of the vine. It is worthy of note also that Count P. Bargagli, a well known Italian entomologist, published one paper that may. be considered economic, in which he takes up the control of injurious insects by artificially produced disease, following the suggestions made by H. A. Hagen of the United States in 1879. Bargagli’s paper was printed in the Italian Journal of Agriculture in 1880. Writing in 1894, I made the statement that “ The work which has been done by the Italian government in the encouragement of eco- nomic entomology perhaps surpasses that of any other European nation.” In fact, one of the great leaders of the movement which was to establish economic entomology on a firm basis in Europe was Adolfo Targioni-Tozzetti, who lived and did most of his valuable work in Florence. He came from a scientific family, and began to publish as early as 1843. He was a well trained man, and one of his early papers treated of the egg and the embryology of the Cicadas, but his other papers for many years were concerned very largely with botanical matters. After 1866, entomological papers from his hand became more numerous, but with them were also ular papers on other animals and upon botany. He probably came distinctly into entomology, and especially eco- nomic entomology, in 1870 when the Phylloxera was threatening the destruction of the Italian vineyards. In 1872 his attention was di- rected to the Coccidae, and from that time to his death in 1902 he published many papers on this important group. His studies of the scale insects, in fact, were going on contemporaneously with those of the French master, Signoret. WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 251 In 1875 a Station of Agricultural Entomology was founded in Florence, and Targioni was made the first Director. From that time on, a stream of publications on different aspects of economic ento- mology was’ published by him and his assistants. He was one of the founders of the Italian Entomological Society, and in 1891 he started the Revista di Entomologia Agraria which con- tinues to this day. The Station issued also a large number of pam- phlets, and in 1891 published a large and useful volume entitled “Ani- mals and Insects of Growing and Dried Tobacco.” With the assistance of Dr. G. Del Guercio and Dr. A. Berlese, he conducted a very elaborate series of experiments with insecticides, mainly against the Coccidae but also against injurious insects of other groups, and in 1888 published, in collaboration with Berlese, a very large treatise on the general subject of insecticides. When I came to Washington, in 1878, Targioni was already an economic entomologist of high repute. Professor Comstock’s inter- est in Coccidae, which began in 1879, led to a careful study of Tar- gioni’s published work as well as of that of Signoret ; and a little later I began an independent correspondence with Targioni. He was looked upon as the foremost exponent of economic entomology in Europe until the time of his death. About this time, F. Franceschini, Curator of the Italian Society of Natural Sciences, wrote a useful little book entitled ‘“ Noxious Insects” (“ Gli Insetti Nocivi”), published in 1891 as one of the Manuali Hoepli. It was well illustrated, and in its 263 pages consti- tuted a good summary of applied entomology as practiced in Italy. In 1902, I visited Italy for the first time. Targioni had just died. His position at Florence had not yet been filled. I landed at Naples and immediately made the acquaintance of Antonio Berlese and his assistant, F. Silvestri, at the Royal College of Agriculture at Portici, some miles from Naples in the direction of Vesuvius. The visit aroused great enthusiasm in my mind for Berlese and his work. He was a man then in his early forties, who had, as just indicated, been an assistant to Targioni-Tozzetti in Florence, and who had compara- tively recently taken the new position of Professor of Entomology in the Agricultural College in the South. He was a man of enormous energy and indefatigable industry. He had been working taxonomi- cally on the Acarina and was spreading out over the whole field of economic entomology. His salary was only 2,000 lire a year (less than $400). The means at the disposal of his department were almost nothing. He made his own drawings and lithographed and printed them with his own hands. Both he and Silvestri worked night and 252 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 day. Neither Berlese nor Silvestri spoke English. The latter, how- ever, spoke a little French and acted as interpreter between Berlese and myself. A mutual friendship was begun by that visit, which lasted until Berlese’s lamented death in October, 1927. One of the insects to which Berlese paid rather especial attention and about which he published important papers was the olive-fly ; and this suggests a story. Some months after my return to Washington, the Secretary of Agriculture, James Wilson, sent for me and told me that he had been dining the night before at the White House and had met a charming Italian princess who told him that, knowing the great reputation of the Americans in such practical matters as the destruction of insect pests, she had come to America largely to consult him about the olive- fly and had asked the President to place her at Mr. Wilson’s side in order that she might learn from him. Of course the Secretary told her that the olive-fly does not occur in this country and that he knew nothing about insects himself but that he would send an expert-ento- mologist to see her the next day. So he sent me in his carriage, with a card of introduction, to call upon the princess at a house which she and her husband had leased for the season on the corner of Twentieth and Q Streets. The very charming lady told me her story, and said that her husband’s olive orchards, which were very large and brought him in a large income, were so badly damaged by the olive-fly that it had become a very serious matter to them. I asked where the groves were situated, and when she replied that they were near Naples, in fact between Naples and Portici, I was able to assure her that the one man in the world who knew most about the subject lived at Portici and that his name was Antonio Berlese. (She was the Principessa Brancaccio. ) Between 1902 and 1905 (the date of my next visit to Italy) Ber- lese had succeeded Targioni-Tozzetti as the head of the Station for Agricultural Entomology in the museum at Florence, and Filippo Silvestri had been appointed to fill his place in the Agricultural Col- lege at Portici. I never knew just why Del Guercio did not succeed Targioni-Tozzetti at Florence, but there was undoubtedly a reason which seemed sufficient to the authorities. G. Leonardi was the principal assistant of Silvestri. He was a man of small stature and rather delicate appearance, and seemed to be very modest. Silvestri, however, was and is a tall, handsome man of great personal charm and obviously a forceful character. Silvestri as indicated in a previous paragraph, had been-an assis- tant to Berlese before the latter left Portici, and they were surely WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—-HOWARD 253 good friends. As a matter of fact, I know nothing personally about their early relations; yet it always seemed strange to me that they should have drifted so far and so violently apart as they did in later years. I visited both of them in 1905, 1906, 1907, and 1908, and although I did not see them together I noticed no differences of opinion. In 1905 Silvestri was of great assistance to the United States, since I consulted him, among other things, on the subject of intro- ducing the European parasites of the gipsy moth into the United States. As it happened, he had just heard of an outbreak of the gipsy moth in Sardinia, and at once sent Leonardi to the spot, where he collected and shipped to the United States a large number of the puparia of one of the important Tachinid parasites of gipsy moth larvae. That year, in Florence, I found Berlese assisted by Del Guercio and Ribaga, and just married to his first wife, a very beautiful young Italian girl. He could still speak nothing but Italian. Del Guercio, however, spoke excellent French; and Ribaga, who had studied in Germany, knew German. So they acted indifferently as interpreters between Berlese and myself. Berlese understood enough German and enough French so that he could catch the drift of what the others were saying, and he was very keen on having his ideas properly explained to me. First he would tell Del Guercio to put it into French, and then, dissatisfied with his work, would turn impatiently to Ribaga and ask him to try it in German. While I thought that I understood what he was driving at, I evidently missed some of his points, because he became greatly annoyed at his inability to give me his full meaning. Berlese about this time or a little earlier had a heated controversy with the bird lovers of Italy in regard to legislation they were try- ing to secure and enforce regarding the destruction of birds. Berlese insisted that birds were of little account in the checking of injurious insects, but that the important enemies of such insects were parasitic and predatory insects and lizards which abound in south Italy. He appealed to me for my opinion, and quoted my views in one of his longest papers. Silvestri knew a little French the first time I met him; and betore I saw him the second time he had begun to speak English, Since that time he has been a great traveler, has visited most European countries, Africa, the Pacific islands, the Orient, and the United States, thus becoming quite a cosmopolitan and a man who can talk more or less in several languages. Berlese, however, seemed less 254 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 adaptable linguistically, but on my last two interviews with him he threw aside his false pride and spoke very acceptable French with me. The white scale (Diaspis pentagona) made its destructive appear- ance upon mulberries in Italy about 1888, and it was described by Targioni-Tozzetti as “the new Coccid of the mulberry ” (la nuova Cocciniglia del Gelso). It multiplied and spread slowly, but eventu- ally became so serious an enemy to the mulberry, and therefore to the great silk industry of Italy, that it occupied much of the attention of the Italian economic entomologists. At first, sprays of different kinds were used. On one of my early visits to Florence, Berlese asked me whether the scale occurred in the United States. I replied yes, that it occurred upon peach trees in Georgia and that I had seen it upon peach and cherry trees in the District of Columbia, but that I thought it might be a different species after all, since in one instance, just behind the insectary on the. Department of Agriculture grounds, the limbs of an infested peach tree interlocked with the limbs of a mul- berry tree and the scale had not gone to the mulberry. I told him, however, that the scale was not apparently a dangerous one with us, and he asked me whether it was parasitized. As a matter of fact, we had not up to that time reared any parasites from it, but I cabled im- mediately to Mr. Marlatt to secure twigs affected by the Diaspis and to forward them to Berlese. This was done. Marlatt found a lilac bush in the garden of a well known jady who lived on H Street, North- west, and secured her permission to cut some of the twigs for sending to Berlese, Eventually they arrived in Florence, and Berlese reared from them a minute Aphelinine which he sent to me in Washington for naming. I found it to be a new species of Prospaltella, and named it after him, P. berlesei, sending him the description which was published in the Rivista of his Station. As it happens, this introduction was one of the striking successes in the international exchange of parasites. Under the care of Ber- lese and his assistants, it multiplied and was colonized in different mulberry groves in north Italy, and, according to reports, was emi- nently successful in keeping the destructive Diaspis in check. Soon after this came what seemed to me the first break in the friendship between Berlese and Silvestri. Silvestri, possibly incited by the success of the Prospaltella introduction, began immediately to correspond with entomologists in different parts of the world and to introduce into southern Italy all of the natural enemies of the Diaspis that he could get, not only internal parasites but predators. Berlese objected to this, stating that, having established a good parasite which WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—-HOWARD 255 was doing effective work, they would be liable to lose the benefits derived from its activities by introducing other parasites, thus bring- ing about what Fiske subsequently called “ superparasitism,” and predatory enemies like Coccinellidae which would eat indifferently healthy scales and those parasitized by Prospaltella. A heated discussion began between the two authorities in the columns of the Italian newspapers and in publications of scientific societies, and the rift in their friendship widened rapidly into a pro- nounced enmity. The result was that in a short time Italy was divided into two schools, the Silvestri school and the Berlese school. None of the assistants of Silvestri could be induced to say a single good word about Berlese and his followers; and the reverse was equally true. Visiting Florence in 1910, I found Berlese absent, but he sent one of his assistants—Paoli—to my hotel to try to get me to place myself on record as supporting him against Silvestri. This I declined to do, as I did not wish to antagonize so useful and so fine a man as Silvestri. The fight was too strenuous, and I felt that if I had any duty in the matter it was to try to bring the two men together rather than to accentuate the antagonism. As a matter of fact (although I do not know the exact status of Prospaltella and Diaspis in Italy) my present view is that on the whole Berlese was right. There have been ‘since those days some experiments which seem to justify his attitude rather fully. I have in mind especially the success of Opius humilis against the fruit-fly in Hawaii, which was much decreased and hampered by the subse- quent introduction of two or three other parasites, by Silvestri him- self, who was employed by the Hawaiian government for this purpose. In 1920, the last time I saw Berlese, I found that he had been given greatly improved facilities in Florence ; had a large laboratory, beautifully furnished reception rooms, and had started an especial Prospaltella museum in which, among other exhibits, he had the cover of the box in which Marlatt sent the original lilac branches from Washington. | visited Battista Grassi on this trip, and Grassi made fun of Berlese. (They are both dead now, so that it will do no harm to tell the story.) He showed me a mulberry tree in his garden, badly infested with the scale, and asked, “ Where are the Prospaltellas?” And then went on to say (in French), “ Berlese seems to think that he is the sole proprietor of Prospaltella and the Prospaltella idea. I do not think that he recognizes the hand of the good Lord in the creation of this parasite.” 256 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VoL. 84 Berlese, by the way, told me on this visit that he had seen an advertisement in a newspaper to the effect that a South American government offered a reward of 50,000 francs for the discovery of a remedy for Diaspis pentagona on the fruit trees in that country. He said that he had visited the consul in Rome and had taken him twigs of mulberry infested by parasitized Diaspis, and that these had been sent out to the South American country. Later he learned from the newspapers that the parasites had taken hold out there and had virtually controlled the scale. He had waited for his reward, and hear- ing nothing, and being in Rome, he called on the consul who stated that he would consult with his government. Months later, Berlese being again in Rome, again called at the consulate and was informed that a commission had been appointed in his country to make a report on the matter. Again months passed, and again being in Rome he called at the consulate and was told that the committee had decided to divide the price between Berlese, who had sent the parasites, and Howard, who had described the species. Again months elapsed, and eventually Berlese received an illuminated manuscript conveying the thanks of the Government. This illuminated parchment I saw in his Prospaltella museum. But neither he nor I ever heard anything more of the 50,000 francs. There is one more little story that should be told in connection with this really historical Prospaltella matter: One day, after the success of the Prospaltella had become a matter of rather common informa- tion, a charming elderly lady called on me at my office in Washington and introduced herself as the lady who owned the garden in which Marlatt had originally cut the lilac twig. She suggested to me, with a somewhat ironical smile, that it would be only proper for the Italian Government to recognize her agency in this matter; that she would consider the matter if they were to offer her some form of recognition, hinting at a possible Italian title. Silvestri had already done much sound work when he succeeded 3erlese in charge of the entomological work at the Royal Agricul- tural College in Portici, and this work plainly foreshadowed his sub- sequent rather remarkable career. He has published upon many sub- jects, and has shown himself to be a man not only of enormous indus- try but of brilliant intellect. The stream of important papers that has issued from his laboratory has been of the highest rank, and the number of these publications is astonishing. Of many of the most important, Silvestri*has been the sole author, but he has trained a number of fine workers. One can get a good idea of the character of the training given by Silvestri from the large, well illustrated volume WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 257 of nearly 600 pages entitled (translated) “Agricultural Entomology According to the Lessons of Prof. F. Silvestri.” These lessons, or lectures, were recorded and published under the name of Dr. Guido Grandi, Assistant in the Laboratory of Entomology at Portici. The lessons were originally published in leaflets (dispense), and the work as a whole is one of the very best of its kind that has ever been published. Professor Silvestri has been a great traveler. He has gone on expeditions to Italian Africa for the Italian Government ; has visited many parts of the world for the Hawaiian people, principally in order to secure the natural enemies of the Mediterranean and Oriental fruit-flies ; for the State of California, to secure parasites of injurious scale insects. He has visited most parts of the world, and has been in the United States on three occasions. He attended the Fourth International Congress of Entomology at Ithaca in August, 1928, and has delivered a course of lectures at the University of Minnesota. He is a man of great force and of much personal charm, and now speaks English fluently. He is one of the foremost of the men who have distinguished themselves as international entomologists. A number of publications dealing with entomological problems from the economic point of view were published in Italy from time to time during the period preceding the World War.’ In 1912, L. Vivarelli published two volumes of an Agricultural Entomology, the one on insects injurious to the vine and the other on insects injurious to fruit. In 1924 a revised edition of Volume I, very much enlarged, was published. This second edition contains nearly a hundred additional pages, reaching the size of xv+350 pages, and carries 93 figures. The *T have just learned some rather definite facts about Professor Silvestri. He was born June 22, 1873, and is therefore at this writing approaching his 57th birthday. He has crowded into his comparatively short life more important work and more travel than any other entomologist whose records are known to me. He has published 113 papers, and he has traveled practically everywhere. - He was in the Argentine doing important work as early as 1898. He became Chief of the Department of General and Agricultural Zoology at Portici in 1904, and Director of the Royal Agricultural School at Portici in 1920. He early traveled for the Argentine Government, visiting Formosa as early as 1900. He made wide-spread explorations for the Hawaiian Government in 1912 and 1913. He traveled again widely in the Orient for the State of California in 1924 and 1925. His list of scientific voyages, including parts of South, Central, and North America, Africa, China, and Japan, have numbered 21. He is an honorary or corresponding member of 23 learned societies, and has been the recipient of four great prizes. The last one was the Grand St. Hilaire Medal of the National Acclimatization Society of France. 258 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 author in his preface states that it is slightly modified from the first edition and contains quite a number of additions, especially with regard to control measures, 7. e., those which by recent experimental trial and practical application are recognized to be the most effective and at the same time the easiest and most economical. The author at the time of writing was an assistant in the “ Cattedra”” of Natural History and Phytopathology in Conegliano. The work is largely com- piled, but is said to be based upon actual field experience. One of the most notable of these before-the-war publications was a pamphlet by P. de Stefani published in Palermo in 1914 and en- iitled (translated) ‘‘ Insects Occasionally Injurious to the Vine.” Professor de Stefani has written a number of sound articles on vari- ous injurious insects, especially those of Sicily. There have been three rather prolific writers of short articles dur- ing the past few years in Italy. One of these has been Prof. G. Paoli, a former assistant to A. Berlese. He has been stationed near Genoa, and has done some very good work. E. Malenotti has published about a large number of injurious insects, both under the Ministry of Agri- culture, in the journal Redia, and in agricultural newspapers. G. Mar- telli has also been a writer of frequent short articles on different aspects of agricultural entomology during the past few years. These men and some others are connected with the service known as Cattedre Ambulanti di Agricoltura. These traveling chairs of agri- culture are placed in the chief towns of the provinces, and are supported by contributions from the State, the province and local institutions. Their object is to assist local agriculture, and their men act as what we would term in this country, possibly, glorified county agents. As a rule, they are better trained than the so-called county agents in this country. They have charge of the fight against insect pests and plant diseases under the control of the Central Phytopatho- logical Observatory, and they form a bond of union between the Ministry of Agriculture and the farmers. This service has been found to be very important, and the system has been strongly supported by the present Fascist Government. Italy has therefore been one of the most active countries in work in economic entomology. This is shown in a rather striking way in a large work by Dr. ‘Gustavo Leonardi, published long after his la- mented death, which is a consideration of the species of injurious insects and their parasites recorded in Italy to the end of the year 1911. It was published in three large parts by Professor Silvestri at Portici. While it is little more than a list it is very impressive. The bibliography alone covers 142 pages, and a study of this bibliography WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 259 shows that down to the end of the year 1911 no less than 584 Italian writers had published on some aspect of the injurious insect question. And then too, many unsigned articles are listed, as well as articles published in Italy under the authorship of a few men of other nation- alities. My own name, for example, occurs twice in the list. We have previously referred to Doctor Leonardi in connection with the completion of Prof. A. Lunardoni’s great work, and he was really a learned, useful and important man. Antonio Berlese died in 1927, after a life of most arduous and important work. He was one of the greatest of the European eco- nomic entomologists. Dr. G. del Guercio, early associated with him in Florence when they assisted Targioni-Tozzetti, and afterwards Berlese’s principal assistant when he returned to take Targioni’s place, is now acting in charge. Doctor del Guercio has, therefore, had a very long experience. He has been a prolific writer, and an investi- gator of very high rank. GERMANY It seems safe to say that for very many years the German-speaking countries considered it worth while to pay especial attention to only one branch of applied entomology, and this came from the needs of forestry. Forest culture in Europe, of course, is very old, very important, and much advanced in comparison with America for example. Here it is a recent development, and forest entomology has only in comparatively recent years been considered as an important study. German entomologists early assumed the leadership in this direction, and made careful studies of forest insects as early as the close of the eighteenth century. The best and most comprehensive work on the subject, however, was prepared by J. T. C. Ratzeburg, who was born in Berlin in 1801. His father was a professor of botany, and he studied botany in his early days. Afterwards he studied medicine and was admitted to practice. When, however, the Forest Academy was started at Ebers- walde (near Berlin) in 1831, he became attached to the staff and devoted himself for the rest of his life to forest entomology. He died in 1871. He had already done some entomological work before his connection with the new Forest Academy, and in 1837 published the first edition of Volume 1 of his great work on forest insects, which included a consideration of Coleoptera. The second edition of this volume appeared in 1839; and Volumes 2 and 3 followed in 1840 and 1844 respectively. Each of these volumes was accompanied by a large number of carefully prepared and beautifully executed plates, 260 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VoL. 84 some of them in colors. The work as a whole was a magnificent con- tribution to science and to forestry. In 1844 to 1852 there were pub- lished, as additions to this great work, three volumes entitled “ Die Ichneumonen der Forstinsecten,” an elaborate and very careful work which has been very useful and scientifically very important. Both works were basic and have become classic. The principal works which followed Ratzeburg’s were Eichoff’s “European Bark-Beetles”’ in 1881, Bernard Altum’s “ Forest Zool- ogy” published in Berlin in 1881, and a great two-volume work by J. F. Judeich and H. Nitsche entitled “ Manual of Central European Forest Zoology.” This last work remained a standard for many years. In 1914, K. Escherich published in Berlin a revision of the last- named work. This was a true revision, including much new matter and using additional illustrations. Just before this, Otto Nuslin pub- lished, also in Berlin, a volume on forest entomology which seems to have been very well done. Doctor Judeich was the Director of the Forest Academy at Tharandt near Dresden, and Doctor Nitsche was Professor of Zool- ogy in the same institution. Doctor Altum was Professor of Forest Zoology at Eberswalde, and was therefore a successor of Ratzeburg. Through his care and that of Doctor Eckstein, his successor, the origi- nal Ratzeburg collection still remains at Eberswalde in excellent condi- tion, where it may be studied by specialists in forest entomology. Eichhoff was Royal Head Forester at Mulhausen, Alsace; and Doctor E’scherich was a successor of Doctor Nitsche at Tharandt, but is now the Director of the Institute for Applied Entomology at Munich. Germany has had very many great entomologists. Their writings have been consulted by the entomologists of all other countries. Ger- many’s standing in most branches of scientific endeavor was fully sustained by her entomologists, but, aside from this one branch ot forest entomology, economic entomology received little attention until comparatively recently. The necessity for work of this kind in cen- tral Europe was not obvious. In the summer of 1893 or 1894, the chief of the Agricultural Section of the Ministry of Agriculture of Prussia, in conversation with the writer, argued that Germany did not need to employ general economic entomologists and that its experi- ment stations seldom received applications for advice on entomologi- cal topics. When an especial insect like the Phylloxera sprang into prominence, the work could be handled by special commissions. There were, however, very many papers and several books pub- iished in the German-speaking countries prior even to 1862 (the date of the publication of Hagen’s “ Bibliotheca Entomologica ”). Among WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 261 the books, there was, for example, a volume by P. F. Bouché on the “Natural History of Useful and Injurious Garden Insects,” which was published at Berlin in 1833. This was a volume of 216 pages with a number of steel-engraved plates. It was a good book, but was not comprehensive enough for farmers, and it also included forest insects although these are not mentioned in the title. In the same year (1833) another book was published that deserves mention. It is entitled (translated) “ The Lives and Development of Some Insects Injurious to Agriculture,” by Ferd. Jos. Schmidt. In 1836, J. C. Zenker’s “ Natural History of Injurious Animals ” was published at Leipsic. It was a well planned work, but practically incomprehensible to the non-entomologist. In 1844 appeared a comprehensive work by C. A. Loew bearing the title “ Natural History of All Insects Injurious to Agriculture.” This was a painstaking compilation, but, as Nordlinger says in the intro- duction to his book published 11 years later, it could ‘‘ not be recom- mended to farmers, inasmuch as the entire subject has been treated by the author without criticism of the many remedies cited for insect control. For this reason, he who would care to take the author’s advice will waste much energy and money.” A later book deserves rather careful consideration. It is (trans- lated) “The Small Enemies of Agriculture,” etc., and is a volume of 636 octavo pages, published in Stuttgart in 1855. Its author was Hermann Nordlinger, born in 1818. This volume seems to be rare nowadays, and, although I have been trying for a number of years to find a copy to purchase, I know of but one example in this country and that is in the Hagen Library of the Museum of Comparative Zoology in Cambridge, Massachusetts. It is a very well printed book, not apparently well known to American or English students, through the fact that it has never been translated into English as was Kollar’s earlier book. It has a very distinct historical value through its analy- sis of the earlier literature, and is an easy book to use since it has a good list of the literature consulted, an admirable table of contents, very full indices, and tables classifying and referring to the species in accordance with the classes of damage. The method of treatment is on the lines of zoological classification, some preliminary pages being given to mollusks, true worms, Acarids, and Myriapods. The treatment of the insects occupies the bulk of the book (from page 31 to page 597, inclusive). A long list of insects is considered. and very many species are illustrated by fairly good woodcuts. Apparently it is a full and competent consideration of practically all the injurious insects of Central Europe, with very up-to-date ‘ 262 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VoL. 84 information for that time. Full life histories are given for most of the important species. An extremely useful German work, entitled (translated) ‘‘ The Plant Enemies of the Class Insecta,” is a large, 848-page book bear- ing the date 1872, the author of which was J. H. Kaltenbach. The author was born in 1807 and died in 1876. He was a teacher at Aachen, who had made a reputation for himself by his monographic work on plant-lice. The work under present consideration was published originally under another title as a series of papers in the Proceedings of the Natural History Society of Rhineland Prussia, beginning with the year 1856. These were finally brought together in admirable book form and published by Julius Hoffmann of Stuttgart. Although the title page bears the date 1872, the introduction is dated 1873. I did not buy this book until 1888, but since then it has been constantly on my desk and consulted very frequently. It contains no illustrations of insects, but the whole work is grouped under the classification of the plants, under the name of each plant being given the names of its insect enemies, long paragraphs being devoted to the most impor- tant of these. The plants themselves are illustrated by good line wood- cuts, and there are full indices of the Latin and German plant names and of the Latin insect names, the latter being arranged according to their classification, the genera under each large group being arranged alphabetically. The usefulness of such a book to the economic entomologist is at once evident, since, although no remedies are given, he can see at once any important European insect with the plant upon which it feeds, can gain a sound idea of its life history, and through its use we in America have been able to gain easy first-hand information as to the injurious insects we are likely to meet with in plant impor- tations of any kind. In 1879 and 1880 there appeared a work in Germany which, tak- ing everything into consideration, was the best thing that had been published concerning applied entomology down to that time. It was not really a book on applied entomology in the modern sense, but perhaps in the care and thoroughness of the basic treatment of the insects it was a model for present-day writers. The author, Dr. E. L. Taschenberg, was born in 1818 and died at the beginning of 1898. He was at first a botanist, and his early papers were upon botanical subjects. In 1856, however, he was appointed Director of the Zoological Museum in Halle, and began to write about insects. He soon became a very well informed entomologist. Appar- WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 263 ently he did little original research, and his works for the most part were compilations, but they were very useful compilations. In 1871 he published a book entitled “‘ Entomology for Gardeners and Garden Friends,” in 1874 one on “ Forest Entomology,” and in 1879-80 his big work, the title of which we may translate as “ Practical Ento- mology.” It appeared in five volumes, well printed and well illus- trated with 326 well drawn and well engraved woodcuts. The whole work included 1410 pages. I. believe that there was no English trans- lation of this valuable work. It is a pity, since such a translation would have been very useful to the people in the British Isles, and, since many of the insects considered have been carried by commerce to many other parts of the world (as we shall show in our section on Kollar’s work), it would have helped very many people. As it was very largely a compilation and not the result of original research, it does not seem to have been considered especially by the German sci- entific men, but nevertheless it was good and sound and full. Contrary to a frequent method of considering injurious insects by crop classification, the matter is arranged according to the classifica- tion of the insects, just as is done in Dr. H. T. Fernald’s book on “Applied Entomology.” Looking through the pages, one finds every- where data brought together in such a way that, had it been written in English, it would be frequently quoted today in publications written in that language. It considers not only German insects, but those species which the author thought would be found in Germany in the then near future. From the view-point of remedies, it is no stronger than any one of the European books of that period or earlier, but a distinct effort was made wherever it was possible to show, in the concluding para- graph of the consideration of each species, after a side-heading ‘““Gegenmittel,” such measures as might be adopted. There is little doubt that had this great work been linguistically available to the American workers of the eighties it would have been a very great help to them, and in fact would be so today. On the death of Doctor Taschenberg, the great English journal Nature had this to say about this work: In the absence of any satisfactory general textbook on the subject published in this country, this work is indispensable to any serious study of injurious insects in Great Britain as well as in Germany. Doctor Taschenberg published but one more paper in the 18 years following the publication of this magnum opus. This was one on Hymenoptera, which appeared in 1891. 264 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 In 1890 there was published (apparently simultaneously in Ber- lin and Vienna) a very good little book entitled (translated) “ In- sects Injurious in Agricultural Fields and Kitchen Gardens, Their Life Histories and Remedies.” The author’s name as published was Gustav Henschel. The book covers about 230 pages, and its titles are arranged alphabetically. It seems to be somewhat of the nature of Kaltenbach’s “ Pflanzenfeinde.” Remedial suggestions, however, are not very abundant or very complicated ; but it is a good, practical, little work. In 1895, in Berlin, there appeared a book entitled (translated ) “The Injurious Forest and Orchard Insects, Their Life Histories and Remedies, a Practical Handbook for Foresters and Gardeners.” The author’s name given is G. A. O. Henschel, but he was the same man whose name is given in the preceding paragraph. The publica- tion of this book was a rather notable incident in entomological prog- ress. It contains more than 750 pages, is well illustrated and accom- panied by synoptic tables. It contains a great mass of useful infor- mation. I have given the date as 1895, but I note on the title page that this is the third, corrected edition. An interesting little German work was published at Frankfort in 1899, on “ Garden Insects.” It is by Heinrich Schilling, and is a very good little handbook for persons interested in gardens. In an important address on “ The Development of Applied Ento- mology in Germany,” delivered before the Third International Con- gress of Entomology at Zurich in July, 1925, Dr. K. Escherich dealt with the international character of the study and spoke with enthusi- asm of the stimulus given to forest entomology by Ratzeburg and also of Taschenberg’s work and that of Reh. He showed that, aside from forest entomology, the other branches of applied entomology were for many years largely neglected, and this statement applied particu- larly to agricultural entomology. It is true that there were a number of agricultural experiment stations and similar institutions, but the object of these stations was mainly to investigate plant biology and pathology and questions of plant breeding and seed control. When damage caused by insects became alarming botanists were consulted, and entomological problems were confided to botanists employed in such research institutions. He spoke well of the work of these men, but said that it was all preliminary, since work of this kind requires a broad zoological training and a knowledge of insects. 1 well remember on my first visit to Hamburg in 1902 that I found Dr. Ludwig Reh working under the recently passed decree prohibiting the entrance of American fruit on account of the danger from the WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY HOWARD 265 San Jose scale. I had a long talk with Doctor Reh at that time and found that he was chafing under existing conditions, since the director of the work was a botanist and he could see no reason why an entomologist working upon an entomological problem should be controlled by a botanist who had no just idea of entomology. Doctor Reh did not confine his opinions to this private conversation, but made them generally known in Germany, and there began to arise a general feeling that Germany was in a way neglecting an important subject. This feeling grew, and Doctor Escherich, on his return from his American journey in 1910, published a book on his observations. In his Zurich address he said (translated), The effect of this booklet surprised me more than anything. Enthusiastic comments came in from all sides. I realized that the time was right for the development of applied entomology which for a long time had been earnestly pushed by Doctor Reh and others but in vain. The ice was broken, and the development proceeded in an accelerated tempo. The call for the formation of a “German Society for Applied Entomology” was well answered, and in the fall of 1913 the first meeting was held in Wiirzberg and was attended by a large number of scientific men, practical farmers, and representatives of the different State governments. At this time a journal was started, entitled Zeitschrift fiir ange- wandte Entomologie, and found abundant material for publication. It thus seems that there was, during the first ten years of the present century, a growing feeling among certain entomologists and perhaps others in Germany that not enough attention in that country was being turned towards applied entomology. Very likely the work that was being done in this country, in some of the English colonies, in Italy, Russia, and France, helped to a considerable extent in pro- moting this feeling. Economic entomology apparently was not taught in the educational institutions, and there were no official entomologists. As we have seen, the books that had been published were written by men who had no official standing with the general government. The situation, therefore, needed only the incentive of the publi- cation of Escherich’s extremely enthusiastic book, “ Die angewandte Entomologie in den Vereinigten Staaten,” and his forceful person- ality to bring about the very general appreciation of the value of such work and to start the movement indicated in his Zurich address. In this address Escherich spoke of the sympathy with which this book was received and the congratulatory letters that he received. But there were nevertheless somewhat critical comments. Dr. Walther Horn, for example, while praising the book, came to the defense of German entomology, showing that Escherich had really 18 266 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS voL. 84 criticised German entomology by comparison when he should have specifically criticised only German applied entomology. Undoubtedly this criticism was justified, even though Escherich’s fault consisted only in the accidental omission of a single word. In later publications Doctor Horn has defended German entomology, but as a matter of fact it needs no defense. There have been great writers in Germany, and great workers, and the world is indebted to them for their en- lightened labors in matters of taxonomy and biology and in many other directions, and, as we have just shown, a number of important works on economic entomology have been published in that country. Another somewhat critical statement was published by M. V. Eme- lianov, a well known Russian entomologist, who visited the United States a year after Escherich’s journey. He referred particularly to Escherich’s apparent failure to realize the importance of the work of the State Experiment Stations. His words are (translated) : Escherich allotted only one page of his book to the work of the State Experi- ment Stations, which does not at all correspond to their actual significance. In the first place, there are about 60 such stations, and in many of them the quality of the work done is not in the least lower than in the Washington Bureau. In general, their work and merits are no less than those of the central organization. ’ Emelianov is perfectly right in this, and Escherich would be the first to acknowledge it. The present writer readily assumes the blame in this matter. Escherich’s stay in the United States was short. He came at the writer’s invitation (although at the expense of Andrew Carnegie) and the writer accompanied him personally across the coun- try to California and back again. The time (three months) was too short to gain more than a good working knowledge of the operations of the Federal Bureau. Escherich was told of the work of the stations, but visited only two of importance—those at Cornell Uni- versity and at the University of Illinois. I am sorry now that we did not visit more of them. Nevertheless, Escherich’s book was sound and most suggestive. It was frank and honest. He was keenly appreciative of all that I showed him, but he also criticised certain American acts and con- ditions. He was a perfect traveling companion, a man of the highest intelligence and of the broadest interests, and at the same time of the most perfect sympathy—a rare combination. It was his influence and that of Reh that started effectively the remarkable interest in applied entomology that Germany shows today. Almost simultaneously with the founding of the German Society of Economic Entomologists in 1913, appeared an excellent large volume on the animal enemies of: plants by Dr. Ludwig Reh. This WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 267 was the third volume of the third edition of Dr. Paul Sorauer’s “ Handbook of Plant Diseases.” The first edition of Doctor Sorauer’s work was published in one volume in 1874 and was concerned only with plant diseases, although one of the gall-mites is mentioned. The second edition, published in 1886, contained two volumes, and at the close of the second volume some consideration was given to plant galls, some of them, of course, caused by insects. The third edition comprised three volumes, the first two devoted to diseases, and the third (published in 1913) was on economic zoology. It is a very good and very comprehensive work. Doctor Reh, in a most readable intro- duction, explains the difficulties of his task and has some very signifi- cant things to say on the subject of nomenclature. He states that since the time of Taschenberg zoological phytopathology had been almost entirely in the hands of the botanists and that therefore it is not to be wondered at that the same name had been given by them to insects of different families and even of different orders. This produced what he calls such a Tohuzvabohu’ that even the specialist had great difficulty in finding out what was what. The volume, which covers 774 pages, royal octavo, is admirably done and well illustrated with more than 300 text figures. Doctor Reh’s command of the literature is surprising, and references are given to original sources in extensive footnotes on almost every page. He seems to have known the publications of other nations quite as well as his own. A good chapter on the subject of remedies, by Dr. Martin Schwartz, covers the last 22 pages of text. Doctor Schwartz seems to have been equally well informed regarding the work in America and elsewhere. The report of the Chief Plant Protection Station in Baden for this same year (1913) contained a great deal of matter concerning injurious insects—sufficient, in fact, to warrant a very good two-page review in the Review of Applied Entomology. The report is by C. v. Wahl and K. Miller. This report is so full and so careful that it is quite possible that its publication in this form was influenced in some degree by the movement started by Doctor Escherich. The next year came the World War, and, as Escherich pointed out in his Zurich address, every one soon became convinced of the neces- sity of an intensive and scientific campaign against insect pests. Body- lice were brought in by the Russian prisoners ; numerous insect pests infested stored food products to an alarming degree; the crops were damaged sometimes to the extent of 50 per cent, and all this just at a time when every grain of corn and every apple was of great value. *T rather like this Hebrew word, although it really means chaos. 268 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS vot. 84 Doctor Hase was sent to the eastern front to study the lice; others were sent to the Southeast to study the malarial mosquito, and a cam- paign was organized for the control of grasshoppers in Asia Minor. At the close of the war the effect of this renewed interest was evident. The Biologische Reichsinstitut was reorganized under Dr. O. Appel, and. entomology was well represented. At the time of Escherich’s Zurich address there were 20 entomologists connected with that institution, some of whom were at work in field stations. In 1925, agricultural entomology, which hardly existed 20 years earlier, had reached a standing in Germany practically the same as forest entomology, although there were fewer teachers in the agri- cultural high schools. The laws of Germany were modified so that arsenical compounds were permitted as insecticides, and the dusting of forest areas with airplanes began. Moreover, the fumigation of mills, storehouses, ships, and dwelling houses with poisonous gases was permitted by law. So the chemical industry profited by a new insecticidal development. About the same time that Doctor Escherich gave this address, volume 4 of the fourth edition of Sorauer’s “ Handbook of Plant Diseases ” appeared (1925) ; and there is to appear a fifth volume to complete the fourth edition. The fourth volume is devoted almost entirely to insects, as will also be the fifth volume. Doctor Reh was again the editor, but no less than five younger economic entomologists were his collaborators, namely Dr. H. Blunck, Dr. K. Friederichs, Dr. F. Stellwag, Dr. S. Wilke, and Dr. F. Zacher. In his introduction Doctor Reh refers to the fact that during the war German workers had no access to the publications of foreign countries, and that it would have been very difficult for him to bring his revision up to date had it not been for the invaluable Review of Applied Entomology published by the Imperial Bureau of Ento- mology of Great Britain. A set of this publication, including all the numbers published during the war, enabled him to see what had been done; and the result is that this 1925 volume seems entirely compe- tent. It contains many new figures and much sound information. A short paper entitled “ Reminiscences’ had been published by Ludwig Reh (Anzeiger ftir Schadlingskunde, vol. 3, 1927, no. 4, pp. 37-41). This very frank and outspoken paper throws much light on the position held by entomologists and economic entomology in the eyes of even the scientific public in Germany at the end of the last century. Although naturally interested in insects, Reh was so influ- enced by the opinions of scientific men that he avoided their study until in 1895 he went to Brazil where he was struck by the enormous WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 269 numbers of insects and by their economic importance to man. Then he went to Switzerland, where he associated with certain famous entomologists and where he saw in the Concilium Bibliographicum at Zurich some of the bulletins of the Division of Entomology of the United States Department of Agriculture. This experience opened up the field of applied entomology to him. He had never heard of it before, and in 1897 he published his first paper, entitled (translated) “Troublesome Guests of the Insect World.” He was appointed in the spring of 1898 as Zoologist at the newly established Station for Plant Protection in Hamburg, and his duty was to examine plants and plant products coming from the United States, to prevent the introduction of the San Jose scale. He had many difficulties there. The organization was dominated by a botanist, Doctor Brick, and he was not allowed to sign his own manuscripts. During the early part of the present century Reh constantly labored to secure a recognition of applied entomology in Germany, and from his work it is probable that many minds were prepared for the movement started by Esche- rich on his return from the United States in 1910 which resulted in the founding of the German Society for Applied Entomology and the many important publications and activities that have come about. There is no doubt of the very high quality of the work in economic entomology which is now being done in Germany, nor of the fact that they are rapidly publishing valuable results. Important new books are constantly appearing, and will continue to do so. An excellent one was published in 1927, on the subject of the insect enemies of stored products. It is by Dr. Friederich Zacher, of Berlin. It covers 305 pages, with 123 text figures and 8 very good colored plates. It is the largest and latest general work on this subject, and seems to be thoroughly up to date. Doctor Zacher began his work in this direction in 1917, and has evidently studied it most carefully and intelligently. The book contains many new pictures illustrating damage. Prior to the World War the Germans were doing some good ento- mological work in German East Africa and in other German colonies that no longer exist. The work by H. Morstatt was especially notable ; while F. Zacher, writing in Berlin, published accounts of colonial pests. The work by K. Friederichs on the coconut beetle in German Samoa should be mentioned in this connection; and F. Zacher published a general review of African cotton insects. Fortunately, just as this work is closing there has appeared a very fine two-volume work by Dr. Karl Friederichs entitled ‘ Die Grund- fragen und Gesetzmiassigkeiten der land- und forstwirtschaftlichen Zoologie insbesondere der Entomologie.’”’ The two volumes cover 270 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 nearly goo pages, and are fully illustrated. Doctor Friederichs has shown himself a keen student and an admirable reasoner, While the work includes all of economic zoology, the greater part is devoted to entomology. It discusses the broadest questions in the broadest way, and is a mine of information. In Volume 2 the author goes into historical matters to some extent, and I have learned from the book more than I realized of the situation in Germany. Under the Biolo- gische Reichsanstalt at Dahlem, a Berlin suburb, the Service for Plant Protection includes everything indicated by the name, and in- jurious insects are cared for. Doctor Friederichs shows that a zoolo- gist is chief of the economic division and that he is also in charge of the laboratory of general plant protection. Under him are 32 scientific men, of whom 15 are zoologists. Entomologists are trained at the University at Rostock, and the only professorship of phytopa- thology is at Bonn. The Plant Protection Institute at Berlin-Dahlem maintains 15 laboratories for applied biology, and these constitute the economic division. Of these 15 laboratories, one is for forest zoology, one for the investigation and control of the nun moth, one for the investigation of stored product insects, and one for bee investigations. There is a distinct division of the Institute dealing with insect prob- lems all over Germany, and this division maintains a laboratory for Phylloxera control, one for grape insects, and one for fruit insect investigations. Of the branches of different sorts, there is one in Stade for the investigation of orchard insects, another in Rosenthal near Breslau for the control of the sugar beet maggot, and one in Rastatt for the investigation of corn borer. There are over the coun- try 28 offices giving advice and information as to agricultural prob- lems and also reporting to the central office on the occurrence of out- breaks of insects. I cannot praise Dr. Friederichs’ potundes too highly: they are admirable. He has introduced paragraphs on von Frisch, J. G. Schaf- fer, G. L. Hartig and a few others which I might well have used 1 in this brief sketch of economic entomology in Germany. AUSTRIA Just as in Germany, Austria has paid more attention to insects affecting forests than to those affecting agricultural crops. However, one of the best general books (possibly the best) published in Europe during the first half of the nineteenth century was written by Vincent Kollar, born in Prussian Silesia, who, at the age of 20, joined the Museum of Natural History in Vienna, where he spent the rest of his active life. He was born in 1797 and died in 1860. In the Museum WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—-HOWARD 271 he rose fom the lowest position to the highest. He was a good alli- around entomologist, and published many papers upon different aspects of entomological science. He seems to have been especially interested in life-history work, and in fact one of his earliest papers was on the life history of the common domestic mosquito. In the 1830’s the Royal Agricultural Society of Vienna recommended to the Government the preparation and publication of a popular natural history of insects injurious to vegetation. The Emperor authorized the undertaking and commanded its speedy execution. The work fell largely to Kollar and to Joseph Schmidberger, and the volume was published under Kollar’s name in 1837. Fortunately, for English-speaking entomologists, farmers, and fruit-growers, the work was soon translated into English by Jane and Mary Loudon and was published in London in 1840. The manuscript was carefully read by Prof. J. O. Westwood, who inserted foot- notes, sometimes very long, throughout the book, often giving addi- tional information on habits and remedies and referring to articles published in English in the Gardeners Magazine, Gardeners Chroni- cle and elsewhere. The work was carefully written, well printed, cov- ered about 400 pages, carried some good illustrations which I believe were made especially for the English edition, probably by Curtis since what are evidently prints from the same blocks occur in many in- stances in Curtis’ published writings. Rather more than 120 species of injurious insects are treated, often very fully, with full accounts of the life histories of many of them. Schmidberger seems to have written nearly all of the matter in the book relating to insects injuri- ous to fruit culture, for which he was evidently well fitted since he had been writing on these subjects in short articles for a number of years, His portion of the book is very full and apparently authori- tative. All through the book one looks in vain for economical and practi- cal suggestions as to control. Hand collecting at certain times is rec- ommended for many species. It is interesting to study the list of what may be assumed to have been the most important injurious insects of Austria in the early 1830's. As above stated, in the neighborhood of 120 species are con- sidered in this book. In glancing over the list I recognized at once 35 species that have been introduced accidentally into the United States and have become well known pests. I then submitted the list to a number of specialists in the different orders of insects, who pointed out to me 14 additional species that also occur in the United States and that undoubtedly have been introduced either from Europe or 272 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 from some other part of the world from which they also came to Europe but, presumably at an earlier date. As is quite to be expected, household insects, greenhouse insects, and species affecting domestic animals seem to have become at least partially cosmopolitan at an early date. Of the rest, those insects that attack fruit trees and vege- tables are the most numerous among those that have found their way to the United States ; and of these, the Lepidoptera seem to have been more numerous than the beetles. Of the forest insects, there seem to be very few that have established themselves over here. These are notably the gipsy moth, the brown-tail moth, the pine-tip moth, the satin moth and the leopard moth. This is a rather inter- esting and forcible indication of what happened to this country before our plant-quarantine law passed Congress in 1912. Of course it is quite possible that there are additional species men- tioned by Kollar that may exist in this country and that for some reason or other have not been noticed. For example, the apple weevil of Europe is included in the great Leng catalogue of the Coleoptera of North America and is doubtfully recorded from Ohio. Again, the fruit insect called by Kollar “ the oblong weevil ” has been found in New York State but there is no indication that the species has as yet become established there. Kollar, being a museum man, seems to have had little practical experience with economic insects beyond working out possibly the life histories of some of them. The fullest individual accounts of insects in the book are written by Canon Schmidberger. None of the modern methods are recommended. No sprays were used in those days. Again and again the statement is made that there is no remedy except hand-collecting, but, as life histories are well worked out, the times when such hand-collecting can be done to best advantage are pointed out. Trapping moths to light is mentioned but is not recommended, and it is pointed out that it is males that are most attracted and that, in some cases at least, the gravid females are too heavily laden with eggs to fly readily to light. For underground insects, frequent breaking up of soil to expose such insects to the birds. An infusion of wormwood, also used with road-dust, is recom- mended for the Halticas. Traps, such as manure-filled holes for mole-crickets and ditches for young grasshoppers, are mentioned. Boiling water as an application for certain insects is also mentioned. As deterrents, sulphurated oil and oil of turpentine. WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 273 Lime on the soil. Lye. Tobacco smoke for aphids. Mention is made of trap crops, by the recommendation of an occasional parsnip plant in a carrot bed for the carrot moth, the statement being made that the parsnip plant will be preferred by the moth for oviposition. Powdered charcoal is recommended for the onion maggot. Loosely rolled-up pieces of old cloth or blotting paper in the forks of the trees will attract caterpillars for shelter, and, thus collected, they are easily destroyed. Collecting certain beetles by jarring the trees, when they will fall on spread sheets. Hand-destruction of the wintering nests of the brown-tail moth and the egg-masses of the gipsy moth. Hand-collecting of the eggs of the satin moth. With bark-beetles, such as Tomicus, the felling and barking of infested trees is recommended; also felling the first-bored stems without delay and burning them into charcoal, or conveying them out of the forest as soon as possible, or at least taking off the bark which should be carefully burned. : Austria has never had, so far as I know, a distinct organization for the study of economic entomology other than forest entomology, but, in addition to the Kollar book, a number of interesting papers have been published. Georg Ritter von Frauenfeld, writing from 1847 to 1861 and again from 1864 to 1869, published several papers of an economic bearing. Most of them were short and were published in the Proceedings of the Vienna Botanical-Zoological Society. Another Viennese writer was Gustav Adolf Kunstler. His eco- nomic papers were dated 1864 and 1871 and were published in the same Proceedings as von Frauenfeld’s. Especial mention should be made of the very wonderful plates of insects injurious and beneficial in the forest, field, and garden, done by H. M. Schmidt-Goebel, published in Vienna in 1896. These plates (colored and wonderfully well done) illustrated not only the different stages of many injurious insects but also of their natural enemies. I have seen 14 of these plates, each containing 30 or more figures. The plates measure 39 x 46 cm. Just as in Germany, forest entomology has always been well cared for in Austria. At the Royal Institute for Forest Investigations at Mariabrunn (near Vienna) research was carried on for very many years on the biology of forest insects, and to this Institute were referred questions relating to economic entomology in general. An 274 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 excellent worker at this Institute was Dr. Fritz A. Wachtl. The pro- ceedings of an important congress of silviculture in Vienna in 1892 were largely taken up with discussions and reports concerning the nun moth and its very great devastations in the coniferous forests of Austria. After the World War a federal Institute for Plant Protection was established in Vienna and has been rather active. B. Wahl has pub- lished annual reports on the work of the Institute in regard to insects ; and other writers on this subject in Vienna have been F. Zweigelt, K. Meistinger, and L. Fulmek. M. Seitner has also published on for- est insects. In Dr. Karl Friederichs’ just published book the following facts are mentioned regarding Austria. There is a professorship of Forest Protection, dealing especially with forest zoology at the High School for Soil Cultivation in Vienna. Scientific institutions relating to ag- riculture and plant protection are the Bundesanstalt for Plant Pro- tection at Vienna, the Forest Bundesversuchsanstalt at Mariabrunn near Vienna, and the Versuchsanstalt for Vine, Fruit, and Gardens in Klosterneuburg near Vienna. There is also a corporation, “Aus- trian Plant Protecting Association,’ which stands half way between a departmental and commercial institution, which also gives advice and information as to agricultural problems, but appears to be partial to certain products in which it is commercially interested. HUNGARY Following the extraordinary spread of the grapevine Phylloxera in Europe in the latter half of the last century, there was founded in 1881 at Budapest a Phylloxera Experiment Station which was organ- ized by Dr. Geza Horvath of the Hungarian National Museum, already well known for his admirable work in the fields of economic and taxonomic entomology. As the Phylloxera question, however, became more and more eluci- dated, and as the means of defense against this scourge became reduced to a practical basis, the work of the station became directed more and more toward other noxious insects. As the change in its functions became quite definite, its title also changed, by vote of the Legislative Chamber and the sanction of the King, to The State Entomological Station. It was placed under the Ministry of Agri- culture, and offices were established in the palace of the Minister of Agriculture at Pesth. In 1894 the personnel of the station was com- posed of the Director, two assistants and a messenger, and was supported by an annual appropriation of 8,000 florins. A special WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 275 corps of reporters was organized, who sent in regular reports on the occurrence of destructive insects in their respective regions. The reporters were farmers and forestry agents, and they served gra- tuitously. In case of serious damage one of the employees of the station was sent into the field for study and experiment. A general report was published every year in the comprehensive Annual Report of the Ministry of Agriculture addressed to the Chamber of Deputies. Special reports were also published, which were gratuitously distrib- uted to the public. Horvath remained in charge of the station until 1896, when he went back to the National Museum where he served as Director of the Zoological Department until his retirement; con- tinuing, however, entomological work of great value but relating chiefly to the insects of the order Hemiptera. He is still living and active though long past his 80th year ; and in 1927 was the President of the Tenth International Zoological Congress. This indicates his high rank among zoologists in general, including of course the workers in entomology. In 1890 Josef Jablonowski was taken on by Horvath as a temporary assistant in the Entomological Station, where Karl Sajo had already been working with Horvath for two years. During the next two years they investigated the Moroccan locust (which they fought largely by the Cyprian barrier method), the nun moth, the Hessian fly, the frit-fly, the grain saw-fly, the grain aphis, clover weevils, and the sugar-beet beetle. Sajo resigned in 1894, and in 1896 Horvath was transferred to the National Museum, Jablonowski remaining as acting director with one assistant. A little later, he was sent to western Europe for study. On this journey he visited Italy, France, Holland, Belgium, Germany, and Switzerland. While on this journey he received his appointment as chief of the station, and retained the position until the present year (1928) when he was retired for age. During the years of his incumbency of the office, Jablonowski not only did admirable work but grew rapidly in the eyes of the scientific men of the world and was an important factor in the rather remark- able change that has occurred in Europe as well as elsewhere in the esteem in which economic workers in entomology were and are held. I well remember that when, on my first visit to the Hungarian National Museum in 1902, I asked Mocsary and Kertész where I could find Jablonowski, the reply was ‘‘ Why do you wish to see Jablonowski? He is not a scientific man; he is an agricultural ento- mologist—a kind of farmer.’’ What a change since then! Not only is the economic entomologist today recognized among the men of 276 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 science, but he is responsible for many important discoveries and for a strengthening of the esteem in which all scientific men are held in the eyes of the general public. He is responsible for larger funds to the museums and for governmental appropriations for the support of much scientific work. In this remarkable change Jablonowski has been an important factor, and I was not at all surprised to note the high esteem in which he was held at the Third International Congress of Entomology in Zurich in 1925 and at the Tenth International Zoological Congress at Budapest in 1927. As is obvious from this, his administration of his office in Pesth was very successful. He not only speedily established the confidence of the agricultural public of Hungary in the value of his work, but made his name known throughout the Empire and in fact throughout Europe. His early work on the animal pests of sugar beets resulted in a great increase in the growing of this crop and in the number of sugar factories owing to the fact that he discovered how to control a beetle known as Cleonus punctiventris, a species that occurs only in Hungary and southern Russia. He also published two large treatises entitled “The Injurious Animals of Fruit-Trees and Grapes” and “ The Protection of the Fruit Orchard.” Later he published another work on ‘“ The Animal Pests of the Hop.” As to the Hessian fly, he early advised the late planting of wheat in those parts of Hungary where this insect had become a pest ; and his investigations of Zabrus gibbus, the larvae of which destroy young grain and the adults of which feed upon the grain before it ripens, showed the value of crop rotation. Other successful investi- gations were carried on, and Jablonowski has behind him a record of extremely fine and successful work. To us in Washington he has always been.one of the most helpful of the European workers. In the early part of the century I visited him several times in Budapest, and we grew to be very fast friends. He was the first person to point out to me the overwintering of the larval parasites of the brown-tail moth in the nests of the young larvae ; and owing to this suggestion we were able to import thousands of these winter nests and to establish in this country certain very effective enemies of the brown-tail moth which have undoubtedly aided greatly in the.control of this pest and in the prevention of its spread beyond the region that it inhabits in New England. Then too, when the European corn borer was discovered to have established itself firmly in this country, we appealed to Jablonowski for full information as to this insect in southern Europe. During a desperate time in his country, when the Bolshevists under Bela Kun were in control, he prepared a long and important manuscript that was of WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 277 great service to us during the early years of the investigation. Much later he has welcomed to Budapest and has assisted with advice and in other ways the experts of the United States Bureau of Entomology who have been sent out there on different missions, especially, how- ever, connected with thé study of the ecology of the corn plant and the European corn borer and with the European parasites of the gipsy moth. A short time before the war he translated into Hungarian from the English my book entitled ‘The House Fly, Disease Carrier,” and, although it did not appear until 1917 (we had gone over the subject carefully together at Oxford, England, in 1912), it met with a hearty reception. It appealed to the intelligent class of people and became a popular reader for students in high schools and colleges. Jablonowski wrote me in 1928 that there are still two or three copies available for circulation in many of these schools but they are pretty well worn out by constant use and frequent reference. During the summer of 1928, resting and recuperating in the so- called Black Forest of Hungary, Jablonowski wrote me a long and charming account of his life, which I hope will be published some day. His health had remained almost perfect down to 1927, and then he had all sorts of trouble which he epitomized as follows: After 37 years of service, I became seriously sick. My diabetes became worse and worse, and a serious ear trouble landed me on the operating table. Arterio- sclerosis threatened to become very serious, and I nearly lost my voice on account of a severe throat trouble. What else does a man need to make his life miserable? I had reached my 65th year of age without any serious sickness ; but in my 66th year not less than 19 physicians tried their skill on my body. Thanks to the Lord and to the physicians, I am still alive and able, as you see, to write this long letter to my dear old friend. This account of Hungarian economic entomology is so far a one- man affair, but this is proper, since economic entomology in Hungary for many years has meant Jablonowski almost solely. But of late years excellent work has been done by two younger yet still mature men, namely G. Kadocsa and G. Bako. I imagine that Kadocsa must have succeeded Jablonowski when the latter retired in 1928. The offices and laboratories where the economic work is being done are in the old city of Pesth at a very considerable distance from the national collections in the Hungarian Museum on the other side of the river, in Buda. This is unfortunate, but the laboratories are well equipped, and at the time of my last visit contained large collections of injuri- ous species. There can be no doubt that the present Hungarian Gov- 278 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 ernment appreciates the value of work in economic entomology, and that the investigations of Jablonowski’s successors are being cordially supported. For several years prior to 1928 the United States Bureau supported a parasite laboratory in Budapest under the direction of C. F. W. Muesebeck, and this laboratory was conveniently located at a com- paratively short distance from the headquarters of Government eco- nomic entomology in old Pesth. The headquarters of the ecological investigations of the European corn borer, under K. W. Babcock, were also maintained for a time in Budapest. DENMARK Although Denmark since the time of Fabricius has given the world a number of well known and even famous entomologists, and although for centuries agriculture has been the chief industry of the country, agricultural entomology is comparatively new there. It is not so old, in fact, as in Sweden and in Germany. In spite of the fact that forestry in Denmark is of much less importance than agriculture, forest entomology appeared before agricultural entomology, and the latter did not begin to develop until the last decade of the last century. This rather anomalous fact was due to the early organization of higher instruction in forestry in connection with the Universities of Copenhagen and Kiel. The first Dane to study forest entomology was J. C. Schiddte, who was appointed teacher of zoology at the College of Forestry in 1858 and in 1863 went to the Royal Veterinary and Agricultural College where he served as Docent in general zoology and forest zoology until 1883. His economic publications are few and not very important, and he did not seem to be especially interested in questions of control. Ile was succeeded in the latter position by Frederik Meinert, who retired in 1885. In the meantime Schiddte had been appointed Cura- tor of the Zoological Museum, where he was also succeeded by Meinert. In the latter half of the last century there were severe attacks by insects in the plantations of conifers in different parts of the country, and in 1857 F. C. Eide published a paper on these insects.. Forest insects were further studied by H. Borries, who made excellent stud- ies, especially of the saw-flies ; and in 1898 E. A. Lovendahl wrote an admirable memoir on the Danish bark-beetles. Meinert was succeeded as Docent of Zoology in the Veterinary and Agricultural College in 1885 by J. E. V. Boas, who retired re- WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 279 cently (1927). Boas is probably best known for his studies in the comparative morphology and phylogeny of vertebrates and Crusta- cea, but he made many remarkable investigations in applied zoology. His studies of the cockchafers which were enormously destructive on farm lands, in gardens, and in nurseries, led to the passage of a bill requiring the collection of the adult beetles, that became a law in 1887. In 1887, 7,500,000 Danish pounds of the insects were collected, and the number was steadily reduced year after year until in 1903 only 8,000 pounds were collected. He did not, however, attribute this enormous decrease in number entirely to the destruction of the adults. After a number of important papers on forest insects, he published his “ Danish Forest Zoology” in 1896 which is doubtless one of the best textbooks of the kind in existence. It is admirably illustrated and full of the personal observations of the author. It is notable for its sharp criticism of many unfounded opinions and worthless measures. In addition to his work in forest entomology, Boas lectured before the veterinary students on the parasitology of domestic animals, and he is said to have been largely responsible for the adoption of a sys- tem for the rational control of the warble-fly by the compulsory extraction of the larvae from the backs of cattle all over the country. A government act was promulgated in 1923 establishing this process. It is said that the operation of this act means at least 5,000,000 kroner saved to Denmark each year. Pioneer work in agricultural oriole was done by the botanist, Emil Rostrup, who, while Professor of Phytopathology at the Vet- erinary and Agricultural College, published each year from 1885 to 1905 a survey of diseases and insect pests on farm crops. In the 1890's his daughter-in-law, Mrs. Sofie Rostrup, took up the study of agricultural entomology and in 1907 was made Zoologist to the coop- erative Danish agricultural associations. In 1913 an Institute of Phytopathology was founded under the leadership of K. Ravn, the » successor of E. Rostrup, and Mrs. Rostrup was appointed Zoologist. But it was not until 1921 that this Institute was provided with suit- able laboratories. Mrs. Rostrup remained Chief Zoologist until 1927. During this period she wrote many papers on insects and nematodes, and in 1920 published a book entitled “ Noxious Animals of Our Agriculture.” The fourth edition of this book appeared in 1928, this last edition being done cooperatively by Mrs. Rostrup and Dr. Mathias Thomsen who succeeded Boas as Professor at the Vetert- nary and Agricultural College. Mrs. Rostrup’s work has been very sound, and more than that, it has been broad. In addition to her 280 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS vot. 84 studies on the life histories of injurious insects, she has investigated the effect of the insect on the host plant, the influence of various ex- ternal conditions such as climate and soil, the degree and duration of the attack, the influence of different methods of cultivation on the resistance of the plants, and finally the direct technical control. In 1927 she retired from her official position and was succeeded by Prosper Bovien who is now studying the nematodes of cultivated plants. Dr, Thomsen, in the Veterinary and Agricultural College, and Pro- fessor Damien, in the Institute of Phytopathology, have the future of Economic Entomology in Denmark largely in their hands at pres- ent. If they are allowed to direct and control the character of this work we may expect excellent results. HOLLAND Holland, through its early and extraordinary commerce, came in contact with all the then known faunas and floras of the world, and from the earliest times its navigators brought home all sorts of strange specimens in natural history. It results naturally, therefore, that there were early writers on insects in that country. The famous names of Goedart, Swammerdam, van Leeuwenhoek, and Lyonet are Dutch, as are those of Cramer, Sepp, and very many of the later writers of note. An admirable review of Dutch entomology was given by Dr. J. B. Caporal at the Fourth International Congress of Ento- mology in August, 1928, and has been published in the proceedings of that Congress. It was not, however, until J. Ritzema Bos came on the scene that economic entomology began its development in that country. In 1895 he was drawn from his position as Instructor in Zoology at the Goy- ernment Agricultural School at Wageningen and was made director of a phytopathological laboratory in Amsterdam which had been founded by the horticulturists. At the same time he was made Pro- fessor of Plant Diseases at the University of Amsterdam. In 1899 a Government phytopathological service was established for Holland, largely through Ritzema Bos’ efforts, and he was made its head. In 1906 an Institute for Phytopathology was formed in the Royal Uni- versity for Agriculture, Horticulture, and Forestry at Wageningen, and Ritzema Bos was made its Director. This Institute was replaced by the Agricultural College in 1918. While not distinctively an ento- mologist, but rather an agricultural zoologist, he had charge of the economic work for the State in entomology, and also taught this WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 281 subject. His well known books, “Agricultural Zoology ” and “ Text- book of Zoology,” were republished in Germany and in England. When Ritzema Bos left Amsterdam, Dr. J. C. U. de Meijere became Privatdocent in the science of Arthropods (especially insects and their economic importance). In 1908 he became Extraordinary Professor in Economic Zoology. From this time until 1921 he taught this subject and conducted experimental work in the zoological lab- oratory of the University and in a large garden. At Wageningen, Ritzema Bos was joined by Dr. H. M. Quanjer who took up plant diseases. In 1909 P. van der Goot was appointed an assistant and entered the entomological work, but in the same year went to the Dutch East Indies. While in Amsterdam, however, he wrote an admirable monograph of the Aphididae of Holland which was later published (in 1915). A little later N. van Poeteren and T. A. Schoevers joined the staff, and in 1912 C. A. L. Smits van Burgst was appointed Entomological Adviser to the institution. The greatest change, however, took place in 1919 when the phyto- pathological service was separated from the Agricultural College on account of its growth and became an independent organization di- rectly under the Department of Agriculture. In 1920 Ritzema Bos resigned on account of age. At present the service is divided into phytopathological and entomological branches, Doctor Quanjer being in charge of one and Dr. W. Roepke in charge of the other. Doctor Roepke had spent nearly 12 years in the Dutch East Indies, engaged in work in economic entomology on tropical agriculture. He is as- sisted by Dr. G. F. Betram, a graduate of Leyden, and the laboratory is now working on insects of economic importance both for Holland and for its tropical possessions. My information is derived from Doctor Caporal’s address and from correspondence with Professor de Meijere and Doctor Roepke. The geographic extent of the tropical possessions of the little country Holland is not generally understood. In land surface they almost equal the size of the United States. The problems in economic entomology in these tropical possessions are very serious indeed, and this applies, naturally, not only to agricultural entomology but also to medical entomology. The Dutch investigators who have been sent out to these tropical possessions are well trained men, and they have done very valuable and very serious work in both branches of eco- nomic entomology. I first met Ritzema Bos in 1898, under somewhat peculiar circum- stances. The German Government had recently promulgated its decree barring American fruit from entrance into Germany, on ac- 19 282 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS voL. 84 count of the danger of importing San Jose scale. Other European governments became immediately interested, Holland among them. Before issuing a decree, however, the Netherlands Government sent its leading expert, Ritzema Bos, to the United States to investigate the seriousness of the trouble. He arrived in Washington and, call- ing at the office, learned that I was in California. He was given my address in San Francisco, and immediately started for the Pacific Coast under the impression that a journey in the United States, while longer than a journey in Holland, was still not the serious matter that it proved to be. After a continuous train journey of 6 days (3,000 miles) he arrived at San Francisco late at night, and early the next morning sent his card to me at the old Occidental Hotel, and we took breakfast together. We talked for possibly an hour about the situation. I was very keen on the San Jose scale question at the time, and told him all that he seemed to wish to know. An hour later he took the train back to New York, and from there the vessel to Holland. In 1902 I called on him at his Amsterdam laboratory, and found him to be the extremely courteous, highly placed, well informed man that I had supposed him to be from his reputation and from our brief interview in San Francisco. On later visits to Europe I saw him at work in his laboratories at Wageningen, where he was evidently esteemed as a man of the highest standing and of great importance. In 1907, on my return from south Russia, I attended the meetings of the Seventh International Congress of Agriculture at Vienna, and at the meeting of the Section of Economic Zoology I found Ritzema Bos in the chair. The subject under discussion was the value of birds to agriculture, and the chairman invited me to take part. I explained the important investigations being carried on by the Bio- logical Survey of the Department of Agriculture at Washington, and insisted that such an investigation should be carried on in European countries before decrees should be promulgated for the protection of all birds. In 1921 Ritzema Bos again visited the United States, in the interests of the Dutch bulb growers and in protest against Quaran- tine No. 37 of the Federal Horticultural Board. I told him about the work of the Bureau and introduced him to the workers here. In the Visitors’ Book of the Bureau he is registered as ex-Professor of Entomology and Phytopathology and ex-Chief of the Holland Phy- topathological Service. He had already at that date retired from official work. WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 283 Again in 1923 I saw him at the International Conference of Phyto- pathologists and Economic Entomologists at Wageningen. He took no active part in the proceedings, but on my mentioning his name in my opening address it was greeted with loud applause, and later, when he entered the room, every one arose. In 1925 he had evidently failed in health and was much less vigorous than he appeared to be in 1921. He died at Wageningen, Holland, on the night of April 6, 1928. We were very warm friends, and it is a cherished thought that the last thing written by him was an article about my 7oth birthday which was published the week after his death, in a Netherlands scientific journal edited by Doctor Schoevers. Referring to the International Conference of Phytopathologists and economic entomologists held at Wageningen in 1925, I believe that the quarantine above referred to had something to do with the choice of myself as honorary president of the Conference. However, such a choice had not the slightest influence upon the quarantine atti- tude of the United States Government. Of course, I had no connec- tion with the Federal Horticultural Board, and in fact no one connected with the Board was at the Conference. The meeting itself, however, was of interest and importance. In the first place, it brought together the phytopathologists and the economic entomologists as independent though cooperative groups. This was eminently proper and was the first indication of the proper use of the term “ phyto- pathology ” by’a European organization. In addition to its rather unique scope, the assemblage was notable from the fact that the Central Powers were represented by delegates for the first time since the World War. France was represented by Marchal, Mangin, Foex, and others, Germany by Appel and others, and Belgium by Van Hoove and Mayné. It was a notable conference from many points of view. Its organization was made continuous, and subse- quent international conferences of this precise kind will undoubtedly be held. We visited many points in Holland and were greatly impressed by the remarkable cultures and their intensive and cleanly character. As to the work of the Hollanders in the Dutch East Indies, their work in everything relating to agriculture has been sound and enter- prising and their experimental work, especially in the great botanical station at Buitenzorg, has long been the admiration of specialists. In their extensive sugar cane and tobacco work in Java and Sumatra they soon encountered the question of insect damage and some ad- 284 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS vot. 84 mirable men have been sent out there from time to time to study questions of this kind. The entomological service in Washington was appealed to by these men for assistance of one kind or another at a comparatively early date. My own correspondence with L. Zehntner, who among other things studied the parasites of sugar cane insects, surely began as early as the late 1880’s. The relations of the United States Depart- ment of Agriculture with the Dutch East Indies became closer after David Fairchild went out there for study in 1806. A notable event was the visit of L. P. de Bussy, Zoologist of the Experiment Station at Deli, Sumatra, to the United States in I1g10, in the effort to arrange for the shipment of parasites of Heliothis armigera, a polyphagic species, to the East Indies where its larvae were damaging the tobacco plantations. I went with De Bussy in midsummer across the country to San Francisco and down through the South to Texas where he arranged to have certain parasites studied and shipped to the Orient. De Bussy was and is a charming fellow, well trained as an economic zoologist and after serving his time in the Dutch East Indies he became Director of the Zoological Department of the Colonial Institute at Amsterdam. K. W. Dammer- man and P. van den Goot have been capable workers in economic entomology in Java and Sumatra since De Bussy’s time. Both have visited Washington, the former in 1917 and the latter in 1918. The admirable work in economic entomology in the Dutch East Indies will be treated in more detail in a later section. BELGIUM Belgium is the home of many excellent entomologists and of one of the best entomological societies of Europe. Excellent entomo- logical work has been done in that country for very many years. One of the most noted of the European entomologists, Baron M. E. de Selys-Longchamps (1813-1900) was for many years the world authority on the Odonata. Prof. A. Lameere, the President of the First International Congress of Entomology, is a well known writer on many of the broader topics in entomology and is still living in Brussels. The country is small, the fields are small, and the cultiva- tion is intense. Therefore, the problems in economic entomology are not extremely serious, even as regards forestry. Belgium, however, has large possessions in Africa, where the insect problem at once becomes serious when the cultivation of crops is begun. In 1860 the Institut Agricole de l’Etat was established at Gembloux under the direction of Phocas Lejeune. In 1864 was published the WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 285 first important article on economic entomology in that country. It appeared in the Bulletin de la Federation des Sociétés d’Agriculture and was entitled (translated) ““A Treatise on Horticultural, Agri- cultural, and Forest Entomology and Methodical Treatment of In- jurious and Useful Insects, Comprising Their Description, the History of Their Habits and Mode of Life, and the Means of Destroying Those that Damage Cultivated Plants.” The author was Alfonse Dubois. It is a paper of over 200 pages, and is illustrated by four admirable colored plates. There is little in it of value, however, in the way of remedies. In 1891 was begun at Gembloux the publication of the Journal d’Association des Anciens Eléves de l'Institut, and in 1893 this journal published its first entomological article. It was entitled ‘““Entomologie Forestiere’’ and was signed “ Dubois, Ingenieur agri- cole, Garde Général Adjoint, Eaux et Forets a Bouillon.” And in the same year a brief report on insects by J. Poskin was reviewed. The title of the journal was changed in 1897 to L’Ingénieur agricole, and the volumes for 1897 and 1898 contained two brief articles signed, the one by A. de Wilde and the other by Servais. Later the name of the journal was again changed, this time to Annales de Gembloux, and has continued publication under this title. In 1894 a phytopathological organization was instituted at the State Agricultural Institute of Gembloux, and comprised two branches, one entomological and the other cryptogamic. The head of the ento- mological branch was Prof. J. Poskin, Professor of Zoology and Entomology, Prof. E. Marchal taking charge of the cryptogamic work and holding at the same time the position of Professor of Botany at the Agricultural Institute. In a report presented by Professor Marchal at the Eighth International Congress of Agriculture at Vienna in 1907 I learn that the function of this service was to instruct the farmers concerning plant injury, to identify specimens and to indicate remedies ; also to keep track of the damage and to conduct experimental research. Wherever the ravages were important and general, specialists were sent out to visit the field. Professor Marchal showed that specimens and queries concerning injurious insects had been received in increasing numbers—31 in 1894 and 235 in 1905. In 1904 was published at Brussels, in English, a pamphlet entitled “The Government Agricultural Institute of Gembloux—History, Organization, Instruction, Annexes.” Under the head of Zoology and Entomology, the following paragraph occurs: “‘ The course in zoology taught successively by Mr. Malaise, Professor of Natural Science, and since 1888 by Mr. Warsage, Assistant Lecturer in Zoo- 286 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 techny, became in 1891 independent and was entrusted to Mr. Poskin, Doctor of Natural Science, who was commissioned to give to ento- mology, which was then sadly neglected, its true importance in natural science.” True work in economic entomology, therefore, may be said to date from 1891 when this commission was given to Professor Poskin. Professor Poskin published a series of reports (probably annu- ally—I have not seen them all) that contained many interesting and important short articles. In the Annales de Gembloux for 1907 is published.a very important address delivered by Professor Poskin at the solemn séance of the opening of the academic year, on ento- mology in its applications to agriculture. It was a very competent address showing familiarity with work done in other parts of the world and especially in the United States, urging among other things the use of arsenical sprays. Dwelling upon the importance of the subject he says (translated) “Can one treat as a negligible quantity an almost microscopic creature that in the course of the year will kill 1,500,000 trees?”’ After further detailing many facts, he uses the significant words (translated) “ It would be puerile to exaggerate the importance of this problem, but it must be done to indicate the general ignorance of the people.” In the volume of these Annales are to be found numerous articles on applied entomology. In 1905, for example, was published an account of the frit-fly by Alb. Carlier. Professor Poskin was still writing in 1921. In that year he pub- lished in the Annales an article on silviculture and agriculture. Rather serious damage to forests by insects occurred toward the latter part of the last century, and the Superior Council of Forests of Belgium found itself confronting a condition which demanded serious attention. Prof. G. Severin, then Curator of the Royal Natural History Museum in Brussels, was officially charged by the Govern- ment to study the situation, and for some time he paid much attention to forest insects. It was while he was engaged in this work that I first met him in Brussels in 1902. Severin was and is (he is still living) a very unusual man. His work in the Museum at Brussels has always been of a very high character, and he has concerned himself with the study of several groups of insects. He acted as the scientific executor of De Selys-Longchamps and brought out a beauti- ful edition of his completed writings on the Odonata. The Natural History Museum in which he was Curator is one of the best planned museums of the kind in existence. In no other natural history museum has the same attention been paid to the arrangement of the exhibits WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY——-HOW ARD 287 of animals on a magnificent evolutionary scale. Fortunately, Professor Severin came to the United States in 1907, to attend the International Congress of Zoology, and at that time, on account of his authoritative position regarding forest insects, he was asked to give an expert opinion to the Massachusetts State authorities on the value of the work then being done to introduce from Europe the parasites and other natural enemies of the gipsy moth and the brown-tail moth; and his report, together with those of Dr. Geza Horvath of Budapest, Dr. R. Heymons of Berlin, and others, was of such a character as to squelch the demand that had arisen in certain quarters in Massa- chusetts for the abandonment of the methods then in use and the employment of a California collector of parasites. At the First International Congress of Entomology, held in Brus- sels in 1909, Severin was one of the leaders. And I had the pleasure of journeying with him from Brussels to Oxford in 1912 to attend | the Second Congress. During the World War, when the Germans constantly occupied Brussels, he stayed in the Museum constantly day and night watching lest the collection should come to harm. The last time I saw this fine man was in 1925. He had then retired from the Museum and was lecturing on medical entomology at the School of Tropical Medicine near Brussels. The School of Tropical Medicine, by the way, was established largely for the purpose of teaching about tropical diseases to the young men who were to go out to the Belgian Congo to care for the families of the European administrators and colonists as we!l as the native population. And this statement leads us naturally to the con- sideration of work in economic entomology in the Belgian Congo. I am not quite sure about the beginning of the entomological ser- vice in the Congo, but I note that R. Mayné served there for a num- ber of years (approximately from 1916 to 1921) and published a number of very good reports on the insects of that region. J. Ghes- quiere has also apparently been resident in the Congo for many years, and now holds the title of Government Entomologist. Dr, H. Schou- teden, the well known Belgian entomologist, now I believe connected with the Colonial Museum at Brussels, has written upon several Congo insects, notably the coffee berry beetle (Stephanoderes haim- pei) and the other beetle enemy of the coffee berry, Araecerus fas- ciculatus. Moreover, Mr. E. Hegh, in the Agricultural Bulletin of the Belgian Congo, published in 1920 two installments of a mono- graph on the termites of tropical Africa written with the object of making known the methods of distribution. 288 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS vot. 84 Apparently R. Mayné succeeded Professor Poskin at the station at Gembloux. In the October, 1922, number of the Annales previously referred to he has an article entitled “ Organization of International Measures for Entomological Protection.” In this article he refers to Monsieur Ghesquiere as Entomologist of the Colony of Belgian Congo. In the Annales for December, 1923, Mayné has an article entitled ‘‘ Principal Enemies of Coffee in Belgian Congo,” and in the number for May, 1924, another one on the Colorado potato beetle, suggested by the appearance of this injurious insect in west France. In the October-November number for 1926 he has an illustrated article on Pissodes in Belgium. It is interesting to add that there was published in 1920 a report on the operations of the entomological station from 1913 to 1919, written by Professor Poskin, The title attracted me because it covers the period of the World War and the period of the occupation of a large part of Belgium by the Germans. In the report there is no men- tion of the war, and the only possible reference to the disturbance occurs in the opening sentence concerning the year 1915, in which the statement is made that the activity of the service, completely ruined beginning with August, 1914, began to show signs of life in 1915. Added note.—As this is going through the press, I have received a ten page manuscript from my friend Professor R. Mayné, entitled (translated) “ Economic Entomology in Belgium and the Belgian Congo.” I am very sorry that I did not receive this manuscript at an earlier date and I earnestly hope that my friend Mayné will publish it in Belgium. For the purposes of this book we may add a few statements gained from this article which may supplement what already appears above. Mayné attributes the great impulse to applied entomology to Jules Poskin and G. Severin, which eventually resulted in the royal decree attaching the entomological service to the state Agronomical Station at Gembloux in 1909, and the later decree of I912 reorgan- izing the central agronomic station. J. Poskin was the first director of the entomological station and was followed in 1921-by Raymond Mayné who had been his assistant the previous year. In 1910 occurred a reorganization by M. Leplae, Director General of Agriculture of the Belgian Congo. The positions of entomologist and mycologist were created and Mr. R. Mayné instituted an ento- mological laboratory in 1911 which in 1913 was transferred to the Botanical Garden of Eala, where a mycological laboratory had already been installed by the late Dr. Camille Vermoesen. Mayné’s studies WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 289 began with the enemies of cocoa, coffee, rubber, cotton, and the coco- nut palm. The important collections of insects were classified by Dr. H.-G: Schouteden. In 1916 J. Ghesquiere was sent out as a second entomologist and worked in the province of Katanga. In 1919 Mayné’s health broke down and he returned to Belgium where he assumed the directorship of the state entomological station. The laboratory at Eala was then placed in charge of Ghesquiere who transferred it to Stanleyville and took up as his specialty questions relating to cotton. In 1921 Seydel was made entomologist to the province of Katanga and established an important laboratory at Elizabethville. Ghesquiere left in 1924 and Seydel remained until 1929. In 1929 five entomolo- gists were named for the Congo, one for each province, each one reporting to the provincial station. The provinces are: Bas-Congo, and Kasai, Province Orientale, Province Equatoriale, Katanga, Ruanda-Urundi. At present there are three entomological officials, viz., Seydel for Katanga, M. Bredo (1929) for the equatorial province, and Jean Vrydagh (1930) for the oriental province. This note refers only to persons and stations. Professor Mayné adds in his manuscript a number of interesting facts about the work and also a complete bibliography. This should be published soon. SWEDEN Dr. N. A. Kemner, at present Director of the Entomological Department of the University of Lund, has been kind enough to send me a careful statement concerning applied entomology in Sweden, and it is from this statement that the following paragraphs have been prepared ; many of them are printed here practically in Doctor Kem- ner’s phraseology. Applied entomology is very old in Sweden. Doctor Kemner re- minds me that Linnaeus himself was the first one to publish a com- prehensive synopsis of this subject, in a paper entitled ‘ Noxa Insectorum ” printed at Stockholm in 1752. This was probably the first paper on applied entomology prepared by a thoroughly scien- tific man. It gives a good summary of insect damage and mentions a large number of the most injurious insect pests of the field, garden, and household. In a recent paper entitled “ Linné als Praktischer Entomologe” (pp. 1-104, Stockholm, 1924), Felix Bryk gives the results of his studies of Linnaeus as an applied entomologist, show- ing that the great author published many good observations on noxious insects. Bryk gives extracts. 290 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 A contemporary of Linnaeus, the Rev. Clas Bjerkander (1735- 1795), wrote about 26 papers on noxious insects, mainly on pests of grain, and was the first to describe a number of the most impor- tant enemies of grains. In 1877 he published an important paper on Siphonella pumilonis, and in 1778 a paper on Hadena secalis and H. tritici. In 1779 he published for the first time about wireworms, and in 1790 about thrips. His papers were full of good field obser- vations, and were soon translated into other languages. At this time also there were many other workers who occupied themselves to a certain extent with injurious insects. The physician, A. Beck, and Prof. M. Stromer wrote about Charaeas graminis (1741 and 1742) ; D. Rolander on Hadena secalis (1752) ; and the Professor of Chem. istry in Upsala, T. Bergman (1735-1784) about Cheimatobia bru- mata. This paper, printed in the year 1763, is of importance because it proposes for the first time the method of tarred wrappers on the trunks of the trees. Dr. Kemner thinks that Bergman also can be regarded as the inventor of lime girdles against Cheimatobia. The last decades of the eighteenth and the first of the nineteenth cen- turies were less interesting in Sweden from the standpoint of eco- nomic entomology. But in the year 1837 was published Dahlbom’s excellent work, ‘“ Kort underrattelse om skandinaviska insekters allmannare skada och nytta”’ (Lund, 1837) (= “ Short information about the damage and utility of Scandinavian insects’’). Dahlbom (1806-1859) was lecturer in entomology at the University of Lund, a friend and disciple of the famous dipterologist, Zetterstedt, and himself a well known worker on certain Hymenoptera. His book on the noxious insects is, for that time, a good synopsis of applied entomology, and he must be ranked with the contemporary German authors on the same subject, Bouché (1833).and Ratzeburg (1837). After Dahlbom, A. E. Holmgren was the leader of applied ento- mology in Sweden. He was a specialist on the Ichneumonidae, and was lecturer on natural history at the Institute of Forestry in Stock- holm, teaching practical entomology both there and (during his vaca- tion) at the Agricultural School at Alnarp. He did a great deal to popularize entomology in Sweden, and wrote three handbooks on economic entomology—in 1867, a “ Forest Entomology ” ; in 1873, an “Agricultural Entomology ”; and in 1880, a “ Manual on Household Insects.”’ All these books were influenced by foreign works on the same subjects, but they all contained good original observations made in Sweden. Down to this time economic entomology had no official govern- mental standing in Sweden, and the papers on the subject were all WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 291 written by persons who followed it as a vocation additional to their regular work. The Royal Academy of Agriculture of Sweden had previously recommended the appointment of a Government entomolo- gist, but was not successful until the year 1880, when the Govern- ment appropriated 1,000 kroner as an annual salary for an entomolo- gist to work under the direction of the Academy of Agriculture and whose duties should be to disseminate information on injurious in- sects. The first appointee under this appropriation was Dr. A. E. Holmgren. He worked as State Entomologist until 1887, and died in 1888 at the age of 69. Dr. Holmgren was succeeded in 1887 by Sven Lampa, who was a self-made man, working as curator of entomology in the Museum in Stockholm. Between 1887 and 1897 he did excellent work as Holm- gren’s successor as State Entomologist. He traveled extensively and studied insect outbreaks, especially those of the grain flies, the cock- chafer, the grassworm, the rape-beetle, and so on. The Entomological Society of Sweden, founded in 1879, almost from its beginning began to stress the importance of economic ento- mology, and its efforts were strongly supported by the Royal Acad- emy of Agriculture, by the Economic Society of Ostrogothia, by the Bureau of Agriculture and other agricultural associations of Sweden. They urged the establishment of an entomological experiment sta- tion which should be well outfitted and amply supported. In 1891, under the auspices of the Entomological Society of Stock- holm, Lampa, Aurivillius, Sjostedt, and others, an important jour- nal entitled “‘ Uppsatser i Praktisk Entomologi ” (*‘Articles on Applied Entomology”) was started. In this publication many notices and articles on Swedish economic insects were printed, and here Lampa published his annual reports on injurious insects. An institute for practical entomology was finally organized in 1897. Lampa was appointed Professor and Principal Director, giv- ing up his work in the Museum. He continued his work on applied entomology in the new institution until 1907, when he retired at the age of 70 years. He then lived in Stockholm and later in a com- munity near by, where he died in 1914. Aurivillius says of him (Entomologisk Tidskrift, 1915): “ Lampa was a born friend of nature, with a pronounced practical disposition which became de- veloped still further by his unusual course of life. He had little consideration for theories that were not based upon practice and experience, and he knew how to refute them with characteristic remarks.” Lampa published a large series of articles (Aurivillius enumerates 210), and his work was greatly appreciated by the practical farmers. 292 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 He showed them the practical importance of entomology. In 1907 he was succeeded by A. Tullgren, who has carried on the work of his predecessor in a very satisfactory way and has published a number of sound papers. He has now the title of Professor. In the early part of Lampa’s service under the State Agricultural Experiment Station, Dr. Yngve Sjostedt was his first assistant until 1902, when he became the successor of Professor Aurivillius at the Royal Museum of Natural History at Stockholm. Tullgren became Sjostedt’s successor at the Experiment Station. When Tullgren suc- ceeded Lampa (in 1907) as Director of the Agricultural Experiment Station, Dr. Ivar Tragardh became the assistant. Previous to 1909 he had been teaching entomology at the University of Upsala. In 1915 the system of education in forestry was reorganized, and a Forest Entomological Laboratory was attached to the Forest Ex- periment Station, Doctor Tragardh being made the chief of this laboratory. In 1921 the Entomological Laboratory was made an independent department of the Station; Doctor Tragardh was made a professor and was given an assistant, Doctor Spessivtseff, a well known authority on bark-beetles, formerly an assistant in St. Peters- burg to Cholodkovsky and therefore a Russian refugee. Doctor Tragardh has done extraordinarily good work with forest insects. He is a broad and sound man, and is acknowledged to be one of the world’s leaders in this field. Personally he is well known to a great many entomologists, and has been able to attend the inter- national congresses. During the summer of 1928 he came to the United States and traveled extensively, visiting particularly the points of especial interest in forest entomology. When Tragardh left the Agricultural Experiment Station in 1915, Dr. N. A. Kemner was made first assistant there, and in 1921 ento- mologist. From this year there were also two trained assistants, namely Dr. O. Lundblad and O. Ahlberg. In 1929 Doctor Kemner was made Director of the Entomological Department of the Univer- sity of Lund, and Doctor Lundblad then became entomologist. Under the Agricultural Experiment Station, Professor Tullgren published an account of insect injuries I91I and 1912-1916. The report for 1917-1921 was published over the names of O. Lundblad and A. Tullgren; that for 1922-1926 by O. Lundblad. Besides the workers already mentioned, all of whom have oecupied professional positions in applied entomology and whose many papers have been published in the authorized records, there has always been a number of scientists not professionally engaged in applied ento- mology who occasionally have written good articles on the subject. WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 2903 Among them should be mentioned Doctor Hedlund, Professor at the Agricultural School in Alnarp, who has done research work on Hylemyia coarctata; the famous geneticist, Prof. Dr. H. Nilsson-Ehle, at Sval6v, who has made many observations on economic insects and nematodes in grains ; Dr. Simon Bengtsson, until 1929 Director of the Entomological Department of the University at Lund, who has made a special study of the nun moth in Sweden; the physician, Dr. John Peyron, in Stockholm, who has investigated Cheimatobia brumata: Dr. Eric Mjéberg, who has published a monograph on lice; the Pro- fessor at the Veterinary High School of Stockholm, Dr. Arvid Bergman, who has made extensive studies on the Oestridae of the reindeer, and so on. I have long had a great admiration for Swedish entomology. My early studies of the parasitic Hymenoptera led me to carefully work with C. G. Thomson’s Hymenoptera Scandinaviae, Volumes 4 and 5, in the course of which I picked up a translating knowledge of the Swedish language. In 1897 we were greatly pleased to receive a visit in Washington from Dr. Yngve Sjdstedt, who spent some time studying the organization and work of the entomological service of the United States Department of Agriculture and the collections of the United States National Museum. I have no doubt that it was through Doctor Sjéstedt that in 1898 I was made an honorary mem- ber of the Entomological Society of Stockholm. This was the first honorary membership in a foreign society that had come to me, a notable thing in itself, rendered still more notable by the high char- acter of the Society. Fifteen years later I had the pleasure of meeting Doctor Sjostedt at the Second International Congress of Entomology at Oxford in 1912, and still 13 years later I met him again at the Zurich congress. In the intervening years Doctor Sjostedt had gained a very high place in the scientific world and was highly esteemed both at home and abroad. Even before Doctor Sjdéstedt’s visit, Dr. Filip Trybom visited us in Washington; in fact, as I see from my notes, it was away back in 1886. Doctor Trybom at that time was interested in some fisheries question, but he had been studying the Thysanoptera and was anxious to talk over things with Theodor Pergande here, who was also study- ing thrips. Trybom was here for several days, and when he came in the last time he said to Pergande, ‘‘ I am going to California ; is there anything I can do for you out there?” Pergande replied, with a twinkle in his eye, “ No, unless you get me some of those thrips from the tops of those big California trees.” Trybom was stumped for a 294 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 moment, but replied, “How can I—But then, I have a good rifle along with me!” Doctor Tragardh, as previously mentioned, I met first at the Inter- national Conference of Economic Entomologists and Plant Patholo- gists at Wageningen in 1923, again at Zurich in 1925, and still later in the United States in 1928. These are the only Swedish entomologists I have had the pleasure of knowing personally, but I have followed the work over there with the greatest interest, and had an especial admiration for Dr. Chris- topher Aurivillius who by correspondence helped me in several emergencies, among other things giving me information enabling the settling of the priority question concerning certain economically im- portant genera of parasites established under different names by Thomson and G. Mayr. NORWAY Prof. W. M. Schoyen (1844-1918), having graduated at the Agri- cultural College in Aas, became greatly interested in agricultural ento- mology, abandoned his early intention to study medicine, and took a position in the Zoological Museum in Christiania, where he worked for 10 years. He became favorably known as a scientific worker through his papers on Norwegian Lepidoptera, Hemiptera, Orthop- tera, and Diptera, and he also published an occasional paper upon injurious insects. In 1891 he was appointed by the Government “ Landbrugs-entomolog ” and parliament voted him an annual salary of 1,000 kroner ($270). He corresponded with farmers and horti- culturists, and in 1891 published an annual report, and in the next year issued another one. In 1893 his salary was raised to 1,200 kroner, and in 1894 he was appointed Gavernment Entomologist and was given a salary of 3,000 kroner with traveling expenses. He was instructed to study insects and fungi in their relations to agricul- ture and horticulture as well as to forests. Admirable reports were published by Schoyen annually from 1891 and all bore the same title, “ Beretning om Skadeinsekter og Plantesygdomme.”’ Beginning with 1897, they contained competent illustrations and were obviously very practical and very useful. They were not lengthy, varying between 25 and 50 printed pages. The last one under his authorship was published in 1912. In 1913 he was succeeded by his son, T. H. Schoyen, who continued the work in economic entomology and plant pathology until 1920, when a State Mycologist was established and Schoyen continued as State Entomologist. His reports continued to be issued annually until 1920, and since that time have been issued every two years. WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOW ARD 295 As with nearly all publications, the new processes of illustration have decreased the cost and therefore increased the number of illus- trations, and the reports appear to be full and sound and to contain many important articles. A special report on insects injurious to forests was published each year from 1915 until 1922, and the present plan is to publish a collective report on this subject each fifth year. Since 1904, W. M. Schoyen and T. H. Schoyen have given lectures in economic ento- mology in the Agricultural College at Aas, and since 1924 the younger Schoyen has lectured on plant pathology in the winter Agricultural College in Oslo. Both of the Schoyens have written a number of shorter papers deal- ing with practical entomology, published in various scientific and popular journals, and the father wrote a manual on zoology for the agricultural colleges which has been very generally used. RUSSIA An active entomological society was organized in St. Petersburg in the old days, whose publications date back to 1861. This society is still in existence. Since that date and earlier there have been many good entomologists in Russia, and the collections that accumulated in the great museum in the old St. Petersburg were very large and very fine. There were also large collections in Moscow and at other places. Economic entomology, however, had no official standing until much later. In 1881-83 three volumes on injurious insects by Theodore Kkoppen were published. They were rather sparsely illustrated, but were apparently works of value. They were published entirely in the Russian language, and therefore have not become well known to the rest of the world. I have seen them referred to appreciatively in German publications, and Cholodkovsky spoke well of them. The information about Russian economic entomology which I gave in 1894 in my address, “ The Rise and Present Condition of Official Economic Entomology” (Insect Life, Vol. 7, pp. 55-107), was gathered from correspondence with this same Dr. Nicholas Cholod- kovsky. Down to that time there had been no definite official ento- mologists. Competent scientific men and specialists had been re- quested to prepare publications on injurious insects, and where these individuals desired pecuniary aid to enable them to publish indepen- dent investigations funds were granted by the Government. Kop- pen’s work just mentioned was an instance of this. The Ministry of Public Lands from time to time had sent out com- petent specialists to conduct investigations at different points. These 290 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 investigations were partly at the expense of the general government and partly at the expense of the authorities of certain sections and at the request of the governors of provinces and scientific and agri- cultural societies. These reports were published and distributed to all interested. A very considerable amount of work of this kind had been done before 1894, and many important reports had been pub- lished. The Russian investigators who had been used in this way were notably Lindeman, Porchinsky, Tarochewsky, Metschnikoff, Cholodkovsky, Schewyrow, and Koppen. The Ministry of Public Lands also in very important cases called conferences and established temporary commissions. Three Phyl- loxera commissions and experiment stations were established in this way—one in the Caucasus, another in the Crimea, and a third at Odessa. In addition to these, a corps of so-called “ Correspondents on Entomological Questions’ was formed by the Ministry; and to these men, who were for the most part members of the Russian Ento- mological Society living in different parts of the empire, were referred all corresponding farmers and local agricultural societies who were seeking advice as to the best means of fighting injurious insects. Then too, in 1878, the “ Odessa Entomological Commission ” was founded. A regular entomologist was employed with funds raised by the ad- joining provinces. One of the members of the board of correspondents referred to was Dr. K. Lindeman, whose writings became well known to Ameri- can and English investigators, since many of his papers were pub- lished in the German language. When I first visited Russia, in 1907, I found that a very good organization for official entomology had been established. Stations were founded in different parts of the country, with official ento- mologists, all of whom reported directly to Prof. J. Porchinsky of the Ministry of Agriculture whose headquarters were in St. Peters- burg. During that year I visited three of these stations—one at Kiev, under the charge of Prof. Waldemar Pospelov; one in Bes- sarabia at Kischineff, under the charge of Prof. Isaak Krassilstschik, and one at Simferopol in the Crimea, under the charge of Prof. Sigis- mond Mokrzecki, Among the other stations, there was a notable one at Poltava. In addition, there was at St. Petersburg, under Profes- sor Cholodkovsky, a department relating largely to forest zoology. At that time Cholodkovsky was assisted by A. Ssilantjew and P. Spessiwzew. At Kiev, Pospelov impressed me strongly by his intelligence and efficiency. He readily undertook the task of collecting and studying WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOW ARD 297 the local parasites of the gipsy moth and the brown-tail moth with the help of one of his assistants, and insisted upon the necessity for a careful biological study of each species before attempting to send it to the United States. A small orchard was rented in the suburbs of Kiev, a laborer was engaged, and Pospelov’s assistant was employed, all at the expense of the State of Massachusetts, since on that trip I was traveling for the State. All the Kiev expenses, however, were absurdly small, amounting in fact in American money to only $15 per month. At Simferopol, I was surprised by the intimate knowledge pos- sessed by Mokrzecki of the latest developments of economic ento- mology in America. He knew the writings of the principal eco- nomic entomologists of this country and admired them greatly. The Crimea was (at least the northern half) a great fruit-growing region at that time. Mokrzecki had introduced the latest American spray- ing machinery, and one very large orchard at Bakhtchisarai had the appearance of one of the famous, extremely well cared for orchards in the Genesee Valley of New York. He had, almost single-handed, built up an excellent regional museum at Simferopol and gave advice to fruit-growers and farmers on all entomological questions. After the World War he left Russia, taught for a while at Belgrade, and eventually was appointed to a post in Poland which he still holds with distinction. He is chief of the entomological service of the very efficient school and experiment station at Skierniewice. I may mention incidentally that at the time of this visit to the Crimea there was an admirable Marine Biological Station at Sebas- topol. In the library of this institution I saw many American publi- cations, including a number on entomology. Dr. P. S. Galtsoff, now an expert in the United States Bureau of Fisheries, became chief of this station some years after my visit. Two years later I went to Russia again, going from Berlin to St. Petersburg in early May, principally to visit Professor Porchin- sky who had, by correspondence, outlined the previous trip, and who had arranged with Pospelov, Mokrzecki, and Krassilstschik to meet me. Porchinsky was a very able man and a leader in entomology. He was born in 1848, and was therefore at the time of my visit 61 years old. Since 1875 he had been connected with the Ministry of Agricul- ture at St. Petersburg. He organized the Bureau of Applied Ento- mology and became its chief. He dedicated his whole life to ento- mological work and was intimately connected with the Russian Ento- mological Society of which he was Secretary for 22 years. He died 20 298 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 in 1916. He was an extensive traveler in Russia and Siberia, study- ing local pests, not only of agricultural crops but also of domestic animals and of man. His main work was on the biology of insects and especially the biology of Diptera. Certain of his papers dealt with folk-lore and popular superstitions connected with insects. He was a tall, bearded, imposing individual, who spoke French excellently but had no English. Not long after his connection with the Ministry of Agriculture at St. Petersburg, Porchinsky published, in 1879, in the Russian lan- guage, a.70 page pamphlet on the pernicious insects in the South of Russia. The only species referred to by their Latin names are Cephus pygmaeus, Anisoplia austriaca, and Dorcadion. While in St. Petersburg, I went to the great Imperial Museum and met the workers there. I remember especially Adelung, Kusnezov, Georg Jacobsen, Oshanin, and Mordwilko. The great entomological collections were in the basement of the Museum. On this trip I visited Moscow, seeing the poorly arranged collec- tions of insects there and finding that there were a number of boxes of unidentified parasitic Hymenoptera that had been collected in the Transcaspian country. The most important feature of this visit to Moscow was a call on Prof. Nikolas Kulagin at the Agricultural College at Petrovsky, about 12 miles from Moscow. At that time Kulagin was a handsome, rather slender man, of medium height, perhaps 45 years of age. He was neatly dressed and had a short, well- cared-for beard. He spoke French readily, and proved to be excel- lently informed on entomology in general and highly appreciative of the importance of economic entomology. He was the author of very many books and pamphlets. From the standpoint of economic ento- mology, probably the most important of these works was a large vol- ume entitled ‘‘ Injurious Insects and the Means of Controlling Them.” I have before me the second edition, published in Moscow in 1913. It covers 783 pages, is printed entirely in the Russian language, and contains no illustrations. A separate atlas was promised, but so far as I know was never published. In his preface, the author states that the methods of fighting insects are very far from being thoroughly known, and that in this book he gives the methods that have been suggested and which it is desirable to test on a large scale. The work lacks a bibliographical list, but there are brief references in footnotes, largely to Russian writings. Some years ago I asked Mr. Jacob Kotinsky (a Russian) to go through this book rather carefully. He found it difficult to do so, owing to the absence of illustrations, bibliographical lists, and adequate WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOW ARD 299 headings and chapter subdivisions, but often met with very interesting information scattered through the pages. The consideration of the group of insects is in systematic order, and the final chapter is entitled “ Cultural Methods of Combating Injurious Insects.” This is a very significant title and one that I have not seen in general works on economic entomology in other languages. In this chapter occur the following subheads: Entomological Stations ; Crop Rotation and Soil Cultivation; Other Cultural Methods; Importance of Birds in Insect Destruction ; Fungus and Bacterial Diseases of Insects. In the body of the work there is a discussion of parasites, including an account of the work of Shevirev and Porchinsky and of the later work of Kurdiumov. The large report on the parasites of the gipsy moth, by Howard and Fiske, was also known to him, and is quoted. Roerig, “On the Efficiency of Pest Control by Parasites,” is also quoted. I am not familiar with this work of Roerig. Kulagin is still living, I believe (June, 1929), and is still at Petrofsky. Like Pospelov, he has stayed in Russia through the revolution, and is still working, under the Soviet Government. Pospelov visited the United States for the Soviet Government in 1923. The big book by Kulagin just referred to was anticipated in 1894 by a book by K. L. Bramson, published in the Russian language. Its title, translated, was “ Injurious Insects and the Means of Fighting Them (Practical Entomology)”. I am unable to give the gist of this book, but its 12 plates were excellent. It was published in two parts, the first part covering 250-odd pages, and the second part 360 pages. In 1909, N. Kurdiumov, a graduate student of Pospelov’s, came to the United States to see how we were handling entomological questions and especially to study with us the matter of natural control, largely in its parasitic Hymenoptera aspect. He was a very brilliant and likeable young man, and visited the various field laboratories of the Bureau, remaining in this country for a number of months and studying all aspects of economic entomology, especially perhaps the matter of natural control. He was especially interested in the gipsy moth laboratory in Massachusetts and in the cotton boll weevil labora- tory which at that time was in Dallas, Texas. When he returned to Russia he introduced many American methods, and, from his ability and charming personality, exerted a great influence. He immediately established a modern and up-to-date entomological station and labora- tory at the Poltava Agricultural Experiment Station in southern Russia, a place well known to the scientific men of the world on account of its connection with the early work of Metschnikoff. This station immediately attracted attention and was visited by Russian 300 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 provincial entomologists who adopted many of Kourdiumov’s ideas and introduced his fundamentally American methods in their respec- tive provinces. ; One of the most prominent entomologists in Russia in the days before the great war was Prof. Nikolas Cholodkovsky, a man of very high standing and of general culture. He was not only a man of great scientific education, who among other things published many papers relating to economic entomology and especially to forest ento- mology, but he was a poet and a man of letters. Cholodkovsky was born in 1858; graduated in medicine, and in 1885 was appointed Lecturer in Zoology in the Institute of Forestry. In 1892 he was given the doctor’s degree in zoology, and became full Professor of Zoology in the Military Academy of Medicine, filling this place until his death in April, 1921. He published very many entomological papers and also wrote extensively on parasitic worms. He also did extremely fine work upon the Aphididae and the Chermesidae. He published text-books on zoology, comparative anatomy, and pure and applied entomology. He devoted much time to literature, and was known in Russia as the best translator of Goethe’s Faust. He also translated poems of Byron, Milton, and Shakespeare into Russian verse. He also wrote many original poems which remained unpub- lished during his lifetime but were afterwards collected and printed under the title, “ From the Herbarium of my Daughter.” After the revolution he found his way into Esthonia and appealed to me to find him a place in the United States. I succeeded in enlisting the sym- pathies of certain wealthy men in this country, and Mr. Charles R. ‘Crane promised to get him a post at the Marine Biological Laboratory at Woods Hole, and to advance the money to bring him over. The funds, unfortunately, reached the United States Consul over there just at the time of Cholodkovsky’s death. To return to Kurdiumov: After his return to Russia he became acquainted with Mamentov, head of one of the divisions of the Russian Department of Agriculture at St. Petersburg, who brought about the financing of the introduction of many American methods into Russian practice. This fortunate contact between a capable administrator and an entomologist of advanced ideas finally led to the establishment, not only of entomological work at the experiment stations, but also of a network of entomological bureaus headed by provincial entomologists. These bureaus were under the double control and support of pro- vincial or local Zemstvo Governments and the central Government at St. Petersburg. This plan of dual control was established in 1912. WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 301 In this way entomological bureaus were established at Kaluga, Orel, Voronez, Poltava, Stavropol, Kiev, Tula, Kharkoff, Kursk, Tiflis, and Moscow, while entomological divisions were established at the general experiment stations of Poltava, Shatilov, and Bezenchuk. While the plans of these bureaus and divisions were made by their heads, final approval by local and federal authorities was necessary. In 1913 an All Russian Congress of Applied Entomology was held at Kiev for the consideration of affairs of organization and coopera- tive work. With this congress began a decentralization. Professor Porchinsky’s influence at St. Petersburg proved insufficient to hold Federal control, and the growth of provincial entomological institu- tions went forward rapidly. At this period there were among the leaders Adrianoff in Kaluga, Averin in Kharkoff, Borodin in Poltava, and Uvarov in Stavropol. At the same time the stations carried on by Mokrzecki in Simferopol, Plotnikoff in Tashkent, and Krassilst- schik in Kischineff, and the divisions in the agricultural experiment stations headed by Kurdiumov in Poltava and Emelianoff in Khar- koff worked ahead in both research and insect control. Doctor Borodin tells me also that a private entomo-phytopathological organi- zation under the auspices of the Sugar Growers Association was established at Smela in the province of Kiev. Then came the World War and later the civil war in Russia in the course of which two separate governments were overthrown. Natur- ally this had its effect upon the course of economic entomology. Some of the good men have died and certain others have left the country, but many well-trained and good men remain and have been working with much effect upon different subjects in applied entomology. Kourdiumovy, a fine fellow, committed suicide on the Dvina front in the autumn of 1917 when his soldiers deserted. Uvarov went to Eng- land and became connected with the Imperial Bureau of Entomology in London where, in the pages of the Review of Applied Entomology, he has published abstracts of all of the important papers published in Russia since the war. Borodin came to the United States and became the head of a Bureau of Applied Botany and Entomology, supported by Russian scientific organizations, which was formed largely to secure literature aiding in the development of applied science in Russia. Recently this organization has been expanded to cover all agricultural information, and Prof. J. A. Mirtoff has been placed at the head ; Borodin resigning and taking up other work. Doctor Borodin, by the way, has helped me greatly in this short account of Russian work just before the war and just after the war. 302 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 Some admirable workers were carrying on investigations just before the outbreak of the World War. It is most interesting to note that A. F. Radetezky and N. N. Troitsky in Tashkent, Turkestan, started to work in 1913 with the egg-parasites of the genus Tricho- gramma and that Radetezky began to use the species known as Tricho- gramma semblidis Auriv. (considered by Girault to be quite possibly identical with 7. minutum of the United States) against the codling moth. He showed, in an article published that year, that the species had been known since 1903 in Astrakhan and that J. F. Schreiner had observed that from 65 to 100 per cent of the eggs of the codling moth were destroyed by it. He ascertained the polyphagic habits of the species, and showed that the supply can easily be kept up for use against the codling moth. Pospelov, of Kiev, had taken up this matter ; and, in an article published a little earlier, Porchinsky had shown how, by the use of different hosts, the supply of parasites could be maintained. These records are of great interest in consider- ing the much later work of Flanders in California, Hinds in Louisiana, and others, in the breeding of this parasite on almost a commercial scale. There were noticed in the Review of Applied Entomology for 1913, the year immediately preceding the opening of the World War, a number of Russian publications that seem to have been: very well worth while. For example, there are several by I. K. Paczoski pub- lished by the Zemstvo of Cherson in the form of popular pamphlets describing the insects injurious to various crops together with a consideration of remedies. N. L. Sacharoy published at Astrakhan reports on the insects affecting fruits, market gardening and field crops; while V. Pospelov (previously mentioned) issued several important reports. B. P. Uvarov, since connected for many years with the Imperial Bureau of Entomology in London, was then working at Stavropol, and published reports principally dealing with locusts. D. N. Borodin, working at Poltava, was also doing excellent work. E. V. Jatzenkovskij, at St. Petersburg, wrote variously on injurious insects and notably ‘On the Functions of Entomological Stations.” One of the notable publications of this period was by Porchinsky who wrote in the Yearbook of the Department of Agriculture of the Central Board of Land Administration and Agriculture, St. Peters- burg, in 1913, “A Review of the Spread of the Chief Injurious Animals in Russia during 1912.” In this article he showed that the Department of Agriculture had published during 1912 six works on WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY HOWARD 303 entomology and had republished five books. He gave a lst of 23 Russian towns in which bureaus of entomology existed at that time. An account of Russian economic entomology should by no means omit special mention of the admirable work of T. Shevyrew (1859- 1920) whose investigations of the bark-beetles and of the biology of certain parasitic Hymenoptera should be better known to the scien- tific world and more often quoted. My attention was drawn to the work of this excellent investigator as early as 1908 by J. Kotinsky, but the language difficulty has prevented me from understanding many of his publications. During 1914 there appeared in the Review of Applied Entomology reviews of many Russian articles, the authors of which seem to have disappeared during the war. In 1914 Porchinsky published also a long and important report of “The Principal Mites Found in Grain and Flour and Some Infor- mation for the Discovery of Injurious Insects in Grain Stores.” One of the most important articles published during this period was by M. N. Rimsky-Korsakov, on the Chalcids of the genus Isosoma injurious to grain crops in Russia. It is a pamphlet of 84 pages, with 50 figures, 3 plates, describing several new species and including some attention to the parasites of these joint worms. Practical suggestions as to remedies are included. In spite of the war, Russian publications continued in large number and reached England so as to be carefully reviewed in the Review of Applied Entomology. A notable article published at Kiev in 1915 by D. N. Borodin describes an outbreak of Contarinia tritici, Kirby. This is the insect formerly known as the wheat midge in the United States. It was imported for the first time into Russia in Poltava in 1912, and in 1914 occurred in great numbers. Among the Russian economic entomologists who died either during the great war or just after it, are the following: E. M. Vassiljew, died July, 1910. N. V. Kurdiumov, died September 7, 1917. V. N. Rodzjanko, died in 19109. A. A, Silantjew, died March 21, 1918. D. A. Sopotsko, died May 1, 19109. J. T. Schreiner, died July, 1918. And then too, N. A. Cholodkovsky, who died in April, 1921; V. T. Oshanin, who died in January, 1917, and D. A. Smirnow who died August 17, 1920, might also be ranked as economic workers since many of their papers touched on economic entomology. I gain these dates from an article by Walther Horn in Entomologische Mitteil- ungen for September, 1921. 304 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 The first annual meeting of the Russian Society of Workers in Applied Entomology was held in Kiev on the 3rd and 9th of November, 1916. It was attended by representatives of the great majority of Russian entomological organizations. The meeting de- cided to advocate the organization of a central entomological bureau. An interesting paper by I. V. Emelianov was read which discussed the existing entomological organizations. He stated that there were 220 in the whole world, 74 being in Great Britain and its colonies, 68 in the United States, 51 in Russia, Germany having only 7, while China, Turkey, Portugal, and Brazil had none. At present it appears that the Government of the Union of Socialist Soviet Republics has brought about a good organization and that the entomological side of their phytopathological service is being well handled. The Bureau of Entomology of the Scientific Committee of Agriculture, founded in 1894 and carried on under the directorship of Porchinsky, continued under his leadership until 1916, when he died. He was succeeded by Pospelov, who was followed by N. N. Sokolov for 1917-1918. Pospelov again became chief in 1919 and still holds that office. The organization is now a Division for Applied Entomology of the State Institution for Experimental Agriculture. Its work is subdivided, with Pospelov in charge of the biological section, I. N. Filipjev in charge of the zoogeographic and ecological section, N. F. Meyer in charge of the section of biological control, and A. I. Dobrodejev in charge of the section of forest insects. Then there is an experiment station at Detskoje Selo near Leningrad in charge of N. N. Troitsky, and also a section of taxonomy in charge of J. I. Baeckmann. There are also other organizations and a number of excellent workers on different aspects of the entomological complex, includ- ing such well known men as Rimsky-Korsakov, Bogdanov-Katjkov, Mordvilko, Stackelberg, and Boldyrev. These later facts have been gathered from a paper published by Rimsky-Korsakov and W. Gross- mann in the Entomologischen Anzeiger, Volume 4, No. 9, October, 1924. My impression is that Russian work in applied entomology is very apt to be sound, as indeed it is in most branches of science. That nation has produced great men in various lines of scientific work. The agricultural conditions over a vast range of Russian territory are more like those that exist in certain parts of the United States than they are like those of other European countries. Therefore it seems a pity that American workers as well as those in the larger British dominions are prevented by language from at once appreciating the WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 305 results reached by the Russian investigators. So long as Uvarov is doing his admirable abstracting work for the Imperial Bureau in London, this does not matter so much, but he will have to be replaced some day. There is no doubt that the large and well illustrated bul- letins of the permanent Entomo-phytopathologic Congress of Russia contain a great deal of up-to-date information. Six of these large bulletins were published in 1926 and six in 1927. Evidently much advanced work is being reported in these publications, judging by the illustrations. It is a pity that summaries in English, French, or German are not printed at the end of each number. I can imagine the mental attitude of the authorities on this matter must be, ““ We have to learn their languages to understand their reports—they should do the same with ours.” This language difficulty is really a serious one, and there must surely be some way in which the results gained in Russia can be made intelligible to the other countries. After Uvarov’s availability for this valuable work is lost, possibly the Imperial Bureau will be able to supply his place. At this time of writing, intelligent scientific Russians are to be found all over the world, and it is not so difficult as it once was to find a translator. The Fourth International Congress of Entomology held at Ithaca, New York, in August, 1928, brought from Russia a very strong dele- gation. While there were few of them who had much English, nearly all of them spoke either French or German, so it was possible for the American entomologists to talk with them and to learn something of their work and aims. I saw especially Paul I. Adrianov of the Department of Agriculture at Moscow, I. A. Parfentiev of the Uni- versity of Moscow, N. F. Rimsky-Korsakov of the University of Leningrad, N. N. Bogdanov-Katjkov of the Institute for Applied Zoology and Phytopathology in Leningrad, I. N. Filipjev of the Insti- tute of Experimental Agronomy, Bureau of Applied Entomology, Leningrad, A. B. Martynov of the Academy of Sciences, Leningrad, and V. V. Nikolsky who had previously spent a year in the United States as a Fellow of the International Education Board and who is going to do work in economic entomology in Turkestan. A number of these delegates visited Washington, and Parfentiev and Nikolsky stayed on for some weeks doing bibliographical work in the library of the Bureau of Entomology. The men were all capable and very much in earnest. There seems no doubt that a great amount of sound work is coming from Russia and that many ideas of a practical nature will be evolved there. There is an extent of territory and a variety of cli- mates involved quite comparable to those features of the United 306 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VoL. 84 States, and consequently the necessities for successful work in eco- nomic entomology will, with the extension of agriculture into regions now largely pastoral or entirely disused, become quite as great as in this country. There is, then, every reason why the results achieved in that country should be known to the people of this and other parts of the world. The language obstacle must in some way be overcome. An admirable example is the case of the big 943-page work entitled “ Guide to Insects” prepared under the supervision of I. N. Filipjev, published the present year (1928), which lies before me. It is obvi- ously a very comprehensive work, illustrated by good line figures, and apparently covers the field of Russian insects, especially so far as the injurious forms are concerned. It includes, in those groups con- taining many noxious forms, full tables of families, and then full tables of genera under the different families, and again synoptic tables of the principal Russian species under each genus. It appears to be a very useful and instructive work, but I can read none of it except the Latin names. There must be hidden from me by the lan- guage many things I wish to know and ought to know. At the International Congress just mentioned A. P. Adrianov read an important paper entitled “‘ Present Status of Methods and Policy of Controlling Insects Injurious to Agriculture and Forestry in the United Socialist Soviet Republics.” This paper was presented in Eng- lish, and will doubtless be published in the Proceedings of the Con- gress. Mr. Adrianoy touches very slightly upon the history of applied entomology in Russia dating the former Central Experiment Station from 1894 and the first local institution (that at Kiev) from 1904. In the next 12-year period 22 entomological institutions were established, but these 23 local laboratories covered the territory of the then Russian Empire very unevenly. There were no such institutions in the Far East, in Siberia, in the Ural region, the Kirghiz region, the Volga region (except Astrakhan), nor in any of the northern regions of European Russia. Since the war, however, there has been a rapid growth of entomological institutions, and additional ones in all of the regions of the Republic have been established. Mr. Adrianov describes the stations and organization in the different Republics of the Union, and shows that the entomological staff in the various institutions varies from five to twelve (in the majority of the local institutions the average being from five to six). After the war much damage was done in different parts of the Union by migratory locusts, and these insects have been fought by the poisoned bait method and by the airplane method. Grain insects, WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 307 forage insects, and truck crop insects have received special attention, and those of the vineyard have also been studied. Before the war most of the insecticides and the apparatus for dis- tributing them were imported. At the present time the Republic fur- nishes its own material as well as knapsack and hand sprayers. A thorough research in the chemical warfare against insects is being conducted. Government appropriations for the support of this work have been increasing, and for the whole of plant protection during the present year they reached the sum of $2,500,000. Forest protection so far has been undertaken only spasmodically and on a small scale. Russia has always bred scientific men and women of very high rank. Her entomologists have naturally been of the highest type. Every entomologist knows Porchinsky, Cholodkovsky, Semenov Tian-Shansky, Mordwilko, Kusnesoff, Nasunov, and Rimsky-Kor- sakov. Their scientific publications have been of the highest char- acter. Much is to be expected from their followers. Addenda—Nearly a year after this account was written, Mokrzecki published in the Anzeiger fur Schadlingskunde an account of K. E. Lindeman who died February 1, 1929. I had supposed that Lindeman was long since dead, since I had not heard from him for many years and since the photograph he sent me in the 1890’s was apparently that of a man well past his 50th year. Mokrzecki’s very interesting and appreciative account of Lindeman’s life and work indicates that he deserves additional consideration in an account of Russian eco- nomic entomology. Briefly, he was born in 1844. His father was a physician, and he himself began the study of medicine. He graduated at Dorpat and became a teacher in the Agricultural High School at Molodetschno, later becoming professor in the well known Agricul- tural College at Petrowski. He published an outstanding monograph of the wood-boring beetles of Russia, and successively held several other positions. His work in the field of applied entomology was of great value, and it is stated that most of the important injurious insects in Russia were either described by him or considered in some one or another of his list of 200 publications. Mokrzecki states that he was a shrewd observer, a prominent speaker, and a skilled orator. In 1892 he opposed the movement to establish an Imperial Bureau of Entomology and insisted upon the continuance of various insti- tutions for plant protection in different parts of the Empire. He early advocated the introduction of resistant vines against the Phylloxera, as opposed to the radical control method that was at first generally advocated. His correspondence with Washington in the late 1880's 308 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS vot. 84 and early 1890’s principally concerned the Hessian fly and its para- sites, several species of which he described. After reading this all over I find that I have not said enough about the important work of Professor Bogdanov-Katjkov. He is a com- paratively young man, a graduate of the University of Leningrad and as early as 1918 founded a Plant Protection Station for the northern part of European Russia. In 1924 the journal entitled “Plant Protection”’ was started and is now in its seventh volume. More than 300 men have been educated at the station in entomology and plant pathology at the Institute of Applied Zoology and Plant Pathology at the Agricultural Institute of Leningrad. Professor Bogdanoy-Katjkov’s main specialty in taxonomy is the family Tene- brionidae, and in applied entomology kitchen garden and truck pests. He has published about roo papers. His work on Palearctic insects injurious to kitchen garden crops will shortly be published. It will contain 1500 or more figures. LATVIA The new Republic of Latvia was formed after the World War, out of the former Russian province of Courland with some adjacent territory. I am greatly indebted to Mr. E. Ozols, of Riga, for much of the following. Injurious insects attracted attention in the province many years ago, and in 1822 cereal crops were severely attacked by the frit fly. In 1910 the Central Agricultural Society began to agitate organiza- tion ; and in 1913, in connection with the Department of Agriculture, founded the Baltic Bio-entomological Station at Priekuli which ex- tended its functions over the whole territory now occupied by Latvia and Esthonia. J. Bickis was the head of the Station, and its work included both economic entomology and applied mycology. After the great war the work was divided between two entomolo- gists, W. N. Rodzjanko and K. Zolk, the latter at the present time being in charge of the Station of Experimental Entomology of the University of Esthonia. Immediately after the war, E. Ozols, and soon after, J. Zirnits joined the Station. In 1924 the Station was reorganized as an Institute for Plant Pro- tection consisting of three departments, namely Entomology, Mycol- ogy, and Botany. The Station now has a central office, laboratory, and museum at Riga, a permanent field branch at Priekuli superintended by J. Zirnits, and a seasonal laboratory of forest entomology at Cirava. In 1929, E, Ozols was made Director of the Institute, and WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 309 during very recent years different lines of entomology were investi- gated by L. Bramanis, O. Conde, and O. John. These men have done very good work, making faunistic and biological studies upon a num- ber of groups of insects and also upon all of the important insect pests. Information on the control of injurious insects is put out to the public by demonstrations, lectures, and publication of pamphlets on the more important pests (35 of these have been issued). Also the radio is used for quick communication widely among the population ; and the daily press is also called upon for propaganda work. The gardeners and the minor farmers readily adopt the suggestions of the Station. The Institute is incorporated with the Central Agricultural Society and extends its function to the whole country. It is subsidized both by the Society and by the State. There has been legislation with regard to trade with live plants and their parts and also in the control of potatoes. The chair of applied entomology in the agricultural faculty of the University of Latvia is held by L. Gailits, who is Government Entomologist to the Department of Forestry of the Ministry of Agriculture. The principal insect pests are largely those of surrounding countries. It is interesting to note that in 1929, after an interval of 36 years, there was a serious outbreak of the Hessian fly which caused an approximate loss of a million dollars. In 1929 Doctor Ozols published a long article on an putea of Galerucella tenella on strawberry. CZECHOSLOVAKIA Of the different countries comprising the old political organization known as Austria-Hungary, the people of Bohemia, now included in Czechoslovakia, were among the first to realize the importance of economic entomology. I knew of the reports written between 1850 and 1870 by Dr. Franz A. Nickerl, a member of the Patriotic- Economic Society of the Kingdom of Bohemia, an organization which fostered the affairs of agricultural and general social economy ; and I also knew the work of his son, Dr. Ottokar Nickerl, who took up the work after his father’s death in 1871 and published a series of short articles on injurious insects. This son later became Principal of the Seed Control Station of the Agricultural Council for the Kingdom of Bohemia, and published an annual report on the principal insects 310 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 injurious to agriculture during the year. ‘These reports, 13 in all and published between 1875 and 1890, were issued partly in the reports of the State Agricultural Council, partly by the Society for Physio- kratie, and partly privately by the author. One hundred and eight species are included in these reports, and of these, 18 occur in the United States as introductions’ from Europe. My friend, Dr. S. Soudek, of the Agricultural College at Brno, informs me that the real father of work in economic entomology in 30hemia, however, was Dr. Karel Slavoj Amerling, a physician, philosopher, and scientist, who started the Physiokratic Society in Prague. Amerling published, among many other things, several papers on economic entomology, with illustrations. He also studied insects and their host plants in mutual relation in what he called a “ nature complex ”—really what is now (following Moebius) biocoenosis. Most of Amerling’s publications concern scale insects and mites. The elder Nickerl was a collaborator of Amerling ; and the young one, as we have just seen, followed him. Doctor Soudek places the founding of the Bohemian Entomological Society in Prague in 1904 as the next most important step in the development of entomology, including economic entomology, in the Czech parts of the old Austro-Hungarian Empire. This he has told me was due to Frant. Klapalek, a well known specialist in the insects of the Pseudoneuropteroid series. The principal name among the very few economic entomologists of that time was that of Dr. J. Uzel, whose very sound studies of the Thysanoptera became well known. Uzel was the head of the Entomological Section of the Research Institute of the Sugar Industry. There were no special institutions devoted to economic entomology or plant pathology in what is now Czechoslovakia until after the revolution of 1918. Then the Czechoslovakian Government organized four phytopathological research institutions (phytopathology here in the very objectionable European manner, covering economic ento- mology as well). These institutions were placed in Prague, Brno, Bratislava, and Kosice, and a research institution for forest protection was established in Prague. All of these institutions have done good work, with control pre- dominantly in view. It is possible that they have suffered, however, on the research side on account of the lack of specialists who are able to confine themselves to one particular branch of work. But a great deal of excellent work is being done. Dr. J. Komarek is the Professor of Applied Zoology, and I think Phytopathology, at Charles Univer- sity at Prague, and has been doing excellent work, mainly on forest WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD Sir insects. Dr. F. G. Rambousek’ is the head of the Pest Laboratories of the Sugar Beet Hygiene Organization; and in the Phytopatho- logical Laboratory in the city of Prague four good men are at work, namely E. Baudys, F. Stranek, C. Blattny, and J. Rozsypal. All four have done good work. I remember especially Baudys’ report on the insects of Czechoslovakia in 1920. There is an excellent Department of Entomology in the large museum at Prague, and there men are working on the taxonomy of several groups of economic interest. Dr. J. Obenberger, for example, the Curator of the Entomological Department, works with the Bupres- tidae of the whole world. Doctor Rambousek, above mentioned, is working on the Staphylinidae of the world. Another excellent coleop- terist is Ant. Fleischer. Karl Sulc is working on the Coccidae, and J. Zavrel is doing admirable work on the biology of the small Diptera of the families Culicidae and Chironomidae. Fight volumes have appeared of a periodical published by the phy- topathological stations, entitled Ochranarostlin (Plant Protection), which contains contributions on economic entomology; and reports and bulletins of the agricultural experiment stations also contain contributions from economic entomologists. I am also informed that many entomological papers are published for the use of schools, farmers, foresters and gardeners, and that many of the scientific workers in Czechoslovakia publish their contri- butions in foreign periodicals. In August, 1925, Dr. Stepan Soudek, of the Agricultural College at Brno, came to the United States under the terms of a traveling fellowship of the International Education Board. He remained in this country for a year, spending the college year at Cornell University and later visiting field stations of the Federal Bureau of Entomology and State agricultural experiment stations. Doctor Soudek was at that time a very enthusiastic and very intelligent young man, sobered and aged beyond his actual years by six years’ service in the army during and after the World War. He returned to Brno full of enthusiasm for the United States and with a thorough acquaintance with the methods and achievements of the applied entomologists of this country. In August, 1927, I had the opportunity of visiting Czechoslavia. Doctor Soudek was commissioned by his Government to meet me in Prague and to accompany me during the period of my stay. We were "In 1928 the Ministry of Agriculture published a large volume by Doctor Rambousek on Agricultural Zoology. It covers 400 pages (of which 250 relate to insects) and carries 271 illustrations. 312 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 joined by Doctor Komarek and Doctor Rambousek, and together we visited many places of interest, meeting Doctor Obenberger and his assistants at the Museum in Prague. Among them, I was very glad to make the acquaintance of Ogloblin whose work with some of the parasitic Hymenoptera had attracted my attention. We also met Stranek and Blattny at the Phytopathological Station in Prague. One of the most interesting experiences was a 200-kilometer trip across Bohemia, Moravia, and Silesia, east to Troppau, for the purpose of examining the forests which had been dusted by means of army airplanes’early in the season under Komarek’s supervision. The obser- vations were made largely on the estate of Prince Lichnowski. A practically continuous red spruce forest 70 years old, in a hilly country, was owned partly by the Government, partly by Prince Lichnowski, and partly by the city of Troppau. The town would not contribute any financial aid, and its trees were not dusted. The result was that in August, at the time of our visit, the dusted area showed new growth at the tops of the defoliated trees, while on the areas owned by the city the attempts of the trees to recuperate were at once ruined by caterpillars that had not been killed by airplane operations. Some trees had died on the treated areas and had been felled and cut and piled for the paper mills, but the city forest over large areas was obviously past help. Even those that were disposed of brought but a small fraction of their potential value. Later (in September) I met Komarek, Rambousek, and Soudek at the International Congress of Zoology in Budapest, where Komarek gave a public address on the forest work just described, and in 1928 Rambousek came to the United States for a brief visit at the time of the International Congress of Entomology at Ithaca, New York, in August of that year. It seems to me that much may be expected from Czechoslovakia. Its present Government is at the same time conservative and enter- prising. Its Academy of Agriculture is a vigorous institution, and the building it has erected in the city of Prague is a model of its kind. All of the latest ideas in regard to interior architecture have been adopted, and many novel features, especially in the way of lighting, have been introduced. I appreciate very highly my election, in 1926, to honorary membership in this distinguished Academy. Doctor Soudek’s book, entitled (translated) ‘‘ Practical Entomology in the United States of America,” was published early in 1930 by the Czechoslovak Academy of Agriculture. It is a royal octavo book of WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 313 about 150 pages, illustrated by 35 half-tones. It has the appearance of being competent and complimentary ; but, unfortunately, I cannot read it. POLAND A number of good workers in entomology have been of Polish origin, for the most part resident, however, in other countries. We can treat of Poland as a separate entity practically only since the World War, although as a matter of fact the development of eco- nomic entomology in that country began as early as 1904 with the founding by the Horticultural Society of Warsaw of a station for plant protection. However, it was not until 1912 that this station was able to get means and support from the Government and from agricultural circles so that real work could be begun. Little ento- mology was considered at this station, which devoted itself to plant diseases. An agricultural station was established in Cracow, and this station also was given a department of plant protection. The outbreak of the World War, however, in 1914, stopped work in both places. At the conclusion of the war the present Polish Government was established, with its Ministry of Agriculture among others, and under this Ministry a Scientific Institute of Agriculture was estab- lished in Pulawy. Under this Institute there were several depart- ments, and phytopathology and economic entomology were given independent rank, and field experiments were begun. Since 1918, research and educational work in connection with agri- culture has been much expanded. Plant protection stations connected with the Institute at Pulawy were established in Bydgoszcz for west- ern Poland, and in Lwow for the southern districts. Entomological and phytopathological laboratories were also established at the uni- versities and at special schools. Among these should be especially noted the Entomological Institute of the Mean School of Agricul- ture in Skierniewice (near Warsaw), in the Institute of Agricultural Zoology at the University in Poznan, in the Zoological and Botani- cal Institute at the University in Wilno (northeastern district). At the latter place work has been begun which will result in a special station adapted to the conditions of cereal and fruit growing in that part of Poland. Moreover, the Zoological Laboratory of the Free University of Poland in Warsaw is used for some parasitic work in plant protection, chiefly in forestry. Following great damage to grain crops in 1925 to 1927 by the Hes- sian fly, the frit fly and its relatives, private societies such as cham- 21 314 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL, 84 bers of agriculture, associations for the production of beet sugar, and so on, became interested in economic entomology and have coop- erated with the State in the organization and support of control work. Thus quite recently stations have been established in Poznan, in Torun, and in Sarny. In the same way a special station for the study of measures of protection of hops has been established in Luck, and for sugar beets in Warsaw. There are now, therefore, 12 stations for plant protection in Poland. In addition, the different agricul- tural experiment stations scattered through the country include more or less work on entomology. There are 27 such stations, and many of | these have recently added young entomologists or phytopathologists to their staffs, largely for educational work. It is noted that there is a strong tendency to specialize in eco- nomic entomology among the younger generation of workers. An Association of Economic Entomologists (including several phyto- pathologists) has been founded, and at the time of my last informa- tion (June, 1929) had a membership of 50. There has been formed an organization known as “ The Union of Agricultural Experimental Institutes of the Polish Republic.” This Union is of an administra- tive character and has a Section of Plant Protection which acts in a way to coordinate the work of the different stations and research organizations. It has begun this work by the publication of a series of bulletins, of which one, entitled “‘ Plant Diseases,” has been issued. I was greatly interested in a visit I made to Poland in August, 1927. I was received with great courtesy by the officials of the Min- istry of Agriculture, and took several automobile trips to different parts of the country. I visited the important stations at Skierniewice and Pulawy and met a number of the excellent workers. The chief entomologist at Skierniewice at that time (and he still holds the post January, 1930) was my old and distinguished friend Zygmunt Mokrzecki whom I had met in 1907 in the Crimea. After the revolu- tion in Russia Professor Mokrzecki escaped to Constantinople and soon after became connected with important work in Belgrade, later going to Poland where he was given the post at Skierniewice. He has established there a very competent service with several good assistants, among them K. Strawinski who has published some very good papers. At the time of my visit S. Nowicki was working with him, but has since been transferred to another station. At Pulawy, S. Minkiewicz is in charge. Doctor Minkiewicz came to the United States as a Rockefeller student in the early part of 1927, and remained in this country for many months. He was in America when I yisited Poland. He traveled extensively in the WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—-HOWARD 315 United States and Canada and visited many experimental stations. He is a man of much ability, and much is to be expected from him in the way of research and organization. Before starting for America he had made an important study of the bionomics of Psylla mali and had done other excellent work. Prof. R. Bledowski, connected with the Free University of Poland as Professor of Zoology and Comparative Anatomy, is an ento- mologist much interested in the economic aspects of the science. I had the pleasure of meeting him at the Third International Congress “of Entomology at Zurich in 1925. He met me when I arrived in Warsaw in 1927 and accompanied me on my different trips, and I am greatly indebted to him for very many courtesies, in fact most of the information in this section about Poland has been given me by him. He has made numerous entomological investigations, some of them of distinctly economic bearing. Other men who have worked with economic entomology in Poland are J. Triiffer at Wilno, L. Sitowski at Poznan, A. Krasucki at Lwow, J. Ruskowski at Warsaw, K. Zimm at Cieszyn, S. Keler at Bydgoszez, and J. Niezabytowski at Cracow. Since my visit excel- lent papers have been published by Sitowski, Niezabytowski, Rus- kowski and Strawinski. While in Poland I was greatly interested to see two demonstrations of fumigation work in orchards and forest by means of large arsenic candles invented by Lieutenant Colonel Woynich-Sianozecki. The demonstrations were extremely interesting. The fumes from the candles spread enormously, leaving an arsenical deposit on the leaves, and I was assured that the treatment was very efficient against leaf- feeding insects. I was greatly impressed and have since endeavored to have similar experimentation carried on in this country. Note Added June 6, 1930.—Just as I am about to send this manu- script to the editor, I have received from my distinguished friend Prof. Z. Mokrzecki an explicit statement of the present Polish organization, and I add it in his own words. THe PRESENT STATE OF PLANT PROTECTION IN POLAND When, after a 150-year period of slavery, Poland became an independent state and united its several countries into one whole, energetic action in all directions of scientific life began, in spite of the grave influence of the ruinous World War and the economic weakness of the country. A great deal has been done. In order to give an easy orientation of the existing plant protection stations in Poland, I have classified them into the following divisions : I—The network of plant protection stations under the Ministry of Agriculture. I1I1—Private and communal institutions occupying themselves with plant pro- tection. 310 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS voL. 84 [1]—Universities and equivalent schools whose entomological laboratories are working with theoretical problems and take part in the action of combating pests that occur epidemically. I—STATE NETWORK OF THE PLANT PROTECTION STATIONS (MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE) 1—Plant Disease Division, State Institute of Agricultural Science in Bydgoszcz (Bromberg), which has as its aim the investigation of pests and is besides a central institution of the state plant protection stations. Director: Prof. Dr. L. Garbowski; Dr. St. Keler (entomologist). 2—Plant ‘Protection Division of the above Institute in Pulawy, acting for territory of the province (wojewodztwo) of Lublin. Directors: Dr. S. Minkiewicz (entomologist) and Prof. Dr. W. Siemaszko (mycologist). 3—Plant Protection Section of the Agrobotanical Station in Lwow (Lemberg) under the above Institute. It acts for the provinces of Lwow, Stanislawow, and Tarnopol. Director: Dr. A. Krasucki (entomologist). 4—Plant Protection Station of the Warsawian Horticultural Society in Warsaw, working for the provinces of Warsaw, Lodz, and Bialystok. Director of the Station, Prof. Dr. W. Gorjaczkowski (phytopathologist) ; leading the Entomological Section, Dr. J. Ruszkowski. 5—Plant Protection Station of the Pomerellan Chamber of Agriculture in Torun for the provinces of Pomorze (Pomerellia). Director of the Station, Eng. S. Nowicki (entomologist). 6—Plant Protection Section and the Section of Control of the Wart Disease of potatoes, Experimental Station, Agricultural Chamber of Great-Poland in Poznan. Director of the former, Eng. A. Kuryllo; Director of the latter and the Experimental Station, Dr. K. Celichowski. Territory of action: province of Poznan (Great Poland). 7—-Plant Protection Station of the Agricultural Society of Little Poland in Krakow (Cracow) acting for the provinces of Krakow and Kielce. Director, Prof. Dr. K. Rouppert (phytopathologist). . 8—Silesian Plant Protection Station in Cieszyn (Teschen), acting for both Silesias (Upper and. Cieszynian). Directors: Dr. A. Piekarski (phytopath- ologist) and Dr. K. Simm (entomologist). o—Plant Protection Station of the Agricultural Society in Wilno, for the provinces of Wilno and Nowogrodek. Directors: Prof. J. Trzebinski (phytopathologist) and Dr. J. Priifer (entomologist). 1o—Plant Protection Section of the Experimental Institute for Peat Culture in Sarny for the province of Polesie. Director, Miss M. Boczkowska. 11—Plant Protection Station of the Volhynian Agricultural Society in Luck (Luck) for the province of Volhynia. Director, Eng. M. Dabrowski (phytopathologist). Tue Work or THESE PLANT PROTECTION STATIONS (1) Fulfilling the tasks with which the Ministry of Agriculture has charged the Stations in its orders in the control of plant pests, diseases and weeds. WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 3L7 (2) Organizing of a general survey in the respective regions and registration of the pests. (3) Communicating to the administrative authorities and the State Institute of Agricultural Science reports, accounts, and opinions. (4) Educating the region to appreciate the importance of plant protection. (5) Observations on and investigation of the plant diseases, pests, and weeds having greatest economical value in the district. (6) To give sanitary certificates of plants and plant products used in trade according to the power given by the Ministry of Agriculture. II—PRIVATE AND COMMUNAL INSTITUTIONS 1—Station for the protection of the sugar-beet plantations of the Institute of Sugar Industry in Warsaw. Director: A. Chrzanowski (entomologist). 2—Division of Insecticides and Fungicides produced by the chemical industry in Poland, in Zgierz near Lodz. Director of the division: Eng. M. Nowinski (chemist). 3—Military Gas Institute in Warsaw. Experiments upon insecticides and fungicides and toxicological experiments. Director: Prof. Eng. Z. Woynich- Sianozecki. Director of the Division of Toxicology: Prof. Dr. W. Lindeman (toxicologist). 4—Plant Protection Station of the Horticultural School in Poznan. Director of the Station: Dr. K. Zaleski (phytopatologist). III—LABORATORIES OF THE UNIVERSITIES AND EQUIVALENT SCHOOLS DEVOTING THEMSELVES TO PLANT PROTECTION 1—Institute of Forest Protection and Entomology of the Principal School of Agriculture in Skierniewice. Besides the pure scientific and teaching work, devotes a great deal of time to the matter of organization and to the control of pests occuring epidemically. Investigations in the sphere of applied entomology. Director of the Institute: Prof. Z. Mokrzecki (ento- mologist). Assistants: Dr. K. Strawinski (entomologist) and Eng. J. Obarski (forest entomology). 2—The laboratory of Entomology and Zoology of the Posnanian University. Teaching work and investigation of injurious insects. Director: Prof. Dr. L. Sitowski (entomologist). Assistant: Eng. A. Lincke (zoologist). 3—The Laboratory of Forest Protection of the Polytechnicum in Lwow. Teaching work in forest protection and investigation of forest pests. Director of the Institute: Prof. Eng. A. Kozikowski (forest entomologist). Assistant: Dr. R. Kuntze (entomologist). 4—Zoological Laboratory of the Free Polish University in Warsaw. Teaching work and theoretical topics of entomology and zoology. Director: Prof. Dr. R. Bledowski (entomology). Assistant: Mrs. M. Krainska (ento- ' mologist). 5—Zoological Laboratory of the University in Wilno. Teaching work and theoretical investigations of zoology and entomology. Director: Dr. J. Pritfer (entomologist). Assistant: Miss M. Raciecka (zoologist). 6—The Botanical Laboratory of the University in Wilno. Teaching work and phytopathological investigations. Director: Prof. Dr.’ J. Trzebinski (phyto- pathologist). 318 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 7—The Phytopathological Laboratory of the Principal School of Agriculture in Warsaw. Teaching work and theoretical problems of phytopathology. Director: Prof. Dr. W. Siemaszko (phytopathologist). Assistant: Miss W. Konopacka. 8—Lessons of theoretical Entomology at the Warsawian University, Faculty of Natural and Mathematical Sciences. Director: Prof. Z. Mokrzecki (entomologist). Assistant: Dr. K. Strawinski (entomologist). ApDED INSTITUTIONS 1—Plant Protection Section of the Union of Agricultural Experiment Stations of the Republic of Poland. President: Prof. Dr. Z. Mokrzecki. Secretary: A. Chrzanowski. 2—Polish Entomological Union in Lwow. President: Prof. Z. Mokrzecki. Vice-Presidents: Prof. R. Bledowski and Prof. J. Lomnicki. Secretary and Editor: Dr. J. Kinel. The above Union publishes the Polish Entomological Journal (Polskie Pismo Entomologiczne). Investigations upon human parasites as well as their control and the vectors of diseases: Division of Parasitology of the Hygienical Institute in Warsaw. Director: L. Anigstein, M.D. Technical consultant: Prof. Z. Mokrzecki (entomologist ). The results of the investigations and experiences of the above mentioned laboratories are published in the following Polish periodicals: 1—Polski Pismo Entomologiczne (Polish Entomological Journal). Lwow ul. Rutowskiego 18. Editor, Dr. J. Kinel. 2—Choroby i Szkodniki Roslin. Warsaw ul. Bagatela 3. Editor, Prof. Dr. W. Gorzaczkowski (appeared till 1927). 3—Roezniki Nauk Rolniczych i Lesnych (The Annals of Agriculture and Forestry). Poznan. Ul. Mazowiecka 26. Editor, Prof. Schramm. 4—Las Polski (Polish Forest), Warsaw. Nowy Swiat. 36. Editor, Prof. Szwarc. 5—Do$wiadczalnictwo Rolnicze (Experimental Work). Warsaw Kopernika 30. Editor, Prof. S. Miklaszewski. : 6—Sylwan. Lwow. 7—Gazeta Rolnicza (Agricultural Gazette). Warsaw. JUGOSLAVIA In this country applied entomology has come to the front only within the past few years. The Minister of Agriculture at this time of writing, Dr. Otto Frances, took office January 6, 1929, and is mak- ing every effort to build up agriculture on a very broad scale. There are in Jugoslavia several institutions at which entomological work is being done. At the University in Belgrade, Dr. J. Wagner and Docent Dr. M. Gradojavie act as entomologists. At Zagreb, Dr. A. Langhoffer, emeritus professor at the University, acts as entomolo-— gist. There are several stations employing entomologists, and at the WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 319 Hygienic Institute at Zagreb Dr. N. Baranov, in charge of the Divi- sion of Parasites, also works on injurious insects. The subject of medical entomology is handled by several experts. Articles on ento- mology are contained in the reports of the Ministers of Agriculture and of Public Health, and there are two periodicals that contain ento- mological matter, namely Gospodarska Smotra (Agricultural News) and Gospodarski List (Agricultural Gazette). The Hygienic Institute at Belgrade is wonderfully well equipped and is a thoroughly up-to-date institution. I visited it briefly in 1927 and was greatly impressed by the buildings and by the working force. Dr. Eugen Dzunkovski is in charge of the Division of Para- sites of this institution, and there are two entomologists, namely Madame Anna Bragina and Dr. P. Vukasovic, who are working on insects of economic importance. Madame Bragina was formerly an assistant of Doctor Mokrzecki, and is trained in a variety of ento- mological work. At the time of my visit she was investigating some insects affecting tobacco fields, but fortunately returned to the city in time for me to see her. In 1926, Madame Bragina studied the para- sites of the codling moth and of certain other insects. Doctor Vukaso- vic in 1928 published on the subject of an outbreak of Lecanium cornt. The same insect seems to have appeared injuriously in all of the Balkan countries about that time. He also published in that year an excellent article entitled “A Contribution to the Study of Ento- mophagous Insect Parasites.” This Serbian entomologist studied in Paris and published in French many papers relating principally to the host relations of parasitic Hymenoptera. His name in the French and English publications is spelled Voukassovitch. Doctor Langhoffer, whom I had the pleasure of meeting at the Zoological Congress in Budapest in 1927 and who is a most intelli- gent veteran, informs me that among the other workers on economic entomology at present in Jugoslavia are Prof. Dr. Operman and B. Hergula at Zagreb, Prof. Dr. Z. Kosacevic at Osijek, Doctor Turina at Krizevei, Engineer Popovic at Sarajevo, P. Novak at Split, Doctor Trausmueller in Susak, Doctor Sfarcic in Trogir, and Doctor Simic in Skolje.’ Doctor Langhoffer informed me, under date of July 10, 1929, that the Ministry of Agriculture was spending large sums on the control of Lecanium on plums and prunes, and also large sums on silk culture. *In 1926 I noted an article on the elm leaf beetle by R. Sarnavaka, published at Zagreb. 320 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 RUMANIA There has long been a Museum of Natural History in Bucharest ; and for many years a first-class entomologist and long-time corre- spondent of the entomologists in Washington was A. L. Montandon who specialized in the Heteroptera and whose work was well known to the entomologists of the world. Montandon, by the way, published a paper, as early as’ 1901, on the injurious insects of Rumania. Since the World War Rumania has grown in size and importance among the nations, and has realized the importance of plant protec- tion. In F926 an article was published in the Anzeiger ftir Schad- lingskunde by Dr. W. Knechtel entitled “Applied Entomology in Rumania.” In this article it was shown that the Department of Agri- culture had a Bureau of Plant Protection in which there were two officials. The country was divided into two sections, each of which was visited by one official, and all experimental farms, vineyards, and nurseries of the Government were inspected every two months. Dis- eases and infestations by injurious insects were reported at head- quarters and necessary steps were taken to effect control. The Bureau published charts and bulletins and gave information and advice. Doc- tor Knechtel’s comment was to the effect that the Bureau was not well established by law and not based upon scientific principles and was not organized for research. He showed, however, that there were certain scientific institutions in Rumania having charge of inves- tigations of infestations by injurious insects. The oldest and most important was the Section of Agricultural Entomology of the Uni- versity of Jassy, which was in charge of Prof. Dr. J. Borcea who was also Director of the Laboratory of Systematic Zoology. He further pointed out that there was in Bessarabia a bio-entomological station at Kichineff, founded by the Russians. I visited this sta- tion in the old days in 1907 when it was in charge of Isaac Kras- silstschik. At the time of my visit, Krassilstschik was in Berlin, a misunderstanding of dates, owing to the Russian calendar, prevent- ing our meeting. But later he was of much assistance to Prof. Trevor Kincaid when he worked in Bessarabia on the parasites’ of the gipsy moth. Doctor Knechtel adds further that the Laboratory for Syste- matic Zoology of the University of Bucharest, in charge of Prof. Dr. Popovici-Baznosanu, had recently established a division for the control of injurious insects. Further, the German settlements in Bessarabia were stated to have recently established a station at Taru- tino for the control of insect infestations under the directorship of Dr. Karl Stumpf. Lectures on agricultural entomology were given at the Agricultural High School at Cluj and Herestrau, and also at WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 321 the Agricultural Institute of the University of Jassy. Entomology was taught as a side line of natural history in the agricultural schools. Dr. R. Jeannel, of Paris, who lived in Rumania for a time and who often visits that country, wrote me from Cluj on January 19, 1930, and informed me that in 1928 an Institute of Agricultural Research was founded in Rumania and that this Institute comprised numerous sections. He further showed that there are five institutions, depen- dent on the Ministry of Agriculture, in which there exist either instruction in entomology or laboratories for research in applied entomology. These institutions are the Superior School of Agricul- ture at Bucharest, the Academy of Agriculture at Cluj, the National School of Viticulture and Horticulture at Chisinau, the School of Horticulture at Bucharest, and the Institute of Agronomical Research of Rumania at Bucharest. In this latter institute there is a Section of Entomology with a Director, an assistant and a preparator. The Director of this important section is Dr. W. Knechtel, the author of the paper just referred to, and the representative of Rumania at the International Congress of Entomology at Ithaca, New York, in August, 1928. Long before this organization, occasional papers had been published by the Section of Science of the Rumanian Academy and elsewhere. Prof. G. N. Fintescu of Jassy was the author of a number of these papers. He published, for example, in 1914, a contribution to the study of Hyponomeuta malinella, and later showed that the Hemip- teron Capsus mali Myer is an enemy of the larva of Hyponomeuta. Still later he published on one of the rose sawflies. I am indebted to the very well known zoologist, Prof. J. Borcea, for a very competent report on the insects injurious to agriculture in Rumania and the means employed to combat them. Professor Borcea is not only Professor of Zoology in the University of Jassy but is also Director of the Zoological Station at Constantza. In this report, which should surely be published (I hope that it will be pub- lished in Rumania) there is a careful consideration of the geographic and faunistic conditions and an account of the ravages of different important insects including grasshoppers, May beetles, wireworms, and so on, together with some consideration of the insects that affect ' different crops including a very interesting list of the enemies of cereals, fruit trees, forests, and so on. Professor Borcea in his re- search work is assisted by collaborators and by two assistants, Messrs. M. Constantineanu and P. Suster. Both of these gentlemen and Professor Borcea himself have published numerous important papers and have paid rather especial attention to the matter of parasites and 322 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 natural control. An especially important paper by Borcea relates to the damage caused by Bostrychid beetles in Rumania. Mr. Suster has published a very important work on the Tachinidae of Rumania. The manuscript report referred to in the opening sentence of the preceding paragraph has been published since that paragraph was written. Today (April 18, 1930) I have received from Professor Borcea Parts 1 and 2 of Volume 16 of the Scientific Annals of the University of Jassy, and this particular paper is published on pages 203 to 276. To this paper is added a list of certain publications that consider the entomological fauna of Rumania and the insects injuri- ous to agriculture. It is not a long list, but it includes mention of several papers of importance. Most of those relating to injurious insects have been written by Professor Borcea and Professor Fin- tescu. There is also published in the same volume a very interesting report by Professor Borcea and Mr. Suster on the ravages caused in Rumania by the Russian caterpillar (Lowvostege sticticalis). The article includes a consideration of its natural enemies and the means employed to combat the insect. Mr. Suster’s long and fine paper on the Tachnidae is printed in the same volume. BULGARIA The pests of cultivated crops in Bulgaria apparently do not differ strikingly in character from those of surrounding countries. The Bul- garian Society of Naturalists in 1914 published in its Memoirs two articles by Iv. Bouresch on the nocturnal Lepidoptera of Bulgaria with especial reference to injurious species, and in 1919 the Journal of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences published an article by D. Iltschew on Deilephila norii and the damage done by it. Later there existed an Institute for Agronomical Research at Sofia which published a Review ; and in 1921 in this Review there was an article on one of the sawflies in the plantations of pines by D. Ioakimoy. There was a distinct entomological section to this Institute, and reports were pub- lished in 1923 and 1924 by Dr. P. Tschorbadjieff (spelled in the Re- view of Applied Entomology Chorbadzhiev). In 1928 an article by ly. Georgieff on the vine moth in Bulgaria was published, and in 1927 a report on forest insects by M. D. Ruskov was printed in which 63 forest pests were recorded. Other articles on injurious insects have been written by Bouresch and by A. K. Dryenowski. Doctor Tschorbadjieff published a series of articles on injurious insects of Bulgaria in the years 1924 to 1927, and there was estab- lished (the exact date is not known to me) an Entomological Section of the Central Experiment and Control Agricultural Station in Sofia. WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 323 In 1928 Doctor Tschorbadjieff attended the Fourth International Congress of Entomology at Ithaca, New York, as the official delegate of the ‘ Station agronomique de |’Etat a Sofia”; and in 1929 he published what is apparently an article that I should like to be able to read, entitled “Agricultural Entomology in Bulgaria and Pests of Cultivated Plants in that Country.” The Review of Applied Ento- mology for October, 1929, gives two short paragraphs to this publi- cation, and indicates that it gives a report of the work of the Station and a history of the study of injurious insects in Bulgaria. The article was published in the Russian journal entitled ‘“ La Défense des Plantes,” the bulletin of the Permanent Bureau of the Entomophyto- pathologic Congresses of Russia, Volume 5, Nos. 5-6, issued at Leningrad and published in the Russian language. Addendum.—Since the completion of this manuscript and _ its submittal to the Smithsonian Institution for publication, I have received from Dr. P. Tschorbadjieff a short manuscript which | greatly regret did not reach me at an earlier date. From this manu- script the following facts are drawn. Economic entomology in Bulgaria dates from 1902 when an agri- cultural experiment station was founded in Sadowo near Plowdin. In 1905 another experiment station was established near Rustschuck. No especially trained entomologists were employed by these stations and the entomological work was done by agronomists. In 1911 an entomological division was organized with the foun- dation of the State agricultural experiment station at Sofia. Work was soon interrupted by the World War and was not resumed until 1922. Agriculture developed greatly in extent and in the increased number of new crops, and entomology became of greatly increased importance. However this work was confined very largely to the station at Sofia. Nevertheless the institutes for Viticulture and Forestry have done some work and the Royal Entomological Station founded for the investigation of the insect fauna of Bulgaria inci- dentally includes injurious insects. And in this connection the Bul- garian Entomological Society should also be mentioned The most outstanding of the Bulgarian authors have been the fol- lowing: Dr. Jv. Bouresch, Al. Drenowsky, Iv. Georgieff, D. Iltscheff, D. Ioakimov, K. Malkoff, Prof. Z. A. Mokrzecki, V. Naidenoff, P. Petkoff, M. Rouskoff, P. Tschorbadjieff. FINLAND The semi-independence of Finland as a grand duchy, with the Emperor of Russia as Grand Duke, gave its Government jurisdiction 324 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 over most internal affairs, and therefore makes it necessary to treat it as a unit from the beginning of the development of applied ento- mology ; and, of course, since the World War it has been an indepen- dent republic. Work in economic entomology began in 1898. In that year there were founded in the University of Helsinki a faculty section of agri- culture and an agricultural experiment station which included an entomological section. At first this section worked in the quarters of the Agricultural Department of the University, but in 1910 it was established in its own quarters about 10 miles from Helsinki. The Agricultural College had an associate-professorship of entomology which was occupied by Dr. Enzio R. Reuter. He was promoted to ordinary professor in 1901 and held the office until 1913 when he became Professor of Theoretic Zoology and was succeeded in his former chair by Dr. Walter M. Linnaniemi. In 1921 the latter was succeeded by Dr. Uunio Saalas, who had previously been a special lecturer on forest entomology at the University of Helsinki. In 1924 the Agricultural Experiment Station was separated from the University and became an independent institution with a special section for the investigation of injurious insects, with a Director (Doctor Saalas), an assistant (Mr. Y. Hukkinen) and two special assistants (Messrs. N. Vappula and J. Listo). The facilities for work are good. Temporary field laboratories are established from time to time in the centers of insect outbreaks. A system of information exists which in certain years has 700 to 800 reporters. From 1894 to 1916 yearly reports were issued in both the Finnish and Swedish languages. This series was interrupted by conditions brought about by the war, but I am informed by Doctor Saalas that Professor Linnaniemi has prepared a résumé of the insect damage from 1917 to 1923 which will soon be published. In 1925 a plant-protection law was passed; and in 1928 the Council of Ministers alteted the old laws against poisons so that at present the arsenical poisons, nicotine, the cyanide compounds, and so on may be used for agricultural and garden cultivation purposes. SWITZERLAND The Third International Congress of Entomology was held in Zurich, Switzerland, July 19-25, 1925. The President of the Congress, Dr. A. von Schulthess, in his opening address gave a brief summary of the famous Swiss entomologists of the past from the time of Sulzer (1761) down to the present. Among the more important of the older names were J. P. Fuessly, R. Schellenberg, Bremi, Escher- WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY HOWARD 325 Zollikofer, and Oswald Herr. Doctor von Schulthess had already written a series of interesting articles on the Swiss entomologists in the first half of the nineteenth century that were published as early as 1892 in the Schweizer Entomologisches Anzeiger. Among those to whom he gave especial attention were R. Myer-Duer (1812-1825), the coleopterist ; the famous orthopterist, K. Brunner von Wattenwy] (1823-1914) ; E. Frey-Gessner (1825-1863) ; A. Goeldi (1859-1917), the famous writer, who lived most of his life in Brazil; and M. Stand- fuss (1854- ), the man who did much interesting experimental work on the effect of temperature on the development of Lepidoptera. Many famous entomologists still live and work in Switzerland. At the Congress above mentioned were delegates from several Swiss institutions where work in applied entomology is being done today. Among these may be mentioned the Technical High School, the Swiss Agricultural Experiment Station, the Swiss Experiment Station for Orchard, Vine, and Garden Culture. The published writings that include consideration of insects that have been found in Switzerland are very numerous. There was pub- lished in Berne in 1926 the seventh part of the Fauna Helvetica by the Swiss National Library. This seventh part includes the writings on Swiss insects in the years 1634 to 1900, and covers 292 pages. As with other European countries, applied entomology received no especial consideration in Switzerland until the advent of the Phyl- loxera, and no important work was published about injurious insects prior to that time. Dr. H. Faés, of Lausanne, tells me that here and there short articles are to be found about the damage caused by grass- hoppers in the canton of Valais in 1837-39, and so on. The Phyl- loxera, however, made its appearance in the canton of Geneva in 1874 and in the canton of Vaud in 1886; and the vine-growing industry in Switzerland was so important that strenuous measures were under- taken at once. In the Fauna Helvetica to which we have just referred, a long list of articles about the Phylloxera is printed, and I note that about 60 of them were published before 1878. The cantonal Viticul- tural Station of Lausanne which was founded in 1886 owed its origin to the appearance of the Phylloxera and that of the mildew. A history of the work of this station from 1886 to 1916 has been pub- lished by the station. It was written by Dr. H. Faés, Chief of the Division of Physiology, and Dr. F. Porchet, Chief of the Division of Chemistry. Doctor Faés’ work includes phytopathology in the Euro- pean sense that includes the insects as well as the diseases that affect plants. During the early years of the station interest in entomology was confined to the Phylloxera, and later to the Cochylis and Eudemis. 326 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS vo. 84 Now that these questions are measurably solved, the station is extend- ing out more and more toward the study of insects injurious to fruit, and these studies are followed in all of the Federal agricultural establishments. As early as 1909, the Association of Teachers of Agriculture in Switzerland published a little book by Doctor Faés entitled “ The Maladies of Cultivated Plants and Their Treatment.” It is a handy little book of 250-odd pages, with illustrations, and treats many forms of insects and plant diseases. In German Switzerland there are three institutions, namely “Schweizerische Versuchsanstalt fiir Obst- Wein- und Gartenbau, Wadenswil; Schweizerische landwirtschaftliche Versuchsanstalt, Oer- likon/Zurich,” and the Entomological Institute of the Federal Poly- technic School (O. Schneider-Orelli, Director) at Zurich. The results of the work of these stations are published in the Agricultural Yearbook of Switzerland and in the Swiss Journal for Orchard and Vine Culture, either in the form of annual reports or as original works. There is also the agricultural establishment of Liebefeld at Berne, which concerns itself with apiculture and diseases of bees. As to forest entomology, we must refer to the large work, entitled “The Scolytids of Central Europe,’ by Dr. A. Barbey, printed at Geneva and Paris in 1921. This is an elaborate folio volume with excellent illustrations of Scolytid work and of the beetles themselves. Doctor Barbey has also published a Treatise on Forest Entomology (Paris, 1925). Although his book was published in Paris, Doctor Barbey is a Swiss. The volume (second edition) covers 749 pages, with 8 plates and 496 text figures. There should also be mentioned the fine work on /e Hanneton by Prof. M. Decoppet, formerly Professor at the. Polytechnic School and Inspector General and Chief of the Division of Forests, Game and Fish in the Federal Department of the Interior. This volume, published in 1920, is a quarto of 130 pages, with 8 plates and very many maps. It includes a bibliography of the European cockchafer plagues from 1662 to 1920. Quite a large number of papers relating to applied entomology have been published in Switzerland since the publication of Volume 7 of the Fauna Helvetica. The work done in German Switzerland has been very good. Since the beginning of the Review of Applied Ento- mology in 1912, 177 papers from Switzerland have been reviewed (down to September, 1929). In 1926 there was published in the Anzeiger ftir Schadlingskunde, Volume 2, No. 9, pages 118-120, an important article by Professor WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 327 Schneider-Orelli entitled (translated) “Applied Entomology in Swit- zerland.” He pointed out that the geological formation of the Swiss soil, of which about one-fourth is unproductive agriculturally, and the extraordinary climatic differences in the different sections afford remarkable faunal and biological problems. He showed that there is no opportunity in Switzerland for control measures on a large scale as in other countries. He referred to a paper published in 1833 by a Swiss physician, Dr. J. J. Hegetschweiler of Zurich, on the biology and control of the most important insects injurious to fruit trees. The omission of the woolly aphis in this paper indicates that the insect bad not at that time reached Switzerland. A paper published by C. Bugnion and collaborators in 1841 on insects affecting grapes 1n the canton Waadt is also referred to, as well as the work of Oswald Heer on the May beetle. In 1859, Professor Schneider-Orelli states, the question was discussed among Swiss entomologists as to the advisability of paying more attention to the control of injurious in- sects, and the idea of publishing a book on injurious insects was also discussed. It was decided, however, that the practical application of entomology would always remain of secondary value. Then came the Phylloxera in the 1870’s; and the names of Fatio, Muhlberg, Keller, and Goeldi are mentioned in this connection. After this, more and more attention was paid to injurious insects, and the publication in 1913 of Escherich’s book on applied entomology in the United States had an influential effect on Switzerland. Doctor Schneider- Orelli refers to five governmental institutions in Switzerland work- ing mainly in applied entomology. The author of the summary just cited is not only a strong and suc- cessful teacher but also a writer of parts. A number of the important articles reviewed in the Review of Applied Entomology of recent years have been from his pen. He informs me in a recent letter that since the publication of his paper on the status of applied entomology in Switzerland in 1926 very appreciable progress has been made in that country. Forest entomology has become an obligatory subject of examination for forest engineers, and in the same way agricultural entomology is a required subject for all so-called agricultural engi- neers. Professor Schneider-Orelli also gives me the interesting news that the first student from the United States to pursue entomological studies in Switzerland will work in his laboratory the coming year. SPAIN A long paper entitled (translated) “ Notes Concerning the History of Entomology in Spain’’ was presented by Senor D. José Maria 328 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS voL. 84 Dusmet y Alonso at the May, 1917, Congress of the Spanish Associa- tion for the Advancement of Science at Seville. This paper was pub- lished in full, and covers 74 pages. It divides its considerations into epochs. The first epoch is the period before 1776; the second one, from 1776 to 1871, and the third the period since 1871. The sub- ject is, of course, treated in detail, and the facts concerning the museums and the publications are given, and also the names of the writers on Spanish insects, not only the Spanish writers but also those of other countries. The paper is of especial interest since it gives biographical data concerning many of the different writers, and, from the work as a whole, it is perfectly obvious that the insects of Spain are well known and that many first rate men have worked with them; moreover that Spain herself has developed some admirable entomologists. Of course, much of this was well known to the ento- mological world, and all recent entomologists know the work of the elder Bolivar and of Father Navas and a number of others. This paper by Dr. Dusmet y Alonso was reprinted in part in the (translated) Bulletin of the Entomological Society of Spain, Volume 2, No. 3, pp. 74-84, March, 1919; No. 4-5, pp. 87-98, April-May, 1919; No. 7-8, pp. 161-195, October-November, 1919. The injurious insects of Spain have been, in the main, those of the south of France and of Italy, and the old-time remedies were known in this country quite as well as they were in the others. There seemed no reason why active investigations of economic entomology should be taken up in that country ; all the more so since any results obtained in the other Mediterranean countries could be readily adopted there. Thus, while, as we have shown, Spain has developed a number of very excellent entomologists, as a country she entered the field of economic entomology at a comparatively recent. date. In 1893 a very large book was published entitled “ Insectos y Criptogamas que Invaden los Cultivos en Espafia.” It was written by D. Castildo Ascarate y Fernandez, Agricultural Engineer, and is divided into two parts. The first part, that treats of insects only, covers 336 pages; and the fungus diseases added to this make the entire book to cover 780 pages. It is the largest size octavo, and is illus- trated fairly abundantly, the illustrations for the most part appar- ently being drawn from other works. The more conspicuous of the injurious insects of Spain are considered, and the work was fairly well up-to-date for that period. The early portions treat of the anat- omy and classification of insects, and these are then considered in their relations to crops. Apparently this book covered the field in a satisfactory way, and although some years later a phytopathological WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 329 station was established near Madrid the work was directed more towards plant diseases than injurious insects. When I visited Madrid for the first time, in 1910, I had the plea- sure of meeting the veteran orthopterist, Ignacio Bolivar and, in company with El Conde de Montornes, visited this phytopathological station not far from Madrid. There I found Leandro Navarro, who, although much more interested in plant diseases, did what entomologi- cal work was necessary. In fact, there did not seem to be at that time any general demand for work in economic entomology. However, the economic argument was already being used to increase the funds requested from the government for the support of the Museum of Natural History, and in this way an expert Dipterist and an expert in parasitic Hymenoptera were added to the staff of the Museum and were sent, the one to study with Kertész in Budapest and the other with Schmiedeknecht in Germany, on the basis of the argu- ment that these men would be able to study competently the parasitic insects which would hold the injurious forms in check. Later, damage by the gipsy moth and by various other species started more efficient work. It is: possible that the visits of several entomologists from the United States, in search of parasites of the gipsy moth and the brown-tail moth, may have helped in the move- ment. Surely the damage done by certain scale insects to Citrus plantations, which began to be very noticeable about 1909, excited much interest, and American remedial methods were sought for and introduced. R. S. Woglum, of the Bureau of Entomology at Wash- ington, on his way to India to search for parasites of the so-called white-fly of Florida, stopped at Gibraltar in 1910, went up to Valen- cia at the request of the Spanish Government, and instructed Spanish agricultural engineers in fumigation by the use of tents as practiced in southern California. From that time on, progress has been rapid. The young Bolivar (Candido) turned his attention more to economic entomology. Re- search stations were started in several provinces, and much work of a sound character is now being done. D. D. de Torres, receiving a traveling fellowship from the International Education Board, came to the United States in 1927 and remained until after the Fourth International Congress of Entomology at Ithaca in August of 1928. The Bulletin of Vegetable Pathology and Agricultural Entomology, published regularly by the National Institute of Agronomical and Forest Investigation and Experiment, contains full reports from each of the stations above mentioned which show a high degree of excel- lent work. 22 330 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 This Bulletin was started in January, 1926, and contains special articles relating to economic entomology by J. Nonell, M. Beniloch, P. Herce, J. M. Berro, E. Ibarra, F. Gomez Clemente, C. Arroniz, M. Sanchez, A. Cabrera Diaz, D. D. de Torres, J. del Canizo, and others. The Bulletin also contains in each number an excellent bib- liography in which reviews of important works are given with some detail. In the last number received at Washington in October, 1929 (the number for December, 1928) there is a long and interesting article by De Torres on the plant-inspection system as it functions in the United States and Canada. There is also a very interesting and well illustrated article on the acclimatization in Spain of Cryptolaemus montrousieri, by F. Gomez Clemente; and another, on a plague of melons (Epilachna chrysomelina) by Del Canizo; while Benlloch and Herce have articles on insecticides, and Del Canizo one on the codling moth. There is also an obituary notice of Leandro Navarro, whom | met in Madrid in Igto. This Bulletin of Vegetable Pathology and Agricultural Entomol- ogy was preceded for the years 1923 to 1925 by the Revista de Fito- patologia, of which three volumes were published. This was called the organ of the Service for the Study and Extinction of Forest Plagues under the Director of the Laboratory of Spanish Forest Fauna, D. Manuel Aullo y Costilla. This Revista contained a num- ber of entomological articles, including publications on parasites by R. Garcia Mercet ; others by C. Bolivar y Pieltain, and others. Among them is an important article on the gipsy moth by the Director, M. Aullo. This publication continued through 1928, when it was apparently changed in some respects, and there was begun in October, 1929, the publication of the Revista de Biologia Forestal y Lim- nologia, which is termed the Second Series of. the Revista de Fitopa- tologia. The first number is entitled “ Series A, No. 1.” The Bulletin of the Royal Spanish Natural History Society has contained entomological articles of economic importance from time to time. Thus, in 1925, it contained articles of this nature by Escalara, Garcia y Mercet, Sanchez y Sanchez, and De More. PORTUGAL Portugal is one of the South European countries in which wine- growing has always been one of the more important agricultural industries. The wines of Oporto, for example, have long been famous. Naturally, then, the advent of the grape-vine Phylloxera created a great stir in this country. Work in economic entomology was hardly known before the Phylloxera came. The general interest WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 331 in the problem of this new enemy of the vine was very great from the start. The agricultural newspapers of the period were filled with notices of the ravages of the pest and with observations and instruc- tions relative to the means of combating it that had been proposed not only in Portugal but also in foreign countries. Especial studies were made of the hitherto unknown plague, and laws and regulations were promulgated by the Government just as they were by govern- ments in many other parts of the world but especially in Europe. Govermental investigation was not begun for a long time. The Portuguese, however, followed closely everything that was being done in France. Questions relating to crop pests were handled in a way, at the Agricultural Institute by Professor Verissimo d’Almeida, while Profs. Barbosa du Bochage and Matoso Santos of the Univer- sity at Lisbon and Paulino d’Oliveira and Lopes Vieira of the Univer- sity of Coimbra studied the plant parasites that were brought to them by farmers or sent to them in correspondence. In 1899, however, Carlos LeCocq, then Agricultural Engineer, organized the Laboratory of Vegetable Pathology and installed it in the building of the Ministry of Agriculture. It was composed of two sections, one for cryptogamy and the other for entomology. It was a good working organization, each section having a chief (trained as an Agricultural Engineer) and each was aided by a preparator and auxiliary personnel. Senhor LeCocq was afterwards made Director General. The newly founded laboratory was for some time in a very flour- ishing condition, and many species of injurious insects were studied, and remedies put into effect. The incident which first brought this laboratory and the Bureau of Entomology at Washington together was as follows: The white or fluted scale, Icerya purchasi, in the late 1880’s made its appearance in the orange and lemon groves along the banks of the river Tagus in Portugal. It multiplied enormously, and disaster was threatened. In September, 1896, the attention of the Washington Bureau was drawn to this matter by Senhor Armando da Silva. In reply, I suggested the importation of the Australian ladybird, Novius cardinalis, and while awaiting his reply I received a letter from Senhor LeCocq, with whom Senhor da Silva had been in communication and with whom the subsequent correspondence was carried on. There was newspaper discussion of the matter in Portugal, and I am informed that many prominent persons over there thought that the California experience was based on untrust- worthy evidence and that the whole matter was an instance of Ameri- $32 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS vo. 84 can réclame. Senhor LeCocq, however, thought differently, and in October, 1927, the writer was able to secure, through the State De- partment of Horticulture of California, 60 adult Novius and some larvae. Only five of these reached Portugal alive, but Senhor LeCocq was able to rear many others from them. A second sending was started on the 22nd of November, and six adults arrived safely. From these were reared under Senhor LeCocq’s supervision and with ereat care so many of the little beetles that they were soon distributed to orange growers with the result that the scale insects were com- pletely subdued. An account of this rather extraordinary incident, with a translation of Senhor LeCocq’s story of the Portuguese end, will be found in Bulletin 18, new series, of the United States Bureau of Entomology, pages 30-35 (November, 1898). I had the pleasure of visiting Lisbon in 1910. Senhor LeCocq, then Director of Agriculture, introduced me to Prof. A. F. de Seabra of the Phytopathological Station at Lisbon. Senhor de Seabra inter- ested himself greatly in the object of my mission (the European para- sites and natural enemies of the gipsy moth and the brown-tail moth) and we had a long talk on entomological matters of mutual interest. I am greatly indebted to him for most of the facts upon which this account of activities in Portugal is based. In 1923 I had the pleasure of meeting him again, at Madrid, at an international olive-fly con- ference held under the auspices of the International Institute of Agriculture at Rome. He was one of the representatives of Portugal at this important conference. In 1910 the growing work of the Laboratory began to decline. Reorganizations of all the public services were made at that time, since the present Republic of Portugal was formed that year, and the progress of technical work was somewhat hampered. However, the Laboratory of Vegetable Pathology having been installed at the Ag- ricultural Institute of Lisbon, it continued its investigations under the direction of Prof. Verissimo d’Almeida. I have seen an interesting and important article entitled (trans- lated) “The Principal Lepidoptera Injurious to Agriculture in the Neighborhood of S. Fiel,’ published in Broteria, Salamanca, 1913 (Ser. Zool. vol. 9, pp. 40-44). In 1916 Senhor de Seabra was charged with the organization of a Laboratory of Forest Biology. There was an old laboratory, be- longing to the Forest Service, in which the Agricultural Engineer, Camara Pestana, had made some very interesting studies on the dis- ease of the chestnut, and certain forest engineers, such as Mendes, d’Almeida and others, had also done some work on forestry biology. WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 333 After the organization of the Laboratory by De Seabra its investiga- tions were especially occupied with entomological subjects. Interest- ing studies have been made upon the oak Tortrix and upon the gipsy moth and brown-tail moth; also upon the European elm leaf beetle and several other insects injurious to trees; and at the same time studies have been carried on concerning the general fauna of the forests. A special Entomological Section has been started at Coimbra. At the present time the Laboratory of Vegetable Pathology still has approximately the old organization, but has a more numerous technical personnel and is well installed in the new building of the Superior Institute of Agronomy at Lisbon under the direction of Prof. Sousa da Camara. This Laboratory was represented at the international olive-fly conference at Madrid in 1923, and has made investigations on this injurious insect. Aside from these activities of the general government, I am in- formed that there has just been organized in the Museum of the University of Coimbra a special Section of Biology and Parasitology publishing archives and also occupying itself with the study of para- sites of plants. Moreover the Museum of the University of Porto has established an insectorium at Foz do Douro in which the species injurious to agriculture will be studied. Under the titles (translated) “ Publications of the Laboratory of Vegetable Pathology ”’ and (translated) “ Works of the Laboratory of Plant Biology,” a number of studies, instructions, etc., have been published since the organization of these institutions. And apropos to the different plagues of agriculture, the Government has issued laws and special instructions. Quite recently an edict has been promul- gated regulating the services destined for the fight against the Argen- tine ant. More or less entomological work of one kind or another has been done in the Portuguese colonies. About the time of the revolution, Mr. G. H. Gable, of the United States Federal Bureau, for example, was sent to the Azores. Later, C. W. Howard was sent from the United States to Portuguese East Africa. During 1928 and 1929 M. P. Lesne, a very well known entomologist of the Paris Museum of Natural History was resident in Mozambique studying insect pests, especially those of cotton. In 1916 a colonial agricultural company entitled (translated) ‘‘ The Overseas Agricultural Company ” established a Laboratory of Ento- mology and Phytopathology at Lisbon. This laboratory was well organized, and sent a trained Agricultural Engineer to San Thomé to make studies of the cacao and other cultures of that island and to 334 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS vot. 84 send to the Lisbon Laboratory the necessary material for study. This laboratory has published reports and scientific memoirs in the (trans- lated) “ Memoirs of the Portuguese Society of Natural Sciences,” and also some of its papers have been privately published by the company. A large quantity of entomological material has been gath- ered, and it has been identified not only at Lisbon but at London and Paris by well known specialists, and may be found in the Colonial Museum at Belem, Lisbon. Professor de Seabra in the early 1890’s studied in Paris. He took courses in natural science at the Sorbonne, at the Museum of Natu- ral History and at the Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes ; and with the founding of the Laboratory of Vegetable Pathology under the Ministry of Agriculture at Lisbon he joined the force as Prepara- tor ; and in 1905 was made Chief of the Entomological Section. Pro- fessor de Seabra is now (December, 1929) a man of 55 years who has done much entomological work of importance although he has covered not only the field of agricultural zoology but has done con- siderable phytopathological work. His list of publications covers more than 160 titles and includes not only papers of economic bear- ing, but also the results of important work in taxonomy. GREECE The Grecian Government did practically nothing in the way of encouraging research in economic entomology or in helping the Grecian agriculturist to avoid insect damage until political affairs began to stabilize themselves after the conclusion of the World War. Such information as the comparatively few scientific men of that country and the more progressive of the agriculturists could gain from foreign publications was utilized ; and this was the only source. It is true, however, that when a Ministry of Agriculture was founded in 1910 the first person to be appointed Minister, Emmanuel Benachi, called together the most competent men for consultation on this point, and the general opinion seemed to be that a special phyto- pathological service should be started. Some move was made in that direction, and shortly afterwards Dr. C. Isaakides was appointed an inspector and visited the phytopathological institutions at Gembloux, at Paris, and at Florence. I had the pleasure of meeting him in 1912 in the laboratory of Paul Marchal at Paris. In 1914 he had begun active work; and then came the war. It was not until 1923 that the Central Phytopathological Service was organized under the decree of May 26. This service has been in active operation since that time, and has been supplemented by the establishment of regional laboratories in Thessaly, Peloponesis, and WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 335 Crete. No special entomological bureaus have been established, and the men so far engaged are acquainted with the general features of both phytopathology and agricultural entomology. The present year (1930) a phytopathological institute at Kiphissia, a suburb of Athens, 14 kilometers northwest of the city, was opened and started operations. It is known as the Benakion Phytopathologi- cal Institute, and was erected and equipped with funds left by the late Emmanual Benakis. The purpose of the Institute is research work in the fields of entomology and plant pathology. In addition to this research work, graduate students of the agricultural colleges of Athens and Salonica may take postgraduate work here. Building operations were started in 1927, and the actual operation of the Institute, under the direction of Professor Isaakides, was started in January, 1930. This late information has been given to me by Mr. John Hadji Nicolaou, who spent most of the year 1929 in the United States study- ing economic entomology largely with Prof. T. J. Headlee at New Brunswick, New Jersey, but who also has done work in the University of California and at its southern branch at Riverside. He is now (April, 1930) about to return to Greece to take up work in eco- nomic entomology under the Department of Agriculture of the Government. €YPRUS Like all countries around the eastern Mediterranean, the island of Cyprus has been subject to locust invasions from time immemorial. Mr. H. M. Morris, at present Government Entomologist, has been good enough to send me a copy of two pages from the “ Handbook of Cyprus” by Luke and Jardine (Macmillan, 1920), and we quote bere the following paragraph concerning early days: Locusts. The earlier modes of attack were at least quaint. Under Hugh I (1205-1218) an icon representing SS. Christopher, Tarasius, and Tryphon was carried processionally to meet the advancing swarms, and the crops were saved. In 1411 a priest who was cursing them was suffocated by locusts. In 1473 we hear of water brought in open vessels from Kerktk, in Persia: this attracted a flock of “red and black birds, which, flying together like starlings, with their song and flight destroyed the locusts.” In 1688 the Panagia of Kykko was invoked to bring these birds, which were perhaps the russet starling (Pastor roseus). In 1628 Archbishop Christopoulos begged the abbot of the Laura on Mount Athos to send him the head of S. Michael, sometime Metropolitan of Synnada in Phrygia, and a martyr under Leo the Isaurian about 814, to stay the plague. In 1881, however, special legislation was passed to provide funds for a war of extermination, and between July of 1881 and July of 330 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VoL. 84 1882 30,000 pounds was expended on the campaign. One thousand, three hundred and five tons of eggs were destroyed at a cost of nearly 12,000 pounds. Then the screen and pit system was adopted, which became generally known as the Cypriote method and has been of great use ever since. In fact it has been used the present year in eastern Egypt and in Transjordania. In 1883, it is stated, two hun- dred thousand kilos of locusts were destroyed in this way. From 1896 to 1905, P. Gennadius ( a Greek) was Director of Agri- culture in Cyprus, and corresponded with the Bureau of Entomology in Washington. Although not distinctly an entomologist, he was a very well informed man and carried on some entomological work. He was succeeded by another Greek, D. Saracomenos, until 1911. A Cypriote, Z. I. Solomides, was Entomologist from 1914 to 1920, but was only a junior officer. He was succeeded by a fellow countryman, G. A. Mavromoustakis, who held office in 1921 and 1922. In 1923 an Englishman, Mr. D. S. Wilkinson, was appointed Government Entomologist, and remained until 1926. Through his efforts, the rather abundant legislation in force regarding insect pests was re- formed and new legislation was adopted. He made studies of the codling moth, of Eurytoma amygdali, and especially of Thawmeto- poea wilkinsoni, publishing a long account of the latter insect in the Bulletin of Entomological Research for October 2, 1926. Mr Wilkin- son is now a Senior Assistant in the Imperial Bureau of Entomology at London. In the beginning of 1927, Mr. H. M. Morris was appointed. Mr. Morris was a well known worker on several important problems in economic entomology who had been connected with the Rothamsted Iexperimental Station at Harpenden, England, and who has done some excellent work in Cyprus since his arrival. The island produces wheat, cotton, Citrus fruits, and apples, all with the usual pests, and, as Mr. Morris writes me, there are also locusts and rats to be dealt with. He finds himself so busy that he has little time for research. Parr Ui] ASIA ts - . + JAPAN With the modernization of this important country, entomology received rather early attention, but it was really not until after some of the early students, especially selected for their intellectual qualities, had begun to return from Europe and the United States that applied science in many directions began actively to move. The writer was a student at Cornell with the brilliant botanist, R. Yatabe, for example, whose greatly lamented death occurred all too early, when his work at the Imperial University was becoming notable. There were later traveling students who went into entomology. Silkworm culture is one of the oldest industries in Japan, and consequently there has always existed in that country a familiarity with insects that does not exist in other countries. Insect subjects, for example, were often used by Japanese artists, especially in the old days. The accuracy of some of these old drawings is very impressive and leads one to believe that the Japanese are naturally very keen observers of details as well as of larger things. Prior to 1867 insects were studied in Japan principally as to their use in medicine. They were used for medical purposes very exten- sively, and in fact still are so used.” As late as 1919 Miyake published an important paper entitled “ Investigations upon Insects Used for Food and in Medicine.” Some excellent zoologists and morphologists were developed at an early day, notably Mitsukuri and Watase. In 1880 the Tokyo Zoological Society was organized, and for a period of years entomological papers appeared in its magazine. Mr. C. P. Clausen informs me that Doctor Ishikawa began the publication in this magazine of a series of articles entitled ‘‘ Stories about Insects ” which were widely read; and the magazine was used in place of books on this subject as none had been printed at that time in Japanese. In 1898 was published Matsumura’s “ Entomology of Japan,” the first book confined to insect classification to be published in that country. It aroused a great interest in entomology, and many publications followed. Kakichi Mitsukuri, the eminent Japanese zoologist and embry- ologist, was born in 1857. He came to the United States in 1873; took his doctorate in philosophy at Yale in 1879 and at Johns Hopkins *In an important monographic paper on gall-producing aphides and their galls, by Prof. Kota Monzen, published in May, 1920, the statement is made that Ranzan Ono described a sumach gall in 1802 stating that the gall “was inhabited by small insects and was utilized by women to dye their teeth!” 339 340 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 in 1883. He became Professor of Zoology in the University of Tokyo in 1882. In 1893 he was made a Councillor of the University, and in 1901 Dean of the College of Science, which position he held until 1907. He died in 1909. Mitsukuri, from his researches, became well known to all zoologists, and he did great work in the training of students who entered many different departments of entomological investigation. He brought together a very large collection of Japanese insects which were sent to the Columbian Exposition at Chicago in 1893. They were most of them subsequently presented to the United States National Museum and received the attention of a large number of specialists, among them the late W. H. Ashmead. Mitsukuri was much more than a broad zoologist ; he was a high- minded, broad-thinking, patriotic citizen of Japan. In 1897 he visited the United States and gave a course of lectures before the Lowell Institute in Boston on the subject of ‘ The Social Life of Japan.” These lectures were subsequently published, and in 1922 were trans- lated into French by Prof. M. Miyajima and published by the Franco- Japanese Society of Paris. No one who reads one of these books can fail to be impressed more than ever before by the high ethical spirit of the better type of Japanese life, and especially by the training of the children which fits them to become the highly efficient people the Japanese have shown themselves to be in many ways. Applied entomology was somewhat in advance of systematic ento- mology, and a book on injurious insects was published by Fukuhara in 1882. Later, Ono published his “ Introduction to Applied Ento- mology,’ and volumes on insects by Sasaki and Matsumura were published in 1899. The first lectures on entomology were given in 1880 at the Komaba College at Tokyo by K. Neruki, and in 1882 Dr. C. Sasaki began his work there which concerned itself principally with research upon silkworms and which continued until his retirement in 1920. Sasaki’s early research work upon the Tachinid parasite of the silkworm, which he called Ujimyia sericaria and which caused a mortality among silkworms to which had been given the name in Japan of the wji. disease, was astonishing to the entomological world in the novelty of its results, and his early announcements met with general incredulity. They were later abundantly confirmed by the work of C. H. T. Townsend and others; and the old ideas of the bionomics of the Tachinidae have been vastly modified. At the Sapporo Agricultural College (now the Hokkaido Imperial University) lectures were given by Nozawa and Hashimoto prior to Doctor Matsumura’s coming in 1895. WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 341 A very interesting and important entomological laboratory had started at Gifu in 1897 by Y. Nawa, a native who had not studied abroad. He built up an excellent laboratory and founded a journal which was continued for many years. It has been widely distributed, but, owing to very general ignorance in other countries of the Japanese language, only its excellent line illustrations and the Latin names of the insects have been intelligible as a rule. About 1900 there was a great extension of teaching and research in entomology to all of the Government agricultural colleges and agri- cultural common schools, and numerous experiment stations were started. The following is a list of institutions that either teach ento- mology or engage in entomological research at the present time: DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Entomologist or Dept. 5 : z Head Mokyomlmpental Wmiversity” sa. c.cce aces eis ae ele sce 6 Kyotomlmperial Umiversity, . cos cs cece ses cre © ce «ieee Dre. Yuasa Kyushiu Imperial University, Fukuoka............... Prot, To Esaki: Senda1 Imperial’ University, Sendai.:2./............. Hokkaido Imperial University, Sapporo.............. Dr. S. Matsumura. Taihoku Imperial University, Taihoku, Formosa..... Dr. 1. Shiraki: Chosen Imperial University, Keijo, Chosen........... Morioka College of Agriculture and Forestry, Morioka. Prof. T. Monzen. Kagoshima College of Agriculture and Forestry, Ialsoshima epee nears re cle eels ioe sien Prof. G. Okajima. Tottori Agricultural ‘Gollege. “Tottori... ..:.s....... Prof. S. Inomata. Utsunomiya Agricultural College, Utsunomiya....... Prof. B. Shibata. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY Bureaurom NenicuittrepmokyOnc se seee eco e acieciece a. Mr. I, Kuwana. Imperial Central Agricultural Experiment Station, INashigahanarelolayOmnarmecirct scien seen cee el. Mr. S. Kinoshita. Sericultural Experiment Station, Nakano......... Dr. H. Yokoyama. Brea Or LVOLEStV Try tek sis on)ece care chayarevere leche cicre eteyes ei * Mr. S. Yano Forestry Experiment Station, Meguro, Tokyo..... MroS: Yano DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE Imperial’ Plant Quarantine Service: ...5..5..6 000.02 .. Mr. I. Kuwana. STATIONS UNDER THE PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENTS Hokkaido Agricultural Experiment Station, Kotoni, Sap pOnOrmersterieeien mimic eecine ole Otto essnarse Mr. Okayama Agricultural Experiment Station, Okayama.. Mr. Shimane Agricultural Experiment Station, Shimane.. Mr. Niigata Agricultural Experiment Station, Nagaoka.. Mr. Fukushima Agricultural Experiment Station, aictishiitnayererttc ete icks teres etacvavc cise brs leceiatelerers Mr. K. Ito. Shizuoka Agricultural Experiment Station, Shizuoka.. Mr. K. Yoshida. Wakayama Agricultural Experiment Station, WW calccarviclentch seis nite Ribyet sate ien ais toss ave, oealieass sider 4st Chosen Agricultural Experiment Station, Chosen GEG REA ee eeeine ald oatiiseidae a tereele ads Mr. S. Nakayama. Kuwayama. Matsumoto. Nozu. . Takahashi. eee 342 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 Srations UNDER THE PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENTS Entomol git ps Dept. Taihoku Agricultural Experiment Station, Taihoku, Taiwan) |(Rormosal): scrieieaeteierrncinteieirer Dr. T. Shiraki. Chosen Forestry Experiment Station, Keijo.......... Mr. J. Murayama. PRIVATE LABORATORIES Nawa Entomological Laboratory, Gifu............... Mr. U. Nawa. Ohara Institute fiir landwirtschaftliche Forschungen Kurashiki: (Okayatnia ess... one ae eneet eee Dr. C. Harukawa. This list has been given me by Mr. C. P. Clausen, who has spent some years in Japan recently and who has also been good enough to furnish me with the following facts: The leading university in respect to entomology is that of Hokkaido, with Dr. S. Matsumura as head of the department. The lead taken by this university may be attributed to the fact that when organized 52 years ago it was headed for a short time by President Clark of Amherst, and for a number of years a considerable number of the staff were American. Doctor Matsumura, upon eraduating from this university (then the Sapporo Agricultural College, later the Tohoku Imperial University, and finally the Hokkaido Imperial University), spent several years abroad in study and returned in 1893 to hold the newly established chair of entomology. He has served continuously since that time and has built up by far the largest collection of insects in Japan, in fact this is the only comprehensive collection in the country today. The university has recently completed a concrete fire-proof building solely for the housing of this collection. For many years the Hokkaido University was the only institution in Japan giving training in entomology, and consequently a large proportion of the leading entomologists of the present day received their training under Doctor Matsumura, notable among them being Doctors Shiraki and Okamoto. Doctor Matsumura is a most extensive writer, his best known writings being the three volumes on economic entomology and the twelve profusely illustrated volumes under the title “Thousand Insects of Japan.” In addition he has described several thousand species covering practically every order. He speaks and writes both English and German with considerable facility. Working under Doctor Matsumura is Mr. T. Uchida, who is engaged primarily in a study of the Ichneumonoidea. As in practically every country the early work in entomology was largely along systematic lines, and the work at Sapporo is still being confined entirely to this line. At other institutions there is now developing quite a pronounced leaning toward the biological phases of the subject. The Tokyo Imperial University, with its College of Agriculture at Kamabe, has no department of entomology and at present no entomologist on the staff. Mr. Yano of the Forestry Experiment Station at Meguro delivers a course of lectures there, but nothing further is offered at present. Dr. C. Sasaki was for a period of years professor of entomology at the college but retired in 1920. His work has been largely upon silkworms, and it was while a member of the staff of the Sericultural Experiment Station at Nakano that he made his investi- gations upon the Tachinid, Ugimya sericariae, and published in 1887 his account of the unusual life-history of this parasite, in which was demonstrated for the first time the habit of leaf-oviposition. WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 343 The entomological department at Kyoto Imperial University was organized in 1923 with Dr. H. Yuasa, who studied for many years in America and took his doctorate at Illinois, as its head. He is known primarily for his work upon the larvae of the saw-flies. The newly organized Taihoku Imperial University in Taiwan (Formosa) has Dr. T. Shiraki as head of the division of entomology and zoology. He also holds the position of chief of the division of economic zoology at the Government Research Institute and entomologist at the Taihoku Agricultural Experiment Station. His best known publications are a large volume on the general economic insects of Formosa and one of several hundred pages reviewing the cotton insects of the world. The remaining three of the Imperial universities have no provision at present for teaching or research in entomology. The Imperial Central Agricultural Experiment Station at Nishigahara, Tokyo, was at one time the leading institution in research in economic entomology in Japan, with Dr. T. Miyake and Mr. Kuwana on the staff. Upon Kuwana’s transfer to quarantine work in 1914 and the death of Doctor Miyake in 1920 the activities of the entomological section declined. The station, however, is now being reorganized and will move into a fine new building next month, and it is anticipated that the research work of the institution will now be much extended. The leading provincial experiment stations as far as entomology is concerned are those of Hokkaido, Okayama, and Wakayama in Japan proper, and at Taihoku, Taiwan (Formosa), and Suigen, Chosen (Korea). The Hokkaido station at Kotoni, Sapporo, of which Mr. S. Kuwayama is the entomologist, is doing extensive work upon field crop and deciduous fruit insects, and a number of extensive publications have been put out in recent years. The Shizuoka station confines itself largely to Citrus problems, but the remaining ones listed cover the entire field, with perhaps greater attention being paid to insects affecting rice. Of the private institutions the Nawa Entomological Laboratory at Gifu is the oldest and best known. Established by the late Y. Nawa, it is now being con- ducted by his son, U. Nawa. Among other things there is published by this laboratory Konchu Sekai (Insect World) now in its 32nd volume, as well as a number of volumes of taxonomic work, largely on Lepidoptera, by K. Nagano. The income of the laboratory is supplemented by the manufacture and sale of various household articles artistically decorated with the wings of butterflies and moths and other insects also. They have developed a process whereby the scales from the wings of Lepidoptera can be transferred direct to any desired surface, and the coloring and texture is thus identical with the actual specimens. The second of the private laboratories is the Ohara Institute at Kurashiki, which is engaged primarily in research along economic lines. Dr. C. Harukawa, who studied for a time at the University of Illinois, is the entomologist, and has published a series of papers dealing with Laspeyresia molesta and various other deciduous fruit insects, as well as upon some affecting rice. * The Ohara Institute for Agricultural Research is an important organization. Its publications have been mainly printed in German with the title (translated) “Proceedings of the Ohara Institute for Agricultural Research.’ M. Kondo is the Director of the Institute, and some of the articles are written in the German language. The majority of them are written in English. The Institute has a 344 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VoL. 84 One of the more prominent entomologists of Japan, not given in my list, is Dr. H. Okamoto, who prior to 1921 was entomologist of the Hokkaido station, and, until 1924, of the Chosen station. Since that time he has been without an official position. His systematic work has been largely upon the Lepidoptera, with biological and control studies on various deciduous fruit insects. Aside from the publications of the various experiment stations, entomological papers in Japan appear very largely in the following periodicals : In ForeiGN LANGUAGES ONLY: Journal of the College of Agriculture, Tokyo Imperial University, Tokyo. Journal of the College of Agriculture, Hokkaido Imperial University, Sapporo. Trarisactions of the Sapporo Natural History Society, Sapporo. Berichte des “Ohara Institute fiir landwirtschaftliche Forsuchungen,” Kurashiki, Okayama. In JAPANESE ONLY: Konchu Sekai (Insect World), Nawa Entomological Laboratory, Gifu. Dobutsugaku Zasshi (Zoological Magazine), Zoological Society of Japan, Tokyo. Byochu-gai Zasshi (Journal of Plant Protection), Plant Protection Society, Tokyo. Byokingaichu Iho (Journal of Pathology and Entomology), Department of Agriculture and Forestry, Tokyo. Sapporo Norin-gaku Kwaihd (Transactions Sapporo Society of Agriculture and Forestry), Sapporo. Dai Nippon No Kwaihd (Journal of Agricultural Society, Japan), Tokyo. Several other entomological journals have been published in the past but were eventually discontinued, so that Konchu Sekai is the only one now remain- ing devoted entirely to entomology. At the Formosa Experiment Station Mr. R. Takahashi is publishing an exten- sive series of papers in English on the Aphididaes of Formosa. This last paragraph quoted from Mr. Clausen reminds me that the Formosa Experiment Station has been doing especially good work for a number of years. Dr. T. Shiraki visited this country in 1909, and, both before his visit and later, published a number of good papers. I especially remember one on insects affecting growing rice, in which the rice stem borer (Chilo simplex) was treated among other forms. An especially interesting report was published from this sta- tion in 1916 on the injurious insects of the mulberry tree in Formosa. The author was M. Maki. The book covered 265 pages, with 24 text figures and 14 plates. The number of insects attacking this important tree in Japan appears to be very great, and they appear rather large organization, carrying specialists in forest bacteriology, plant pathology, and entomology, with a corps of assistants numbering about 15 in 1929. Doctor Harukawa has been connected with the Institute since 1917 and has published many important papers. He is considered by some of the Japanese workers to be practically the foremost economic entomologist in Japan. WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—-HOWARD 345 to have been studied carefully by the author of this work. Professor Shiraki spent 1927 and a large part of 1928 in foreign travel. In 1927 he spent some time in Berlin and at other points in Europe. I was glad to meet him in June of that year in the British Museum of Natural History. In September we were both at the Interna- tional Congress of Zoology at Budapest. And in 1928 he returned to Japan by way of the United States, was a delegate to the Fourth International Congress of Entomology at Ithaca, and later visited the Federal Bureau of Entomology at Washington. Mitsukuri, one of the greatest of the early Japanese zoologists, visited the United States as early as 1880 and made many friends. He had been a student of E. S. Morse, one of the famous students of the elder Agassiz, who went to Japan and lectured on zoology in the Imperial University of Tokyo in the early 1870's. Mitsukuri, al- though a broad zoologist, was greatly interested in insects, and he sent a very large collection of Japanese insects to the World’s Fair at Chicago in 1893. This collection in its entirety came to Washington, and portions of it were worked up by different specialists, the Hy- menoptera in particular being very well handled by the late Dr. W. H. Ashmead. And Mitsukuri himself visited this country in the late nineties and spoke before the Biological Society of Washington. About 1899, S. I. Kuwana, who had been a student at Stanford University and who had paid especial attention to the scale insects, went back to Japan.. It was at a time when the original home of the San Jose scale was under dispute, and Kuwana, finding it abundant in many orchards in Japan, announced that in his opinion the insect must originally have come to America from that country. Dr. C. L. Marlatt, of the United States Bureau of Entomology, who had been paying especial attention to the San Jose scale, was not perfectly satisfied with this conclusion, and in 1900 started on a long trip around the world in the course of which he proposed to settle, if possible, this question of the original home of the scale. He visited Japan first, and it may be stated at once that he decided that Japan got the scale from the United States rather than the reverse, and he eventually found what seems with little doubt to be the original home in north China. However, Doctor Marlatt’s visit to Japan really started a more personal contact between the Japa- nese workers and those of this country than had existed before. He was received with extreme courtesy. A skilled Japanese student, Mr. Hori, was nominated by the Government as his traveling com- panion. He visited Y. Nawa at his entomological laboratory at Gifu, and explored many parts of the Japanese archipelago. Professor Kuwana greeted him in a fraternally hospitable way and helped him, 23 346 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 as did all the Japanese scientific men whom he met, to the extent of his ability. Professor Kuwana’s long residence in California and his admirable English, of course, made him of great assistance.’ Again in 1908 Prof. Trevor Kincaid was sent to Japan to study the parasites of the gipsy moth and the brown-tail moth. While his expenses were paid by the State of Massachusetts, he traveled as an authorized representative of the United States Department of Agriculture. Both officially and personally, he was received with extreme courtesy and hospitality. His work was facilitated in every possible way. The Department of Agriculture of the Japanese Gov- ernment authorized Professor Kuwana to assist in the work, and after Professor Kincaid returned to the United States shipments of the parasites were continued by Kuwana for a long time and without expense to the United States. Then Japanese entomologists began to come to America more numerously—some to study at the different universities ; others, al- ready well trained, to look into the different aspects of applied ento- mology as practiced in this country. One of the early arrivals was T. Shiraki, from Formosa, who arrived in 1909; and from that time on there have been one or two almost every year to visit Washington and some of the other entomological points of interest in the United States. A list of those who happened to register in my office is appended. T. Shiraki, 1909, Formosa. C. Sasaki, November 29, 1910, Zool. and Ent., Imp. Univ., Tokyo. J. Omori, December 1, 1911, Zool. and Ent., Imp. Coll. Agr., Morioka. T. Ito, February 18, 1914, Chief, Plant Industry, Dept. Agr. and Commerce, Tokyo. G. Okajima, April 19, 1916, Prof. Ent., Kagoshima. M. Oshima, August 12, 1918, Zool., Govt. Inst. of Science, Formosa. M. Miyijima, August 13, 1919, Kitasato Inst. S. I. Kuwana, September 20, 1919, Dir., Plant Quarantine Sta.; Ent., Imp. Agr. Ex. Sta., Tokyo. S. Matsumura, December 13, 1920, Imp. Univ., Hokkaido. M. Koidzumi, May 18, 1921, Inst. of Sci., Formosa. N. Ishimori, April 8, 1922, Asst., Imp. Univ., Tokyo. C. Harukawa, May 12, 1922, Ohara Inst., Kurashiki, Okayama. ‘Doctor Marlatt writes me under date of January 14, 1929, “I recall vividly the courtesies which ‘were received from entomologists in all the principal sections of Japan which I have visited. It would be almost invidious to mention by name, but I have a very particular souvenir of the courtesies and very friendly personal interest and aid which was given me by those fine old Japanese pro- fessors, Doctors Mitsukuri and Watase. The former gave me particularly an insight into Japanese thought and courtesy which will always be a pleasure to me to recall.” a WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 347 S. Hozawa, September 29, 1922, Zool. Inst., Sendai. E. Kitajima, May 29, 1923, Prof. Ent., Coll. Silk Culture, Uyeda. A. Toki, April 12, 1923, Tokyo. Hirowo Ito, June 4, 1924, Zool. Lab., Tokyo Sericult. Coll. _ J. Hatori, April 28, 1925, Biol. and Health Officer, Formosa. R. Kawamura, May 5, 1925, Pathol., Med. Univ., Niigata. S. Itah, August 12, 1925, Entom., Kyoto Seric. Coll. K. Monzen, December 7, 1925, Prof. Ent., Coll. Agr. and Forestry, Morioka. C. Ishikawa, December 16, 1926, Imp. Univ., Tokyo. N. Yagi, June 22, 1927, Ent. Lab., Kyoto Imp. Univ. T. Shiraki, June 8, 1928, Taihoku Imp. Univ., Formosa. T. Esaki. June 22, 1928, Ent. Lab., Kyushu Imp. Univ., Fukuoka. S. Inomata, October, 1928, Prof. Ent., Coll. of Agr., Tottori. Finally it became necessary, on discovery of the dangerous work of the so-called Japanese beetle, to send other experts to Japan to search for the parasites of this injurious species. C. P. Clausen and J. L. King were sent over in 1919 and 1920 and a few years later T. R. Gardner was also sent. The story of Japan’s perfect courtesy was again repeated. The work of these men was rendered as easy as possible; their studies were greatly aided by the kindness of Japa- nese colleagues, and their important shipments to this country were facilitated in such a way as could hardly be expected from a for- eign people. In medical entomology, Japan has already done great work. As is widely realized, that country has been keenly appreciative of the value of all discoveries looking towards broad health measures. The early discoveries of Kitisato, which brought him at once into the ranks of the great workers in medicine, were followed by intense activity in all measures relating to public health; and it did not need Major Louis Livingston Seaman’s fine book entitled “ The True Triumph of Japan,” published after the Russo-Japanese War, to fix the atten- tion of all people interested in such questions on the advances Japan had made in health matters. Medical entomology has kept up with other branches, and much is to be expected from the Japanese workers. BRITISH INDIA British East India is larger than Australia. It is almost as large as all of Europe. It is almost as large as the United States. It is a very thickly settled country, with a very great range of climatic con- ditions, and therefore has a most varied agriculture. But after all it is not a wealthy country. We can see there what over-population would bring to the newer nations of the world such as the United 348 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 8&4 States or Australia, if the people were not gifted with energy and foresight or if they failed to read the lesson that India should teach them. With its range of climate, the insect fauna of India is richer than that of Europe or Australia. Entomologists knew this long ago. As sarly as 1798 Fabricius had described or recorded more than a thou- sand species of insects from India, and during the next century the [english collected and described many additional thousands. Good entomologists of other nations later, like the Frenchmen Amyot and Serville for example, developed the taxonomic side of Indian ento- mology until the region became famous for its profusion of new and strange forms. Catalogues of different groups of Indian insects were published by Atkinson, Moore, Cotes, Swinhoe, and others. But for a very long time little was known of the biology of the different forms, and practically no attention was paid to the economic im- portance of entomology. The Indian Museum at Calcutta, a Government institution, among other things brought together a collection of insects, and as early as 1885 the Director, Wood-Mason, published reports on the tea-bug of Assam and on a pest to the rice plant in Burma. The Museum from that time became the center of information on injurious insects. In 1888 Mr. E. C. Cotes was in charge of the entomological collec- tions of the Museum, and began the publication of an official series entitled “‘ Notes on Economic Entomology.” In the early part of that year Mr. Cotes prepared two reports, one on the wheat and rice wee- vil and the other on insecticides, and he was sent to an agricultural conference at Delhi where arrangements were made by the various provincial governments to send reports and specimens to the Museum from officials concerned with agriculture in-all parts of India. The task of collating the results and also of carrying on such investiga- tions as could be conducted at headquarters was entrusted to Mr. Cotes aided by a staff of six office assistants of his own selection. Circular letters were sent out to all parts of the country, and large numbers of reports and specimens soon began to come in. The results were published from time to time and freely circulated. In the next few years the identity of several hundred of the more important injurious species affecting the crops of India was ascertained; the nature of the damage occasioned by them became known, and their life histories in a large number of cases had been traced out. Infor- mation had been continuously supplied to officials and planters as to the nature of their insect pests, and the more promising methods of treatment. Many experiments had been tried with a view to the WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 349 adaptation of insecticides in use in other parts of the world to the requirements of special crops under cultivation in India. The pub- lication of the Indian Museum Notes was continued for a number of years, and the set is valuable for reference to workers in all parts of the world." Some of the illustrations are wonderfully well done. Five volumes and one part of a sixth were published. At the expiration of Mr. Cotes’ term of service, Mr. Lionel de Niceville was appointed Entomologist to the Government of India. He was instructed to carry his investigations into the field and study crop pests in the actual regions in which they were doing damage. Mr. de Niceville was a well known entomologist and a very compe- tent one, but unfortunately in the same year he contracted malaria and died. In 1901 E. P. Stebbing was appointed Forest Entomologist to the Government of India, and in 1903 H. Maxwell Lefroy was appointed to fill the post made vacant by De Niceville’s death. In the interim, Mr. Stebbing had published a series of circulars on agricultural eco- nomic entomology issued by the trustees of the Indian Museum. Between 1903 and 1907 Mr. Lefroy had published a number of ento- mological memoirs of the Department of Agriculture, and Mr. Steb- bing had published certain forest bulletins dealing with tree-boring beetles. In the meantime Mr. E. Ernest Greene had been made Gov- ernment Entomologist for Ceylon, with headquarters at the Royal Botanic Garden at Peradeniya, a position which he held for a time and during which he published the results of some admirable studies, especially with the Coccidae. It should be noted here that there was issued in 1902 by the Depart- ment of Agriculture of Mysore, a bulletin entitled “ Notes on Ento- mology ” by A. Lehman, Official Agricultural Chemist. It contains some general statements about insecticides. In 1905, Mr. Lefroy was transferred to Pusa, to the Central Re- search Department of the Agricultural Department, and the title of his post was changed to that of Imperial Entomologist to the Govern- ment of India. He was given an assistant in agricultural entomology, and an entomologist was also appointed to deal with disease-carrying insects, and there was another assistant. In 1912 Mr. Lefroy left India to go to London to become professor of entomology in the University of London. He was succeeded by * While busily engaged at this important work in the Museum, one day Mr. Cotes met a young American woman, a writer, who was on her way around the world—Sarah Jeannette Duncan—and later married her. I think they must have gone back to England to live not long afterwards. At all events, Mrs. Cotes has written one or two charming books about English life since that time. 350 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 Mr. T. Bainbrigge Fletcher, who had previously held the post of Gov- ernment Entomologist in Madras, and since that time the Research Institute has grown, new buildings have been erected, and the entomo- logical department has also grown. At the Third International Con- gress of Entomology at Zurich in the summer of 1925 Mr. Fletcher was present and gave an illustrated address in which he described in full the condition and the equipment of entomological work, and he has been kind enough to send me the manuscript of his address, which I believe has not been published. In 1907 a very excellent entomologist, Mr. F. M. Howlet, was connected with the work, and the papers that he published showed him to be a man of very great promise. He wrote part of Lefroy’s “Indian Insect Life.’ During the World War he was in England on leave and he acted as Entomologist to the Hygiene Department of the Royal Army Medical Corps during 1916 and 1917, returning to India the latter part of that year. He died in 1920. The force of the Entomological Section of the Institute in 1925 consisted of one Imperial Entomologist, one second entomologist, one first assistant, seven assistants, four artists, and also field men, clerks, setters, and a menial staff. Very large collections have been built up, and the work covers every aspect of Indian entomology except forest entomology which is dealt with at Dehra Dun. Prior to his appointment to the Imperial Bureau of Agricultural Research, Mr. Fletcher had been Government Entomologist to the Agricultural College and Research Institute at Coimbatore, Madras. He was succeeded by Mr. E. Ballard in 1914, but the latter was called to the colors at the outbreak of the war, and during his absence the post was filled by an Indian, Mr. T. V. Ramakrishna Ayyar. Mr. Ballard returned in 1919, leaving Madras in 1922 and being suc- ceeded by Rao Sahib Y. Ramachandra Rao. Admirable work has also been done in the Punjab by Indian work- ers, and also in the United Provinces, as well as in other sections. A number of the native workers have taken up entomology and are doing excellently well. Among them may be mentioned Mohammed Afzal Husain, Harnam Dass and C. C. Ghosh. The subject of forest entomology in India is carried on under the Imperial Forest Research Institute created at Dehra Dun in 1906. Prior to that, however, Mr. E. P. Stebbing prepared a small work on forest insects in 1898 and since then has advanced to be the head of the department. His work entitled “ Indian Forest Insects of Economic Importance ” is an excellent volume. WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY——-HOWARD 3 5iE In 1911 Dr. A. D, Imms was appointed Forest Zoologist, and made a serious attempt to establish the work on a sound basis. He occu- pied the post, however, only 16 months, and was succeeded by Mr. C. F. C. Beeson who finally succeeded in getting the staff increased and was given three Divisional Forest Entomologists as well as a Systematic Entomologist. In December, 1920, Dr. M. Cameron was appointed as Systematic Entomologist, and was succeeded in 1923 by Mr. J. C. M. Gardner. The present staff of the branch of Forest Entomology consists of the Chief (Doctor Beeson), the systematic worker (Mr. Gardner), two senior grade assistant entomologists, three junior grade assistant entomologists, 13 field men, setters, in- sectary keepers, etc., two artists, four clerks, and five servants. One very interesting feature of the more recent Indian work has been the series of entomological meetings first brought together by Doctor Fletcher at Pusa in 1915. All the entomologists of the inde- pendent States, of the planters’ associations and others were asked to meet at the Pusa laboratories. At this meeting they went over the list of crop pests of India in systematic order, took each insect at a time and went over its distribution, its food plants, and so on, all persons present taking part in the discussion. No report of the proceedings of this meeting was published. The experiment, however, was so suc- cessful that a second meeting was called in 1917, a third in 1919, a fourth in 1921, and a fifth in 1923. The attendance at these con- gresses has increased, and, of those held since the first, very full reports have been published. The 1917 meeting lasted a week, and the results were published in a volume of 340 pages. The meeting of 1919 seems to have been particularly important, and its proceedings have been printed in three large volumes which comprise 1,137 pages and 182 plates. The proceedings of the 1921 meeting have been published in a volume of gor pages with 55 plates, and the fifth meeting is recorded in a volume of 422 pages and 37 plates. These volumes make an extraordinarily fine contribution to economic entomology. It becomes at once evident to one who has examined these large volumes that much work in applied entomology is done elsewhere than under the auspices of the central Government. As a matter of fact, the agricultural departments of the provinces and of some of the Indian States maintain entomological staffs. Mr. Fletcher pointed out in 1925, at Zurich, that in Madras, the Punjab, and the United Provinces, these staffs comprised a Government Entomologist with assistants. He further stated that in the other provinces there are usually only one or two assistants employed in teaching entomology at the agricultural colleges or in economic work in the field. — mn bo SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 Madras stands out first among these provincial governments. In 1904 an entomological assistant to the Government Botanist was appointed. In 1909 two others were added, and they were trained under the Imperial Entomologist of Pusa. In 1912 Mr. Fletcher was appointed as Government Entomologist. He was succeeded in 1913 by Mr. E. Ballard. During the period of the war, when Mr. Ballard went to the fighting line, a native entomologist, Mr. T. V. Rama- krishna Ayyar, was Acting Entomologist. Mr. Ballard returned in 1919, devoting himself for three years to the study of cotton and paddy ; and in 1922 he retired, as we have stated in an earlier para- graph. Mr. Ballard’s name will occur later in our accounts of work in Egypt and in Australia. The Punjab Agricultural College was established at Lyallpur in 1909. Previously the Department of Agriculture of the colony had carried on some entomological studies under Mr. Carson, and in 1910 an Entomological Section was established, which in 1919 was composed of an Entomologist, M. Afzal Husain, a Master of Arts from Cambridge University, with two principal assistants, five native research assistants, and a good force of clerical and other assistants. Good work is also being done in the United Provinces, where an Entomological Section was started in 1921. Instruction is given, and investigations are being carried on, largely with cotton insects. In Burma an Entomological Assistant to the Department of Agri- culture, in the person of Mr. K. D. Shroff, was appointed in 1906 and continued until 1918. With the opening of the Mandalay Agri- cultural College in 1919, very good plans for entomological work were made, and an excellent worker, in the person of Mr. C. C. Ghosh, was made Entomologist, Research Officer in charge of the Entomo- logical Station and Lecturer on Entomology, a good force of assis- tants being planned for him. In December, 1930, Mr. Ghosh visited Washington and made a short address before the Entomological Society. In Mysore, Dr. L. C. Coleman was appointed Entomologist and Mycologist as early as 1907. He was made Director of Agriculture in 1912, and Dr. K. Kunhi Kannan was appointed Entomologist in 1923. Entomological work has also been done in the provinces of Travan- core, Baroda and Hyderabad. In addition to this provincial work, the Indian Central Cotton Committee has maintained a small laboratory for work on the spotted bollworm of cotton, the Indian Tea Association has on its scientific staff an entomologist (Mr. E. A. Andrews) who for many years WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOW ARD R53 worked on the control of the so-called “mosquito blight” of tea (Helopeltis). Moreover, the Bombay Natural History Society pub- lishes in its journal many important papers on the life histories of Indian insects, and the Asiatic Society of Bengal has also published entomological papers in its journal from time to time. CEYLON Admirable work against injurious insects had been done in Ceylon for a great many years. Mr. E. Ernest Greene, for many years con- nected with the wonderful Botanic Gardens at Peradeniya, was an excellent entomologist, and continues his remarkable work on scale insects today although he retired to England many years ago. Ceylon has had a succession of good economic workers. One of the early Carnegie Students, Andrew Rutherford, went out there and published a number of excellent articles, mainly in the journal entitled Agri- culture. After his death, E. R. Speyer, another Carnegie Student to America, was sent out, and published several reports. And there are also reports signed by G. M. Henry, Assistant Entomologist. After Mr. Speyer returned to England, J. C. Hutson was appointed Govern- ment Entomologist and still holds the office. Mr. F. C. Jepson is Assistant Entomologist, and Mr. C. B. R. King is the Entomologist at the Tea Research Institute. Mr. King was formerly Entomologist to the Empire Cotton Growing Corporation in Nyasaland and Mo- zambique. Prior to his appointment in Ceylon, Mr. S. S. Light held the post. It should be stated that in 1916 Nigel K. Jardine held the temporary entomological post for the investigation of the tea Tortrix. G. M. Henry, in Tropical Agriculture for March, 1917, published a detailed account of this insect. DUTEH EAST INDIES Although Holland in Europe is a very small country, her colonial possessions are very great. I remember vividly how the American delegates to the International Congress of Entomology and Phyto- pathology at Wageningen in 1923 were impressed when one of the Dutch delegates showed a map of Holland and its colonial possessions superimposed upon a map of the United States. None of us had realized down to that time that Holland with its colonies covers a territory which would compare favorably with the whole of the most fertile portion of the United States proper. The Dutch have shown themselves to be wonderfully good colo- nizers, or, perhaps better, administrators of colonies. Their East Indies possessions, situated as they are in the tropics, offer a very 354 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 marked contrast to Holland. The native peoples as a whole would have been very difficult to govern harmoniously, to any other people but the Dutch. The great islands of Java and Sumatra are extremely fertile and grow crops of enormous value—sugar, tobacco, coffee, tea, cinchona, rubber, and others of lesser value. The Dutch have had to learn to know the people of these islands, and to cultivate these extremely valuable crops in the most productive manner. They have made a very thorough study of these matters; they have for genera- tions sent many of Holland’s brightest minds to the East Indies to take administrative or technical positions, and the results have been extraordinary from the view-point of applied agriculture as well as of social administration. It is rarely, in fact, that one speaks to a Hollander in a higher position at home who has not served his term in the East Indies. In 1896, Dr. L. Zehntner, an entomological expert, began to publish in Java, and he soon began correspondence with the entomological service in Washington, largely in regard to the identity of some of the insects that he was encountering in his economic work. He was obviously a well trained entomologist and quite competent to make careful biological and taxonomic studies of his new material. Many of the pests he encountered were new to science, and he described new species among them in the Coccidae, in the Aphididae, in the parasitic Hymenoptera, and in other groups. Situated as he was, far from the large collections and far from libraries, it is remarkable to see how well his work was done. He was either a very good and careful artist himself or he had the services of one. And evidently his fund for illustrations was not small, because his bulletins for the next ten years were illustrated with colored plates of a rare excellence. He made some mistakes in the placing of some of his new insects, but this is easily forgiven when we remember that he was working in Java. With his Parasitica, his early work showed a much better understanding of the subject than did, for example, the comparable work of Juan Bréthes in South America who in a similar way began to publish about parasitic Hymenoptera without a full library and without competent collections for comparisons. L. P. de Bussy, a well trained zoologist, was sent out to Sumatra and was made Economic Zoologist of the Tobacco Planters’ Experi- ment Station at Deli. A wide-spread insect, Heliothis obsoleta, known in the United States as an enemy to corn, tomato, cotton, tobacco, and certain other crops and which is here variously known as the cotton bollworm, the corn earworm and the tomato fruit-worm, was found to be damaging the Sumatran tobacco rather seriously. Doctor WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 355 de Bussy, knowing of the occurrence of the insect in this country and understanding that it was not a serious pest of tobacco here, thought that it might be held in check here by parasites that could be intro- duced into Sumatra; and the tobacco planters adopted a suggestion that he should go to the United States to secure such parasites. This decision was reached rather suddenly in the late spring or early summer of 1910, and he started for the United States via Amsterdam. The Dutch Government took the matter very seriously and notified the Dutch Minister to the United States that Doctor de Bussy was on his way, and asked him to lighten his path officially. As it happened, at that time the Dutch Minister was Jonkeer Loudon, long afterwards Minister of Education in Holland and one of her foremost statesmen. The Minister and his family had gone to Bar Harbor for the summer, but he left that cool summer resort on receipt of the advices from his home government and came to Washington in the heat of July to assure himself that the expert from Sumatra would be properly received. I assured the Minister that we would. do our utmost to forward the purpose of the mission, and at the same time was very much impressed by the importance of the matter as evidenced by Mr. Loudon’s unusual action. De Bussy proved to be a delightful and able man, and I went with him to the Pacific Coast and back through the Southwest to Texas where I left him with Doctor Hunter and his assistants at Dallas. The Heliothis was very abundant in Texas, and the Trichogramma egg-parasite was also abundant. De Bussy engaged one of Doctor Hunter’s assistants to make ship- ments of parasitized eggs to Sumatra, and returned to his post. Living parasites were introduced, but I believe brought about no especial change of conditions in the tobacco fields. I feel rather sure that the same species of Trichogramma, or one closely related to it, must have been present already on the island, or at least in Java, since it is figured on one of Zehntner’s plates. The anecdote is told to show the thought given to the subject by the planters and their experts and to indicate their enterprise. As a matter of fact, the Heliothis is by no means controlled by its parasites in the United States, and the comparative immunity of tobacco from its attack is probably due to the very great abundance of preferred foods, such as corn, tomatoes, or cotton. As would be expected from the personnel, the publications coming from the Dutch East Indies have been of the highest character, not only in other aspects of agricultural science but also in economic entomology. The Experiment Station for East Java was apparently founded in 1887, principally for sugar investigations. At the same time sta- 356 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 tions were started in West Java and Middle Java. Each station seems to have had its independent series of publications. In the first volume of the East Java station was published a long account of a Scarabaeid beetle (Apogonia destructor) with three ex- cellent engraved plates. The author was J. D. Kobus. It was pub- lished separately as No. 28 of the first series. In No. 43 of the same series the same author published an article on the same insect, and in this article described Thrips striatoptera, with an engraved plate. The Experiment Station at Medan, Sumatra, seems to have made a specialty. of tobacco more than any other crop, and it published a series of bulletins brought together in volumes from October, 1906, to 1924. In the earlier volumes are articles by L. P. de Bussy and others on insecticides and on the insect plagues of tobacco. As else- where stated, Doctor de Bussy came to the United States in 1910, and on his return published several papers. In 1916 he published a paper on the cigaret-beetle. In that year J. E. A. Van Doop pub- lished an article on the spread of the Trichogramma introduced into Sumatra from America by De Bussy; and in 1918 the same writer published on the tobacco louse and other tobacco insects. In 1907 the West Java station was amalgamated with the station for East Java, and later publications were issued by Dr. R. Fulmek and Dr. H. H. Karny. For the past 13 years Dr. S. Leefmans and Dr. P. van der Goot have been publishing entomological articles under the Institute for Plant Diseases at Buitenzorg. These have appeared as a rule in the form of bulletins, and refer largely to sugar cane insects. Later important papers on the rice borer, on the pests of cinchona, on a borer in the stems of jute, on the coffee borer, on tea insects and those injuring cocoa, and so on, have been published by these writers and also by L. G. E. Kalshoven, W. C. van Heurn, and W. Roepke. We have already mentioned Dr. L. Zehntner. He began publishing at an early date in the Archives of the Java Sugar Industry and in the Proceedings of the West Java Sugar Station. Many of his arti- cles were very important. Dr. W. Roepke in 1911 and rg12 published four papers on cacao insects. Thus very good men, trained in biology as applied to agriculture, have been working at various problems at these Dutch East India stations for many years, and their work has given these stations very high rank in the scientific world. They have included workers in° plant diseases as well as entomologists, plant physiologists, and other specialists. Of the entomologists, L. P. de Bussy, K. W. Dammer- man, W. Roepke, S. Leefmans, and P. van der Goot have all visited WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 357 Washington, and I am able to write of them in the highest terms, not only professionally but personally. No other country has a more com- petently manned service in economic entomology. Notable for its size and completeness is the large work entitled (translated) “ The Agricultural Zoology of the Malay Archipelago,” by K. W. Dammerman, Zoologist to the Department of Agriculture at Buitenzorg, Java, published in Amsterdam in 1919. This is a vol- ume of 368 pages, illustrated by 39 plates and 134 text figures. A number of the plates are colored and are extremely well done. While the work includes the whole of agricultural zoology, it is almost entirely entomolgical and pays especial attention to remedies. It is a very well printed royal octavo, issued from Amsterdam. By the close of 1927 Doctor Dammerman had prepared an English edition of this work. The scope of the work was extended to neigh- boring countries with faunas almost identical with that of the Dutch East Indies so far as pests are concerned, and he includes facts placed at his disposal by Prof. C. F. Baker of the Philippines and Mr. G. H. Corbett of the Federated Malay States. The book was considerably enlarged, and in its English form covers 473 pages. It was published at Amsterdam in 1929. It is interesting to note that, although Dammerman speaks very good English, he nevertheless sub- mitted the entire manuscript to Capt. H. S. Bushell, Assistant Editor of the Review of Applied Entomology, for the purpose of having the English. corrected and the whole manuscript put into shape “‘ according to the English practice of printing.” Aside from those already mentioned there have been other good investigators and writers among whom should be mentioned especially P. E. Kuchenius, C. J. J. van Hall, A. E. Rutgers, and M. Ishida. Rutgers has published some very good reports for the Association of Rubber Planters of the east coast of Sumatra. Dr. Oswald Schreiner, of the United States Department of Agri- culture, who attended the Pan Pacific Science Congress in Java in 1929, has lent me an elaborate book entitled ‘‘ Science in the Nether- lands’ East Indies,” from which I am able to straighten out my con- ception of the organization of the different stations carrying on work in economic entomology in the Dutch East Indies. In the first place there is a Department of Agriculture, Commerce, and Industry, and this Department has among its technical divisions an Institute for Plant Diseases, which includes of course economic entomolgy. This technical division devotes itself to the estate crops (in close collabo- ration with private experiment stations) and to native agriculture. And then there are a number of private experiment stations, the costs 358 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 of which are borne by the large estates. For example, there is the experiment station for the Java sugar industry at Pasuruan, two tobacco stations (one at Klaten and one at Medan), two rubber planters’ stations (one at Medan and the other at Buitenzorg), a tea experiment station at Buitenzorg, a cinchona station at Pengalengan, a coffee station at Malang, and several others that cover more than one type of culture. The “ Conspectus of Institutions of Pure and Applied Science in or Concerning the Netherlands’ East Indies” contains a formidable list of institutes, laboratories, experiment stations, surveys, and observatories. Under the head of private experiment stations for the agricultural sciences, there are listed six for West Java, three for Central Java, three for East Java, and four for Sumatra (east coast). Tt is safe to say that more or less sound work in economic entomology has been done at nearly all of these stations, partly under the direc- tion of the central Department of Agriculture and partly by an occa- sionally employed expert, all at the expense of planters’ associa- tions. There is, moreover, an Association of Government Agricul- turists in the Netherlands’ Indies, and also an Association of Experi- ment Stations’ Personnel. I had been relying on Dr. W. Roepke, now of Wageningen, for exact information regarding the Dutch East Indies, but, unfortu- nately for my purpose, Doctor Roepke was absent from Holland during 1929 and was unable to comply with my request until May, 1930, when he had returned and naturally was overwhelmed with other work. So I wrote what precedes. Now, at the last moment before this goes to the printer, I have received a four-page manu- script from Doctor Roepke, accompanied by a list of 25 writers on one or another aspect of the insect problem in the Dutch East Indies. I believe that it will be best to abstract Doctor Roepke’s report in the interest of exactitude, as follows: Both the Government and private research laboratories have done and are doing research in applied entomology. The Botanical Garden in Buitenzorg, established in 1817, employed Dr. C. J. J. Konings- berger, of Utrecht, as Zoologist and Entomologist about 1895. He worked on the insect pests of various tropical crops, especially coffee. Doctor Zimmerman (a German), the Botanist of the Station, worked with him, especially on thrips and insects injurious to rubber plants. Doctor Koningsberger became later the Director of the Zoological Museum and Botanical Garden in Buitenzorg, and later Minister of the Dutch Colonies (in 1925), retiring in 1929. WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 359 Applied entomology started really in 1905, after the Department of Agriculture was established in Treub, and in 1910 a Phytopatho- logical Institute was started in Buitenzorg and placed in charge of Dr. C. J. J. van Hall. The first Entomologist was Dr. W. Dammer- man, who was later assisted by Dr. S. Leefmans and somewhat later by L. G. E. Kalshoven, W. C. van Heurn, W. Roepke (temporarily), and P. van der Goot. Dr. N. Kemner, of Stockholm, was temporarily employed as an entomologist. Doctor Dammerman became Director of the Zoological Museum after the World War. Doctor Leefmans is at present the Director, and the entomologists are Van der Goot, Kalshoven, Reyne (formerly in Surinam), Van der Vecht, Voute, Dr. C. Franssen, and a few European assistants. The Government in 1909 appointed the neuropterologist, H. W. van der Weele, as Ento- mologist for the Cinchona Plantation at Tjinieroean, but he died a year later in Java of cholera. Dr. H. H. Karny, of Vienna, worked as an entomologist in the Zoological Museum from 1920 to 1929. He was succeeded by Lieftinck, of Amsterdam. In the veterinary service and the medical service several good medi- cal entomologists have been employed, namely Schuurmans Stek- hoven, Schuffner, Swellengrebel, Rodenwald, Van der Brug. and E. W. Walch. Private research laboratories for the larger plantations began work in economic entomology before the Government. The Sugar Cane Laboratory was established in Kagok, West Java, in the late eighties, but later was transferred to Pasoeroean, East Java. Kobus and Krtiger published their first papers on sugar cane insects late in the eighties or early in the nineties. Then Zehntner began his classical work which was summarized later by W. van Deventer. Van der Goot worked as an entomologist at this institution in 1913 and 1914. Then entomological work was discontinued for 14 years when it was taken up once more by Dr. Hazelhoff, of Utrecht. Dr. L. Zehntner was a Swiss. He left the Sugar Cane Research Institute in 1900 and took charge of a small cacao experiment sta- tion in Salatiga. He resigned from this position in 1906, and went to Brazil [I understand that he has returned to his native Switzerland and is now living near Basel]. Doctor Hunger, of Amsterdam, suc- ceeded him in the sugar cane station and was assisted by Doctors van Leeuwen and Roepke as entomologists, the former in Salatiga and the latter in Bandoeng where he was especially engaged in cin- chona investigations. Prior to 1928 Miss Wilbrink (Cheribon) did some entomological work. Doctor van Leeuwen resigned from the experiment station and was succeeded by Doctor Roepke. The for- 360 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 mer became a teacher for a time, and in 1918 became Director of the Botanical Garden in Buitenzorg. In 1911 Doctor Roepke took charge of the experiment station in Salatiga. In 1914 Dr. P. van der Goot became his assistant and served until 1917. Doctor Roepke resigned his position in 1918, on account of his health, but worked in Buiten- zorg until rg1g at the Phytopathological Institute. Later he accepted a position as Professor of Tropical Agriculture in Wageningen, and still later became Professor of Entomology there. The Tobacco Planters’ Experiment Station at Deli did perhaps more entomological work than the other stations. L. P. de Bussy was the first’ Entomologist and served from 1907 to 1917. Later he entered the service of the Colonial Institute in Amsterdam and also became professor in Utrecht where he gives lectures on tropical agriculture. J. den Doop, C. J. van der Meer Mohr and Doctor Fulmek also did some entomological work at Deli. Dr. J. D. Corporaal for a few years worked as Entomologist to the Rubber Experiment Station in Medan and is at present Curator in the Zoological Museum at Amsterdam. The Tea Experiment Station at Buitenzorg did much entomologi- cal work. Dr. R. Menzel, a Swiss, worked as Entomologist from 1918 to 1928. He returned to Switzerland and is at present Director of the Experiment Station for Fruit and Vine Culture in Wadenswyl. H. Jensen, a Dane, also worked on tobacco insects in Java until about 1917, and the botanists Wurth and P. Arens did some work on entomology while at the Coffee Experiment Station in Malang. Dr. H. Begeman, of Utrecht, was appointed Entomologist at this Sta- tion and worked from 1925 to 1929 exclusively on coffee insects. He was succeeded by Dr. J. G. Betrem, of Ne ee an assistant to Doctor Roepke. During the war, Stephanoderes hampei became a great coffee pest. It had been noticed in West Java as early as 1909, but did not become prominent until a number of years later. In 1922 the coffee planters established a fund and sent J. den Doop to Uganda to search for para- sites. He introduced two—the one a Braconid (Heterospilus coffei- cola Schmiedeknecht) and the other a Chalcidid (Prorops nasuta Waterston). The latter species met with some slight success, but so far has not checked the pest. In 1922 Dr. K. Friederichs, the German entomologist, who had worked in Samoa, took charge of the coffee- beetle work and remained in Malang until 1924 when he returned to Germany [where he has done the excellent work at Rostock mem- tioned elsewhere }. WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 361 Doctor Roepke has also sent me references to the publications of the different men mentioned above, but it will be unnecessary to print the list here. MALAYA The first Government Entomologist in Malaya was Mr. H. C. Pratt. He was appointed in 1906, and held the title of Government Ento- mologist at the Institute for Medical Research, Kuala Lumpur, in 1907. He was transferred to the staff of the Director of Agriculture in 1908, and continued in that post until 1916. His especial publi- cations related to Artona catoxantha Hampson, a pest of coconuts, to the termite (Coptotermes gestroi Wasm.) that damages rubber, and to the migratory locust. He also published occasional articles on insecticides in the Agricultural Bulletin of the Federated Malay States. In rorr Mr. C. B. Holman-Hunt was appointed Assistant Entomologist, and the title was changed to Systematic Entomologist in 1919. He retired from that post, for age, in 1920, the vacancy being filled by the appointment of Mr. H. M. Pendlebury. In 1913 Mr. P. B. Richards was appointed an Assistant Entomologist. In 1916 Mr. Pratt resigned, and Mr. Richards took the place of Government Entomologist, which he held until 1920. Mr. Richards paid especial attention to the white ant, and I am informed that his recommen- dations for the control of this insect are still practiced on all estates. Mr. G. H. Corbett, who in 1911 was connected with the Royal Agricultural College at Cirencester, England, came to the United States of America in 1914 as a Carnegie Student. He remained here for about a year and then returned to England where he obtained a commission in the Royal Field Artillery and served in France until June, 1917, when he was seconded to the Egyptian army for service in the Sudan, returning to England in the autumn of 1919. In 1920 he was appointed Government Entomologist in Malaya to succeed Mr. Richards. Dr. Guy A. K. Marshall informs me that from 1922 to 1924 Mr. Corbett worked single-handed. I note, however, that in 1923 H. W. Jack published about the insects affecting rice in Malaya—both growing rice and stored rice, the stored rice enemies being, of course, the ordinary cosmopolitan species. Mr. Corbett has a long list of papers to his credit relating to the different injurious insects of Malaya. Mr. B. A. R. Gater was appointed Assistant Ento- mologist in 1924, and in 1925 published an article entitled “ Some Observations on the Malaysian Coconut Zygaenid (Artona catox- antha).’’ This paper called attention to an insect that came to have a roundabout importance, since it was a Tachinid enemy of this moth 24 362 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 that was introduced later into [Fiji with such success against the Levuana caterpillar. He also published other papers, either indepen- dently or in collaboration with Mr. Corbett. In 1926 he resigned to take up the post of Malaria Research Officer in the Institute of Agri- cultural Research. In 1928 Mr. H. T. Pagden and Mr. N. C. E. Miller were appointed assistant entomologists. Mr. Pagden has been engaged in investigating three stem borers of paddy. Mr. Miller had been working for two and a half years with the Tsetse Research Branch, Game Preservation Department, in Tanganyika Territory. He is especially interested in the Acridiidae. Mr. Corbett and his force have been doing very good work, and have published a number of admirable reports and articles. One of Mr. Corbett’s interesting articles, published in 1920 in collaboration with D. Ponniah, related to an alleged damage done by insects to rubber seed. A publication entitled ‘“ Gardens-Bulletin Straits Settle- ments”? has published some good articles by E. Matthieu and by I’. Flippance. PALESTINE True economic entomology in this country was taken up after the conquest in 1917-18 by British forces. As a State under British man- date, with a civil administration under a British High Commissioner, affairs are carried on as in many other parts of the British Empire. From May, 1921, to August, 1923, Dr. P. A. Buxton was Medical Entomologist to the Government, and he made a lengthy report entitled “Applied Entomology of Palestine ” which was published in the Bulletin of Entomological Research for March, 1924. The bulk of this report was devoted to entomological matters of medical or veterinary interest, but some attention was given to agricultural pests. In 1923 Mr. G. E. Bodkin, who had held important official positions in British Guiana and who had devoted much time to the economic entomology of that colony, went to Palestine, having received appoint- ment as Government Entomologist. He began important investiga- tions at once. One of his earlier tasks was to introduce the fumigation of citrus trees into Palestine. This work he began immediately, and published in 1925, in the Bulletin of Entomological Research, the results reached down to that time. In 1927 he published in the same journal an important article on the fig wax scale (Ceroplastes rusct L.). In 1928 there was a locust invasion of Palestine, and the Bulletin of Entomological Research for August, 1929, contains a very important article with maps and illustrations concerning this invasion. The locust invasion was repeated in 1929, and Mr. Bodkin wrote a WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOW ARD 363 leaflet published as No. 8 of Series I of the Agricultural Leaflets issued by the Government of Palestine. In the meantime he published in the Bulletin of Entomological Research a short but important article called “A Note on the Utility of Aerial Photography in Entomological Field Work.” He had found, in his efforts to wipe out certain scale insects on Citrus trees, that it was often very difficult to locate Citrus trees in different gardens. From the airplane, however, these trees were readily located and mapped for an entire district. This, by the way, is the same service that the airplane did for the United States Department of Agriculture in its efforts to locate hidden cotton fields in clearings in the woods at a time when a search was being made for possible infestations by the pink bollworm. In 1923, Dr. F. S. Bodenheimer reported, in the Bulletin of the Royal Entomological Society of Egypt, on scale insects from EI- Arish (Sinai) and Transjordania, and the next year he was appointed Entomologist to the Zionist Organization Agricultural Experiment Station, publishing his first bulletin in July of 1924. It was entitled ‘“The Coccidae of Palestine.’ During the same year he published a leaflet on the leopard moth, and others on the clothes moths and upon general measures against insect pests in field and garden. I had the pleasure of meeting him at the International Zoological Congress in Budapest in 1927, where he read a strikingly interesting paper on the so-called “‘ manna ” of the Children of Jsrael in the desert. I have previously referred to Doctor Bodenheimer’s remarkable two-volume work published recently in Berlin on (translated) “ Material for the History of Entomology before Linné.” Doctor Bodenheimer is now connected with the Hebrew University at Jerusalem, He is obviously a man of training and culture. Some very notable work in medical entomology has been done in Palestine since the World War, especially in the way of relief from malaria, a disease which seems to have held the people of Palestine in subjection for hundreds of years. This excellent work is described and summarized in a just-published book entitled “‘ The Epidemiology and Control of Malaria in Palestine” by Israel J. Kligler, Director, Department of Hygiene, Hebrew University, Jerusalem (University of Chicago Press, 1930). ‘ eee ve eT | 1 PART IV AFRICA . : . a i ae - nek! , i aa y oer EGYPT At the Fourth International Congress of Entomology at Ithaca, New York, August, 1928, an interesting paper was read entitled “ The Development of Entomological Science in Egypt,” by H. C. Efflatoun, Bey, at that time Director of Research in the Plant Protection Depart- ment of the Ministry of Agriculture of Cairo. Many of the facts related in the following paragraphs are based upon portions of that address, which, however, related to all entomological science, includ- ing applied entomology. Civilization in Egypt is very ancient, and a hieroglyphic honeybee is found on a sarcophagus dating back to 3633 B. C. It is supposed to represent a king of lower Egypt. Another well known Egyptian hieroglyph is that of the sacred dung-beetle (Scarabaeus sacer) ; and Mr. Efflatoun states that an excellent carving of a locust, that he thinks may be Schistocerca gregaria, has been found on the walls of a tomb at Thebes of the date of Rameses, 1400 B. C.. Probably the first detailed reference to a great locust invasion is that given in the Old Testament (Exodus 10, 13-15’). Mr. Efflatoun points out “‘ that this Biblical description of the locust plague that Moses engineered on behalf of the Lord ” is remarkable in its reference to the direction of the wind, since it corresponds exactly with the east winds that were prevalent during all the locust invasions of Egypt in the last century. Lice and flies are mentioned in the Biblical account of the plagues of Egypt. “Worms” are mentioned on one or more of the ancient papyri. It is stated by several authorities that these creatures were larvae of Agrotis ypsilon, the familiar cutworm of the Egypt of today. A paragraph is quoted that reads, “ The worm ate half the crop and the hippopotami ate the other half. The fields were full of rats, a swarm of locusts settled down and fed, the sheep also ate and the birds stole.” Another papyrus in hieroglyphics is stated by Mr. Efflatoun to have been identified as a royal decree in which the direc- tor of the administration of agriculture reminds the farmers of the fact that “the worm” ate a large portion of the crop and that this was due to their negligence in dealing with it. Furthermore, he ex- horted them to do their best that year to check it, kill it and thus reduce its harm. It is a pity that the director did not tell the farmers how to check it and how to kill it, since we would then have had in this papyrus the first distinctive writing on practical entomology! Of course the oft quoted lamentations of Joel give other instances of insect damage in old Egypt. 367 368 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VoL. 84 Mr. Efflatoun points out the influence of Mohammed Ali Pacha (1805-1848) in the renewal of the national spirit of Egypt and in the introduction of cotton which found the Valley of the Nile enor- mously favorable to the crop. Agricultural methods and customs, however, changed little, and in fact have changed but little down to the present time. To the Egyptian peasant and farmer “an insect represented a manifestation of strength, which, at one time was re- garded as divine in origin and at another as of obscure origin—but at all times badly defined and regarded as inevitable.” (Efflatoun. ) The Khedivial Agricultural Society was founded in 1898 by Sul- tan Hussein Kamil, and it was this Society which recognized the necessity of protecting cotton and of the selection and distribution of cotton seed. This Society as well as the higher School of Agriculture undertook advisory work in general agriculture before the actual existence of a Ministry. In 1911 the Ministry of Agriculture came into existence and im- mediately established an Entomological Section to which Dr. L. H. Gough was appointed Entomologist. Prior to this time (in 1907) the Entomological Society of Egypt was founded, which grew slowly but which now is an important scientific society. In 1913 Doctor Gough was given two assistants, and the branch grew in importance. The present King of Egypt (Fuad 1) became Sultan in 1917 and was proclaimed King on March 16, 1922. Down to this time the prin- cipal officers in the entomological service had been English, but the present King showed himself greatly interested in scientific matters, generously supporting the scientific institutions already existing as well as inciting much important work. A number of young Egyptians of high intelligence have gone to England and to the United States to study, and several of them are now in important positions in the service. I am indebted to Mr. Efflatoun for the tabulated statement that follows regarding the foreign and the native officials in the Ento- mological Division of the Plant Protection Section of the Ministry. ForEIGN OFFICIALS OF THE ENTOMOLOGICAL Division, PLANT ProrectTioN SEcTION, MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE, EGyPptT J Name . Term of Service Remarks L. H. Gough, Ph.D. August I91II to June 1923 Now in South Africa G. Storey, B.A. (Cantab.) 1913 to 1920 Died in 1920 E. W. Adair, B.A. July 1914 to April 1924 Was transferred to Min- istry of Education Fred Shaw, A.R.C.Sc. 1916 to present (Director Administra- tion) WHOLE VOL. Name Wee seetialle AvRIG:Scz Phebe = E. Hargreaves, A.R.C.Sc. T. W. Kirkpatrick, M.A. Adolf Andrés (Collec- tions ) J. E. M. Mellor, M.A. (Beekeeping and vari- ous ) E. Ballard, B.A., Director General, Plant Protec- tion Section Evan Nel, D.I.C., M.Sc. (Fruit-fly investiga- tions ) H. Priesner, Ph.D. C. B. Williams, M.A. A. Alfiéri (formerly in charge of the collec- tions ) APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD Term of Service December 1919 to Nov- ember 1926 February 1921 to April 1923 June 1921 to July 1925 February 1926 to present May 1926 to present March 1928 to present December 1928 to present November 1928 to present June 1921 to July 1927 1924 to 1929 369 Remarks Now with British South Africa Co., Mazoe Now in Sierra Leone Now in Kenya Colony Now in Edinburgh Actually General Secre- tary and Curator of the Royal Entomological Society of Egypt EcyptrAn TECHNICAL OFFICIALS OF THE ENTOMOLOGICAL DivISION, PLANT Protection Section, Ministry or AGRICULTURE, EGyPT Name Naguib Iscandar, C.A. (Fumigation) Wadie Sharobim, Eff. (Silkworms) Abdul Megid El Misti- kawi, Eff. (Locust in- vestigations ) Mohd. Soliman El Zo- heiry, A.R.C.Sc., D.I.C. (London) (Locust in- vestigations ) Mohd. Kamal, Ph.D. (University of Califor- nia) (Parasites ) ize eAtian “ARC.Sc.; BSc.) (eondon) (Granary ) Ibrahim Bishara, (Cutworm) H. C. Efflatoun, Bey, M.S.E.A.C. Hon. Ent., M.R.A.C. (Formerly Director for Research) Eff. Term of Service January 1912 to February 1928 1927 to present I9I5 to present 1920 to present 1920 to present 1927 to present 1918 to present December 1923 to October 1929 Remarks Died in February 1928 Transferred to the Egyp- tian Univ., Abbassiah, Cairo, and actually oc- cupying the post of Asst. Professor of Zo- ology 370 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL, 84 A large number of valuable papers have been put out by the Min- istry of Agriculture in several series. An Agricultural Journal of Egypt was published from I91I to 1920, and in 1923 a new series was started monthly printed in Arabic only. A New Annual Series in English was started in 1923 and continued for two years, when it was stopped. A series of technical and scientific bulletins was begun in 1916. Eighty-five numbers were published down to 1928, of which 33 were concerned with economic entomology. These technical bulletins, whose authors included Messrs. Storey, Gough, Williams, Bishara, Iscandar, Hall, and Mellor, cover a large field. There is, in addition, a short series of entomological pamphlets and a long series of Agricultural Circulars. Of 99 of these, beginning with March, 1911, and continuing until December, 1925, 27 are con- cerned with economic entomology. In addition to these publications, members of the scientific staff have published occasional articles in the Bulletin of Entomological Research in England. Doctor Gough, who was head of the service for so many years, was concerned mainly in matters of administration but published some sound papers on the life history of the pink bollworm and on its dispersion in Egypt. He also published an important key to the iden- tifications of the scorpions of Egypt. Mr. Storey seems to have occupied himself principally in regard to control measures for the pink bollworm and published papers on the treatment of cotton seed and a general paper (in 1921) entitled ‘The Present Situation with Regard to the Control of the Pink Boll- worm in Egypt.” Doctor Hall, during his seven years residence, seems to have worked principally with scale insects. He published as one of his first papers an account of the hibiscus mealy-bug, and in 1924 issued a paper on the insect pests of Citrus trees in Egypt. In 1925 he pub- lished notes on Egyptian Coccidae with descriptions of new species, and in 1926 a paper entitled “A Contribution to the Knowledge of the Coccidae of Egypt.” The same year there were published over his name two pamphlets, the one relating to the hibiscus mealy-bug with notes on the introduction of Cryptolaemus montrousieri and the other one notes on the Aphididae of Egypt. Mr. Kirkpatrick published one ornithological paper and a large and important work entitled “‘ The Mosquitoes of Egypt ” which was done under the auspices of the Antimalaria Commission. It was a large work of more than 200 pages, fully illustrated with figures and maps. WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 37 1 He also published another bulletin on the relations of the fungus, Rhizopus nigricans, to the insect pests of the cotton plant in Egypt. Mr. C. B. Williams, who had been studying in the United States and had held the post of Sugar Cane Entomologist under the Depart- ment of Agriculture of Trinidad from 1916 to 1921, was in Egypt from 1921 to 1927, first as Subdirector and afterwards as Director of the Entomological Section. From 1927 to 1929 he was Entomolo- gist of the East African Agricultural Research Station in Tanganyika, and is now Lecturer in Agricultural and Forest Zoology at the Uni- versity of Edinburgh, succeeding R. Stewart MacDougal. During his stay in Egypt, Mr. Williams was very productive. He published in three papers the results of bioclimatic observations in the Egyptian desert. He also published another paper on cotton growing in relation to the climate in Egypt and the Sudan, and two others relating spe- cifically to the pink bollworm. He also published extensively in the Bulletin of Entomological Research and elsewhere on migrations of insects and upon other entomological topics. Of the Egyptian technical officials, Mr. Ibrahim Bishara has pub- lished a paper on the estimation of loss by bollworms, and Mr. Neguib Iscander an interesting report on a mission to California to study new methods of fumigation of Citrus trees. Mr. Iscander visited the Bureau of Entomology in Washington and traveled rather extensively in the United States. Messrs. Soliman and Kamal have both studied at the University of California, and Mr. Efflatoun visited Washington at the time of the Fourth Congress of Entomology in 1928. Mr. E. Ballard at present has the title of Chief Plant Pathologist and writes me from Giza, Egypt. I am indebted to him for much information and many pamphlets. SOUTH AFRICA Work in economic entomology was not established in South Africa until its importance was forced upon the governments of the different States. The Agricultural Journal, which was the official organ of the Department of Agriculture of the Cape Colony, began in the early 1890's to pay much attention to the subject. The so-called Australian bug (Icerya purchast), known in the United States as the white or fluted scale, the grapevine Phylloxera and injurious grasshoppers aroused the colonists to the necessity for more or less investigation, and the Agricultural Department began to open its eyes to these needs. It was some years, however, before an official entomologist was appointed. Mr. S. D. Bairstow and other colonists made certain investigations and corresponded regularly with Miss Eleanor A. 372 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 Ormerod, the Honorary Consulting Entomologist to the Royal Agri- cultural Society of Great Britain, and this correspondence resulted in the publication of a little book by Miss Ormerod entitled “ Notes and Descriptions of a Few Injurious Farm and Fruit Insects of South Africa.” This book was published in 1880. A very competent entomologist, Mr. Louis Peringuey, was con- nected at that time with the South African Museum in Cape Town and was employed by the Department of Agriculture as Entomo- logical Adviser; but in these advisory functions he chiefly answered correspondence, giving the names of the insects and the best remedies known. Acting upon his advice, the Government attempted to stamp out the grapevine Phylloxera by means of the bisulphide of carbon treatment, but without success, and he resigned his office in 1893. During this period the Director of the Botanic Garden at Cape Town, Prof. P. MacOwan, also answered entomological questions for the Government. Although an entomologist, he was a man of very wide information, and his communications, most of them subsequently published in the Agricultural Journal, showed him to be a clear-headed, practical man. In 1893 the Department of Agriculture fully made up its mind that it needed a good man at a livable salary to organize and carry on sound work against insects. Knowing the advances that had been made in the United States, they asked the Secretary for the Colonies in London to correspond with me and to secure the best man possible from this country. I approached several well known workers in the United States, among them F. M. Webster and M. V. Slingerland, and also James Fletcher in Canada. But the compensation offered was not great enough to make the change desirable. I then looked for a younger man whose financial needs were not so great, and was very fortunate in finding C.. P. Lounsbury, at that time graduate student and instructor at the Massachusetts Agricultural College. He was warmly recommended by Professor Fernald, and when I met him by appointment in New York City, he appeared to have a well trained mind and pleasing personality and the proper amount of energy and ambition. I therefore recommended him to the Secretary for the Colonies, and he took his post in Cape Town in 1895. Lounsbury’s work was excellent from the start, and be began at once to conduct investigations of high value to the Colony and in fact to the whole of South Africa. Governmental confidence in his ability was early shown, and he was given ample assistance. He brought about legis- lative action providing for nursery inspection and restriction on the transportation of plants. Large sums were appropriated for locust WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOW ARD 373 destruction, and, among other things, he investigated the South African ticks that carry diseases of domestic animals. Two other South African colonies, namely Natal and Transvaal, soon started work in this direction. Claude Fuller (brought from Australia, where he had done excellent work) was placed in charge of the work in Natal, and C. B. Simpson of the United States Bureau of Entomology was sent out to take charge of the new work in the new colony of the Transvaal. Fuller was an excellent man, and has remained with the service all these years. (He died in late 1928 as a result of an automobile accident.) He was not given good laboratory facilities for a long time, but the work that he turned out was sound and established an excellent reputation. Simpson did admirably from the start. He took hold of the existing problems with energy, enthusi- asm, and tact. He secured the confidence of the people at once. He conducted investigations on the ordinary crop pests, upon the malarial mosquitoes, and was finally given a large sum, amounting to $60,000, for locust destruction. His death from typhoid fever, which occurred in the autumn of 1906, was a great loss to the Transvaal and a great loss to economic entomology. He was succeeded by C. P. Hardenberg, also from the United States Bureau of Entomology. Later, W. Moore was made Entomologist at the Potchefstroom School in the Trans- vaal, C. P. van der Merve was made Government Entomologist and Horticulturist for the Orange Free State, and C. W. Mally, also from the United States, was made Government Entomologist for the eastern part of Cape Colony. Lounsbury remained Government Ento- mologist for Cape Colony, and was the only entomologist located at a seaport. After a time he got an entomologist with an assistant stationed at each of the four principal ports ; each school got an ento- mologist, and four of them assistant entomologists as well, and a considerable staff was built up at headquarters and for temporary stations. From the very beginning, Lounsbury had great plans, which how- ever were slow in materializing. In 1910 the four colonies of Trans- vaal, Natal, Orange River, and Cape of Good Hope were united to form the Union of South Africa. The Departments of Agriculture of the several former colonies were dissolved, and from the released personnel was formed the Union Department of Agriculture with headquarters at Pretoria. The colleges of the Union were brought into cooperation, and the work went forward. At the time of Professor Lounsbury’s retirement, in 1926 or 1927, 25 good men were connected with his organization and_ properly placed at different points. In addition, four other good men were 374 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VoL. 84 stationed with Transvaal University, the University of Stellenbosch, with the Division of Veterinary Research in Pretoria, and with the Institute for Medical Research in Johannesburg. These men, J. C. Faure, C. K. Brain, G. H. A. Bedford and Alexander Ingram, have all been doing excellent work and have been publishing important papers. A number of these 25 assistants published good original work. I notice, for example, that D. Gunn was the author of four publica- tions in 1916 that received long reviews in the Review of Applied Entomology. After Lounsbury’s retirement, Claude Fuller was made Chief for eight months until his retiring age was reached, and at present Dr. T. J. Naudé is the principal entomologist. Lounsbury’s retirement coincided with a rather radical change in the organization of the agricultural service, brought about for adminis- trative purposes. There had been 17 divisions. This number was reduced to six, and the previous Division of Entomology was made to form the Entomological Section of the combined Division of Botany, Horticulture, and Entomology. At the same time the entomological work of a veterinary bearing was transferred to the Division of Veterinary Services. Under Doctor Naudé, the Entomological Section now provides 14 permanent and five contract posts in entomology. In addition, three entomologists who are functioning as lecturers and extension workers at agricultural schools do research work in entomology under the control of the Chief Entomologist. Also three entomologists on the staff of the University of Stellenbosch do research and extension work (under the auspices of the University) for the Department of Agri- culture of the Union Government with which the College of Agri- culture of the University is incorporated. One entomologist, Mr. C. P. van der Merve, has been entrusted with regulations and quarantine as a whole-time job and is assisted by a staff of plant and nursery inspectors. Mr. van der Merve is also Secretary of a Plant Regulatory Board, the additional members being the Chief of the Division, the Chief Mycologist, the Chief Horticul- turist and the Chief Entomologist. In some respects it seems rather a pity that Lounsbury’s hope of retaining the autonomy of the Division of Entomology and to include in it absolutely all the work of an entomological character was not fulfilled. There are certain great advantages in the way of such a concentration of entomological effort, as I think has been demon- strated by the Bureau of Entomology in this country. The absolute community of interests and the solidarity of the workers is preserved WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 375 by such an organization. I appreciate the administrative reasons for the change in South Africa, but I cannot help thinking that if an organization of somewhat the same character had been effected in this country, as proposed in the early years of the present century, the present Bureau of Entomology functioning (as was proposed) as a division or section of a great bureau of animal industry would not have produced results comparable to those that it has gained, and surely it would not have reached its present advanced condition as a leader in applied entomology and thus as a demonstrator of the vital importance of entomological studies. Dr. Charles K. Brain has just published a hand-book dealing with South African pests. It is entitled ‘‘ Insect Pests and Their Control in South Africa.” The book covers 468 pages and has 204 illustra- tions. The groups of insects are considered in order, South African tepresentatives being especially mentioned. Eight chapters are de- voted to the treatment. There follow three chapters on beekeeping, diseases transmitted by insects and ticks, and on control measures. About one-half of the illustrations are original. Doctor Brain is now Secretary for Agriculture, Northern Rhodesia. He was formerly Entomologist, Union of South Africa, and Professor of Entomology in Stellenbosch University. The publication of this book is notably important, since it is the first general treatment of the injurious insects of South Africa since the publication of Miss Ormerod’s little book entitled “‘ Observations on Some Injurious Insects of South Africa” (1889). BRITISH COLONIES IN AFRICA, INCLUDING MAURITIUS AND THE SEYCHELLES The aims of Lord Cromer and the original Central African Re- search Committee seem to have progressed very favorably in many ways, among them in economic entomology. Important papers have been issued from the various colonies for a very considerable number of years. During the period of publication of the Review of Applied Entomology, for example, from 1912 to and including September, 1929, 319 good papers have been published from such colonies exclu- sive of South Africa and Egypt. It has always been confusing to the workers in other parts of the world, and perhaps especially so since the great war, to carry in their minds a definite impression of these African colonies of Great Britain. They include a very large portion of the continent of Africa. We receive many of their publications, and we read with interest the reviews published by the Imperial Bureau of Entomology, but I 376 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS vot. 84 imagine that the impressions of most of us are rather indefinite and that it is rather difficult to keep track of the changes in personnel among the workers. England seems to be sending out to her colo- nies now a well trained and high type of young entomologist and she has had several admirable men in this service, at least since the establishment of the Imperial Bureau. I have been obliged to consult Doctor Marshall and Doctor Neave of the Bureau about the present (October, 1929) situation as to personnel in most of these colonies, and have, as always, received courteous and authoritative replies. Here are some facts, derived from correspondence and from various publications, which may as well be set down. Rhodesia.—In northern Rhodesia there is no Government ento- mologist at present, although some entomological work is carried on by W. Allan, Assistant Agricultural Research Officer. In southern Rhodesia there is a good force. W. J. Hall, who was in the Egyptian service from 1920 to 1926 and who published several excellent articles, is now Entomologist to the British South Africa Company at Mazoe. The Government of the colony employs R. W. Jack as Chief Entomologist, with J. K. Chorley and A. Cuthbertson as assistants, Another assistant, J. I. Roberts, has resigned. A large number of good papers have been issued from Rhodesia since the beginning of this century, and the agricultural part of the Review of Applied Entomology has given reviews of no less than 70. Kenya Colony.—Excellent work has been done in this part of Africa for a long time. Well before the World War, T. J. Anderson was appointed Entomologist, and after a visit to the United States where he looked into American methods and spent some time at Washington, he returned to Nairobi in 1911 and has occupied the principal entomological post ever since. His principal assistant at present is T. W. Kirkpatrick who was in the Egyptian service for four years after 1921 and was transferred to Kenya in 1925. C. B. Symes, formerly in southern Rhodesia, was appointed to Kenya in 1925 as Medical Entomologist. H. C. James is also Assistant Ento- mologist. More than 70 entomological publications from this colony have been reviewed. Uganda.—C. C. Gowdey, a West Indian of American training (Massachusetts Agricultural College), was for a number of years Entomologist to this colony. At present the post is held by H. Har- greaves. The coffee berry moth became of major importance to the coffee growers of Uganda some years ago and Mr. Hargreaves has published extensively on this insect. His article in the Bulletin of WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD RIT. Entomological Research for March, 1926, should be especially men- tioned. G. L. R. Hancock holds the position of Assistant Entomolo- gist, and G. H. E. Hopkins that of Medical Entomologist. Mr. Hopkins was transferred from Kenya in August, 1929. In agricul- tural entomology, there have been published from this colony 39 arti- cles that have been reviewed in the Review of Applied Entomology. Nyasaland.—The position of Entomologist is held by C. Smee; that of Medical Entomologist by W. A. Lamborn, who, although he has held this post since 1915, was formerly Medical Officer in Nigeria. Twenty-three publications on agricultural entomology have been reviewed in the Review of Applied Entomology from this colony. Nigeria.—At present in Nigeria F. D. Golding is Senior Entomolo- gist. C. B. Lean is Assistant Entomologist. The official position of Tsetse Fly Investigator has just been vacated by Dr. Ll. Lloyd, who will take up in January, 1930, the position of Reader in Entomology at Leeds University. Doctor Lloyd had held his Nigerian post since 1921. The office of Assistant Entomologist and Tsetse Fly Investi- gator is held by A. W. Taylor. Tanganyika Territory—tvThis colony, established just after the World War, has now a very good entomlogical staff. A. H. Ritchie, a well trained and well posted man, who came to the United States as one of the early Carnegie Scholars and who afterwards held an entomological post in Jamaica, is the Entomologist. He is allotted four assistants in agricultural entomology. Two of these places are filled by W. V. Harris and W. H. Potts. The other two positions are vacant. There is also a Medical Entomologist, in the person of J. M. McHardy, and a Veterinary Entomologist, W. H. W. Baird. In addition, the well known C. F. M. Swynnerton is Director of the Game Preservation Department and in charge of tsetse fly investigations. Mr. Swynnerton was in Washington two years ago and gave an admirable account of the tsetse fly work under his direc- tion before the Biological Society of Washington. There has been recently founded in this colony the so-called Amani Institute, and the post of Entomologist to this Institute was taken in 1927 by C. B. Williams who had been four years in Egypt in charge of entomological work. Mr. Williams has just vacated this post, to go to Edinburgh to become Reader in Agricultural Entomology in the University, in place of R. Stewart MacDougal who has retired. Mr. Williams was one of the Carnegie Students sent to the United States before the World War. He went to Trinidad in 1916, in charge of froghopper investigations ; and went to Egypt in 1923. He 25 378 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VoL. 84 is the type of man who will make his mark wherever he goes, and has already done very admirable work. Gold Coast——At present, W. H. Patterson holds the post of Ento- mologist. He has been there since 1916 and has published especially on insects injurious to coconut, cacao, and Citrus fruits. G. S. Cot- terel is Assistant Entomologist. A. W. J. Pomeroy is Medical Ento- mologist, and K. R. S. Morris is Assistant Medical Entomologist. In 1914 Mr. Pomeroy was Government Entomologist in Nigeria, and went to the Gold Coast in 1925. Before going to Africa he lived in the United States and was for a time connected with the United States Bureau of Entomology. I am not sure whether at that time he was a citizen of the United States or not. Some excellent publications have come from the Gold Coast, and 30 have been reviewed in the Review of Applied Entomology. Sierra Leone-—Mr. Ernest Hargreaves holds the position of Ento- mologist. Mr. Hargreaves was one of the Carnegie Students to the United States before the World War and has been in the colonial service since. | Zanzibar —The Zanzibar Protectorate, off the coast of Tanganyika, although small, has a good economic entomologist in the person of Dr. W. Mansfield-Aders. The Protectorate published its medical and public health reports beginning with 1915, and since the war Dr. W. Mansfield-Aders has written some very good papers on insects injuri- ous to economic crops. The economic products are cloves and coco- nuts ; and the insect enemies to cotton, cereals, vegetables, fruits, and so on are considered. The clove tree is said to have no specific ene- mies, although termites attack unhealthy trees. | Gambia.—There is no official entomologist at present. Somaliland —There is no official entomologist at present. Sudan.—tThere is a first-class staff of entomologists in this colony. H. H. King is Government Entomologist at Khartum, with H. W. 3edford as Assistant. J. W. Cowland is at the field station in the Berber Province; W. Ruttledge at the field station in the Nuba Mountains Province; and H. B. Johnston is at the Gezira Research Farm, with Wad Medani, F. G. S. Whitfield, W. P. L. Cameron, and R. C. Darling. Mauritius —This large, rich British island colony in the Indian Ocean east of the African continent is very interesting entomologi- cally and is an especially rich sugar country. Its crops have suffered from insects, and for many years D. d’Emmerez de Charmoy has been interested in applied entomology. He is a well known entomologist WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 379 and has written very many important papers. His greater work has been very largely with the insects of the sugar cane. At present he is not only the head entomologist but is the Assistant Director of Agriculture of the island. W. H. Edwards and A. Moutia are Assistant Entomologists. Seychelles—There is no official entomologist in this colony, but some very good entomological work has been carried on by the Direc- tor of Agriculture, R. R. Dupont. Ps iv a i Part V AUSTRALASIA AND THE PACIFIC re a AUSTRALIA Australia, with its nearly 3,000,000 square miles of territory and its extraordinary fauna and flora, has offered some very interesting problems to the economic entomologist. During the early part of the last century when the extraordinary character of the animals and plants inhabiting Australia began to be appreciated, many collections of different kinds were made there and among them very many insects were sent over to the British Museum and elsewhere, and may thousands of species were described. With the introduction from the older countries of many crops, and with the spread of agriculture, beginning seriously after the gold excitements of the middle of the last century, farmers necessarily began to turn their attention to crop pests. Strange things happened in Australia with introduced forms, Wild horses, for example, in- creased to such extent as to become a pest. The domestic rabbit did the same. Plants introduced for ornamental purposes went wild and multiplied in such a way as to become disastrous. Certain introduced insects did the same. The different States, or colonies, with their independent organizations, handled their own questions through their own experts for many years. With the joining together of the States, however, in the Common- wealth of Australia, with its newly constructed capital at Canberra and its centralization of government which will rapidly spread out into other than political directions, a sound plan has been devised for agricultural research and a most competent entomologist, Dr. R. J. Tillyard, has been appointed. He has a large and well trained staff and admirable results are sure to come from this organization. The story of how applied entomology grew in the different States is not a very long one, but it is far from devoid of interest. The important questions of quarantine were, of course, handled indepen- dently by the different States. As early as 1892 a plea for general protection was published by Thompson, of Tasmania. His State had already begun operating under partial protective legislation, the so- called Codling Moth Act of 1887. This act was repealed the following year and replaced by the so-called Codling Moth Amendment Acts. Finally, in 1898 the Tasmanian Government passed “An Act to Prevent the Introduction into Tasmania of Diseases, Insect, Fungus, and Other Pests Affecting Vegetation.” The spread of the so-called Queensland fruit-fly and of the San Jose scale were the principal incentives. 383 384 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 In 1896 Victoria had passed legislation of this kind, and was fol- lowed by New South Wales in 1897 and Western Australia in 1808. Satisfactory legislation by South Australia was not passed until 1910. A brief but excellent account of economic entomology in Australia was given by Mr. Walter W. Froggatt in his presidential address before the Linnean Society of New South Wales for 1912. In this address he pointed out that before any official Government entomolo- gists were appointed, Sir William Macleay had contributed some notes on insect pests to the Proceedings of the Linnean Society. Froggatt states as his belief that the visits of Albert Koebele and F. M. Webster to Australia on the famous journey that resulted in the importation of the Australian ladybird into California aroused marked interest in entomology and probably had an especial influence in the legisla- tion which followed soon after and which resulted in the appointment of official entomologists in practically all of the colonies. This jour- ney of Webster and Koebele took place in 1888, and not in 1880 as stated by Mr. Froggatt in his address. The growth of the work in the different States will be described briefly under each State in the following pages, but it should be mentioned here that in July, 1906, a conference of Government Ento- mologists was held at Sydney and was attended by representatives of South Australia, Tasmania, Victoria, New South Wales, and Queens- land. Western Australia was not represented. At that time that col- ony was, jointly with the State of California, employing Mr. George Compere to search the world for enemies of injurious insects, and there seems to have been some considerable doubt in the minds of the representatives of the other colonies as to the thorough soundness of this procedure, or at least a fear of the danger of too great reliance on what has since come to be known as the biological method of control. (Mr. Compere’s employment by Western Australia dates from 1901.) One of the principal subjects considered at this conference was the enormous damage done by fruit-flies. After discussion, a resolution was passed recommending the authorities of the different States represented to send Mr. Froggatt to the United States to inquire into entomological problems. This matter did not eventuate until after a meeting of the Premiers of the different States, in Bris- bane in June, 1907. It was then decided that he should be sent to America and Europe, and later, at the request of Queensland, India and Ceylon were added. Mr. Froggatt took the trip, and the report of his investigations was published as a bulletin in 1909. It is proba- bly worth while to state here that he did not endorse the then Cali- WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 385 fornia idea of complete reliance upon the biological method and that he discounted many of the claims made by that school of Californians. I have indicated in the following pages something of the work done in the different colonies down to the latter part of 1929, and have said something about the earlier publications. Australian activity has continued, and it may be worth while to state that, since the begin- ning of the publication of the Review of Applied Entomology (Lon- don), the editors of that extremely useful publication have reviewed no less than 904 articles from Australia relating to economic ento- mology that were published between January, 1912, and September, 1929. Tasmania.—It was in this colony that the earliest attempts were made to promote economic entomology. While it is true that the agricultural societies and departments of agriculture in the other colonies turned their serious attention to entomological problems at a comparatively early date, the first Codling Moth Act was introduced in the Legislative Assembly of Tasmania as early as 1874. The provi- sions of this Act were quite as wisely drawn as those of any subse- quent injurious-insect legislation. It was not, however, until 1891 that a definite Council of Agriculture was created, and not until 1892 that an official Entomologist was appointed. The Rev. Edward H. Thompson, a clergyman of the Church of England and a naturalist of some distinction, had been writing in the local press and had come into the public eye; and in February, 1892, he was appointed Ento- mologist and Pathologist to the Council of Agriculture. It is inter- esting to note that his annual compensation was fixed at 300 pounds, but that in 1894 it was reduced to 200 pounds. He had no funds for expenses and had no assistants. ‘In August, 1892, the Council of Agriculture began the publica- tion of a journal undef the title: The Journal of the Council of Agriculture. In 1896 this title was changed to The Agricultural Gazette and Journal of the Council of Agriculture. In this form it was published until 1915, when it closed with Volume 23. In the first number of the first volume is the report of a lecture by Mr. Thompson on insect pests, and a report of his work since the first meeting of the Council in May, 1892. Printed reports followed in almost every number of the Journal for the first year. Mr. Thomp- son lectured upon insect pests throughout the colony, and published in 1892 “A Handbook to the Insect Pests of Farm and Orchard: Their Life History and Methods of Prevention.” This was an excel- Jent and up-to-date publication. Mr. Thompson’s last publication in the Gazette and Journal appeared in the March, 1896, number, and was entitled “ The Horse Bot-Fly.” 386 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS vot, 84 Mr. Thompson published reports in the Gazette for 1895, but in that Journal for November, 1896, he is referred to as “ late Govern- ment Entomologist.” His portrait, published in the Journal for March, 1895, is that of an able, vigorous man, possibly in his late forties. Mr. Thompson was succeeded in office by Mr. A. M. Lea, previ- ously in Western Australia. Mr. Lea published practical bulletins from time to time until 1914, when his work was taken over by Mr. H. M. Nichols under the title of Government Microbiologist. Mr. Nichols still holds this office, and has published a great deal, more on plant diseases than on injurious insects, and of late years has had charge of the microscopical examination of milk and cream. Victoria.—The State of Victoria was greatly interested in the Phyl- loxera as early as 1873. The State had a Department of Agriculture at that date, and its annual report contained entomological articles before there was any definite appointment of an official charged with entomological work. In the report for 1874 there is an account of some Australian wood-boring beetles, by Charles French. Although the Secretary for Agriculture, in an introduction to this article, expressed the hope that this would be the beginning of a systematic inquiry in regard to injurious insects, it was not until August, 1890, that a conference was held at Melbourne, attended by various inter- ested boards and councils, to consider means for the suppression of injurious insects. In 1891 Mr. Charles French was appointed Ento- mologist to the Government, under the Department of Agriculture. He went to work at once very diligently, and in two years had pub- lished two parts of an important handbook on the destructive insects of Victoria, the first published in 1891 and the second in 1893. The reports were written in popular style and gave much attention to means of destruction. Perhaps their most striking feature consists of their illustrations, which are colored. The third part of the handbook, published later, considers also certain valuable insect-destroying birds. I believe that a fourth part was published, but I have not seen it. Beginning with 1902, there has been published a Journal of the Department of Agriculture. I have seen 25 volumes, down to and including that for 1927. Before the beginning of the first volume, Mr. French had published several bulletins about different insects, as well as a report of the locust plague throughout the north and northwestern districts of Victoria. Articles by Charles French occur in practically every volume of the Journal down to 1908. A number of them were published as formal reports for the current year. In WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 387 the report for 1903 he mentions his assistant, C. French, Jr., and one or the other or both contributed articles to the later numbers of the Journal. In 1912 articles by C. French, Jr., are signed “Acting Government Entomologist,” and in 1914 as “ Government Entomologist.’’ This necessarily means that the son was appointed to his father’s position during 1914. I believe that there has always been a good staff connected with the office of Government Entomologist. I have seen in a Yearbook of Agriculture for 1905 the name of Charles French as Entomologist with a staff consisting of C. French, Jr., and 11 other assistants. Charles French, Jr., still holds the office and is publishing excellent reports. Mr. Walter Froggatt, writing me recently, tells me that Mr. French, Jr., no longer has a staff like that just mentioned, but has a cadet, and is largely engaged in fruit inspection and routine work. Mr. Froggatt also informs me that Charles French, Sr., is living in Melbourne and is about 90 years of age.’ Mr. Froggatt also tells me that at the National Museum in Melbourne Mr. J. Clark is a great worker and much interested in ants; that Mr. A. L. Kershaw has been interested in insects, and that in the Victorian Naturalists’ Club there are some busy entomologists, notably Erasmus Wilson, a coleopterist, and George Lyell, a lepidopterist. Queensland.—In 1889 Mr. Henry Tryon, who was then an Assis- tant Curator in the Queensland Museum at Brisbane, prepared a report on insect and fungus pests which was published in the Annual Report of the Department of Agriculture for the year 1889-go. It was a long report, covering 238 pages, and was accompanied by three plates of spraying apparatus. In this report Mr. Tryon referred to the appointment of a board in February, 1875, to ‘‘ enquire into the causes of diseases affecting live stock and plants.” Two thousand five hundred pounds were placed at the disposal of the board during the years 1875 to 1877, and it published four reports. He further states that Dr. J. Bancroft had conducted investigations and referred among other things to the occurrence of certain scale insects on Citrus plants. Doctor Bancroft’s publication, which was issued at Brisbane in 1879, was entitled ‘‘ Diseases of Animals and Plants,” and it *While I am reading the proof of this book, I have received a letter from Mr. C. French, Jr., in which he tells me that he is now assisted by Mr. R. M. T. Pescott and that he is conducting a number of important investigations. He also states that his father is still living, at the age of 92, and is still very interested in all entomological matters. 388 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VoL. 84 included also some account of the attacks on maize by the larvae of a small moth (Conogethes punctiferalis). Mr. Tryon’s official post when he began publishing on entomology was with the Queensland Museum, and it appears that his duties had been largely in connection with the Intercolonial Rabbit Commission of New South Wales and the Stock Disease Board of Queensland. He continued to publish reports under the Department of Agriculture, but was not appointed definitely as Entomologist to the Department until 1895. His title was Entomologist and Vegetable Pathologist and Inspector under the Diseases of Plants Act. He continued to hold this position and published actively until his retirement. These publi- cations occur mainly in the Reports of the Department of Agriculture and also in the Queensland Agricultural Journal which commenced publication in 1897 and is still being published. Almost every volume in the whole series contains entomological articles of some practical importance, and these articles indicate that Mr. Tryon kept well posted as to the entomological work being done in other parts of the world. Years later Queensland was confronted by an entirely new agri- cultural problem, namely the overrunning of her great pasture lands by a cactus plant of the genus Opuntia. Introduced originally as an ornamental, this plant escaped from cultivation and spread with enor- mous rapidity and with most disastrous results. Failing to stop its spread by any means at hand, the Queensland Government appointed a Prickly-Pear Commission, and sent Mr. Tryon and Prof. T. Harvey Johnston, a botanist, to America and other parts of the world in search of insects or diseases that would control the Opuntia. They arrived in Washington in August, 1913. Mr. Tryon was then appar- ently about 60 years of age, with a closely clipped, gray beard, and was quite markedly hard of hearing. Many countries were visited by these men (I think they went quite around the world) and a definite point was finally selected at Uvalde, Texas, where agents of the Com- mission have been centered for the past 12 years or more. Fortunately, the insect enemies of Opuntia had been studied prior.to the visit of the Australians, by Dr. W. D. Hunter and Messrs. J. D. Mitchell and F.C. Pratt of Doctor Hunter’s force, and a bulletin had been published. Since the establishment of the station at Uvalde, insect enemies of Opuntia have been sent to Australia in very great numbers, and, from late reports, at least two of the species sent from the United States have proved to be very valuable and are apparently in the way of stopping the plague. Mr. Tryon retired from the position of Government Entomologist on December 31, 1925, but was kept on as a Temporary Pathologist HOWARD 389 WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY until June 30, 1929. His retirement from public service was marked by a large gathering at the Department of Agriculture and Stock at which addresses were made by the Under Secretary of Agriculture and by others. An account of this meeting and Mr. Tryon’s full bib- liography will be found in the Queensland Agricultural Journal for August I, 1929, beginning on page 176. The prickly-pear work has been continued on a large scale and with very considerable success. The Prickly-Pear Commission is now controlled by the Queensland Government, by the Commonwealth, and by New South Wales. It has a Queensland staff and is indepen- dent of the Commonwealth Department of Agriculture. Mr. Alan P. Dodd,.a young Queenslander, is Entomologist, and there is a large staff. Mr. Dodd was previously known for his excellent work on certain parasitic insects, especially Proctotrypids. He visited the United States in 1924 and spent some time in Texas, and was ap- pointed to his present post on his return to Australia. In October of 1929 there was published under the authority of the Commonwealth Prickly-Pear Board a full and well illustrated bulle- tin entitled “The Progress of Biological Control of Prickly Pear in Australia,” by Mr. Dodd. This bulletin gives a full account of the investigations and brings the work down to date. Of the insects lib- erated, a Lepidopteron known as Cactoblastis cactorum seems to be doing the most efficient work. This insect was brought over from the Argentine Republic. More than 300,000,000 specimens of this insect have been liberated since the beginning of 1926, and Mr. Dodd predicts that, at the present rate of increase and with the existing avenues of distribution, it should be prevalent in two or three years wherever prickly-pear occurs in Australia. Two other insects have proved very important, the one a mealy-bug known as Dactylopius tomentosus and the other a true plant-bug known as Chelinidea tabu- lata. These species are from the southwestern United States. The Cactoblastis breeds rapidly—so much so, in fact, that the Prickly- Pear Board has revised its predictions and anticipates rather speedy success. The most extraordinary amount of destruction of the plants between October, 1926, and May, 1928, is shown by actual compara- tive photographs. The officers in charge are taking most extraordinary precaution against introducing insects that might attack cultivated plants. Even some very important enemies of Opuntias have been denied admis- sion by the Board, since there seemed to be danger that they would attack other plants. This was notably the case with a large Mexican weevil, Cactophagus spinolaec, and with a North American’ moth, zamia clarefacta. 390 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 This Opuntia work has been most original and is almost novel in the history of economic entomology, the only prior comparable case, concerning the introduction of insects to kill off a dangerous plant, having been the introduction of insects into Hawaii to destroy the Lantana weed. The effective work of some of the insects, as illus- trated in the plates of this report, has been extraordinary. The Board has had frequent changes in personnel among its scientific members and employees. Prof. T. Harvey Johnston, as we have shown, was the first Scientific Controller. He resigned in February, 1923, and the title of the office was changed to Officer in Charge of the Scientific Work. This position was held by Mr. J. C. Hamlin, from the United States, from February, 1923, until May, 1924, when he resigned. He was succeeded by Mr. W. B. Alexander, an Englishman, who resigned in August, 1925. In October of that year the present Officer in Charge, Mr. Alan P. Dodd, was appointed. Australian labora- tories are under the charge of Mr. J. Mann, Mr. F. H. Roberts, Mr. A. R. Taylor, and Mr. H. F. Nicholas, while the overseas work is under the charge of Mr. R. C. Mundell, with headquarters at Uvalde, Texas. Mr. Mundell is assisted by Mr. G. Barnette and Mr. M. G. Rodriguez. Uvalde has been chosen as the overseas headquarters since it 1s easy from that point to visit the most important cactus centers such as the southwestern United States, Florida, Mexico, and Central America. j There is now an excellent organization in Queensland under the Department of Agriculture and Stock, known as the Division of Entomology and Plant Pathology. Mr. Robert Veitch is the Chief Entomologist and Chief of the Division. He had been previously Entomologist to the Colonial Sugar Company and had been stationed at Fiji. Mr. Veitch called in Washington in May, 1914, on his way from England to enter upon the duties of Entomologist to the Sugar Refining Company in the Fiji Islands. He has under him now J. L. Froggatt, in charge of banana insect investigations, and H. Jarvis, in charge of the Stanthorp area. These men have the rank of Ento- mologist. There are three Assistant Entomologists, -G. A. Currie, A. A. Girault, and J. A. Weddell. Mr. Girault is an American, well known for his work on the taxonomy of the parasitic Hymenoptera, and was at one time connected with the Bureau of Entomology at Washington. There are also three assistants of a lower grade. J. H. Simmonds is the Plant Pathologist, with R. B. Morwood as an assistant. Under this Division of Entomology and Plant Pathology there has been issued this year (1929) a capital book entitied ‘‘ Pests and Dis- WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 391 eases of Queensland Fruits and Vegetables,’ by Messrs. Veitch and Simmonds. It is a very well printed book of nearly 200 pages and is abundantly and extremely well illustrated. In I. W. Helmsing, the authors have a capital entomological artist. The colored plates are wonderfully well done. The whole book is absolutely Australian, and on the title page appear the words “ Wholly set up and printed in Australia.” The entomological work of the Bureau of Sugar Experiment Sta- tions is carried on independently of the Division of Entomology and Plant Pathology of the Department of Agriculture and Stock. Mr. A. A, Girault went from the United States to Queensland in 1911 and served as the Entomologist of the Bureau until 1914. He then returned to the United States, and later returned to Australia and engaged in special work for the Queensland Bureau of Sugar Experi- ment Stations. In 1914 Mr. Edmund Jarvis joined the staff as Ento- mologist, and Dr. J. F. Illingworth (another American) became asso- ciated with the Bureau in 1917 and conducted investigations for sev- eral years. Mr. Alan P. Dodd, now in charge of the scientific work of the Prickly-Pear Board, was also an officer of the Bureau for some years. The present staff consists of Edmund Jarvis, R. W. Mun- gomery, A. N. Burns, J. H. Buzacott, and W. A. McDugal. The principal efforts of the Bureau have been directed to the solution of the white grub problem, and it has published a number of very com- prehensive bulletins. They have also investigated other important sugar cane pests, and a large number of articles have resulted. Mr. G. H. Hardy, Fellow in Economic Biology at the University of Queensland, has been working for several years on sheep blowflies. He has also been studying the Aphididae. Mr. F. A. Perkins, Lec- turer on Economic Entomology at the University, has been working upon fruit-flies. Entomological work of still another character is being carried on in Queensland independently of the Division of Entomology and Plant Pathology of the Department of Agriculture and Stock. Mr. E. Ballard, an excellent entomologist who had been in the Nyasaland Protectorate as early as 1913 and who had served in India for 10 years as Entomologist to the Government of Madras and elsewhere in south India, came to Queensland in 1924 and held the position of Common- wealth Cotton Entomologist. In India he had made studies of the pink bollworm and of other pests of Indian cotton, and he took up the entomological problems of this crop in Queensland with vigor, pub- lishing in the next four years nearly a score of papers. These were 392 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 printed mainly in the Queensland Agricultural Journal and in the Empire Cotton Growing Review. When C. B. Williams left Egypt in 1928, Mr. Ballard went to that country, where he now holds the position of Chief of the Plant Protection Section of the Ministry of Agriculture. While in Aus- tralia, Mr. Ballard was allotted land on farms in each of the chief cotton-growing parts of Queensland, which he used for experimental or observation work and for testing possible methods of control of pests. He found serious problems, and at the time of his arrival the coastal areas, for example, were heavily infested with the pink boll- worm. The bolls were infested by the cosmopolitan Noctuid moth, Heliothis armiger (or Chloridea obsoleta) and also by the Australian peach moth (Dichocrocis punctiferalis). There were also cotton- stainers of the genus Dysdercus just as there are in the Americas, and other true bugs doing similar work. Dr. R. Hamlyn-Harris, an Englishman who had held for a brief time an entomological position in the West Indies, went to Australia in 1902 and was engaged for seven and a half years in the Queensland Museum as Director. His health failing, he went into the country for a time and engaged in the study of the diseases and insect pests of fruit trees in the field. In 1922 he took the position of officer in charge of the central office laboratory—Malarial and Filarial Sur- vey of Southern Queensland under grants from the Rockefeller Foundation. He is now and has been since 1926 City Entomologist of Brisbane under the Department of Health. He has made some most interesting observations relating to mosquitoes and disease and has published a number of important papers. We must not leave Queensland without mention of the excellent work done by Margaret E. Temperley, who seems to be an excellent observer and altogether a most competent person. For example, in the April, 1930, number of the Queensland Agricultural Journal there is an admirable and beautifully illustrated article by Miss Tem- perley entitled “Life History Notes on the Banana Fruit-Eating Caterpillar (Tiracola plagiata Walk.).”” She gives a very full account of the life history of this destructive insect. The two colored plates covering this article were drawn by Mr. Helmsing whose name is mentioned in a previous paragraph. They could not have been done more skillfully. South Australia—The first work on injurious insects in South Australia was apparently done by Mr. Frazer S. Crawford who inter- ested himself for a number of years before his death in the study of insects and fungus pests. It was due to Mr. Crawford that the famous WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 393 expedition was sent from the United States to Australia that resulted in the importation of the Australian ladybird and the control of the white scale in southern California. Mr. Crawford sent specimens of a parasitic fly, that afterwards became known as Lestophonus iceryace, to Miss Ormerod in England, who forwarded them to Professor Riley in Washington, thus starting the correspondence between Professor Riley and Mr. Crawford which gave the people in the United States practically the first information that in South Australia the fluted scale was controlled by parasites or predators. When Koebele arrived at Adelaide, South Australia, on October 2, 1888, he carried letters of introduction to Mr. Crawford whom he found at his post in the office of the Surveyor General.’ Koebele states that Mr. Crawford received him in a very kindly way and that he promised him his assistance, which promise was honorably ful- filled throughout Koebele’s stay in Adelaide. On October 15 Koebele made a trip with Messrs. Crawford and J. G. O. Tepper to North Adelaide where Koebele discovered for the first time, feeding on a large female scale, the ladybird which has since become so famous, Novius (Vedalia) cardinalis. Koebele stated in his report that he called the attention of both the gentlemen to the insect, yet neither of them had ever seen it or knew the beetle. The first shipment of the valuable beetle was made from specimens secured at Mannum on the Murray River. The Agricultural Bureau of South Australia was established in the late 1880’s and in its reports there are occasional references to insect pests. When specimens were received by the Bureau, from that time on, they were referred, where necessary, to Mr. Crawford, to Mr. J. G. O. Tepper of the Museum, to Mr. Olliff, Government Entomolo- gist of New South Wales, or to Mr. Charles French, Government Entomologist of Victoria. For a number of years Congresses of Agriculture were held at Adelaide, and at the first one, held March 4-7, 1890, Mr. Crawford made a long report on insects and fungus pests which was published and was illustrated by four etched plates. He paid especial attention to the codling-moth and stated that it was then four years since he first gave the alarm that the pest was present in South Australia. He stated further that it had long been rampant in Tasmania. Had Mr. Crawford lived, it is likely that he would have been appointed official Entomologist to the colony of South Australia, but after his death in 1890 a vivid interest in entomology was kept up, largely through *He was a photolithographer in that office. 26 394 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS voL. 84 the interest shown in the matter by Garden and Field, an important agricultural paper published at Adelaide, the editor of which, Mr. W. C. Grasby, visited the United States and was very appreciative of the work done here. He was an early foreign member of the American Association of Economic Entomologists. One of the-early writers in South Australia was Mr. J. G. O. Tepper, who for many years held the position of Curator of the Ento- mological Department of the South Australian Museum at Adelaide and acted as Consulting Entomologist for the Department of Agricul- ture. He was also consulted by other colonies. Mr. Tepper died in 1922 but had retired at the age of 70 and was succeeded by A. M. Lea, who is now Entomologist to the Museum and Consulting Ento- mologist to the Department of Agriculture. Mr. Lea has been con- nected with the Museum since IQIT. In 1894, Mr. George Quinn, Horticultural Instructor and Chief Inspector of Fruit under the so-called “ Vine, Fruit, and Vegetable Protection Act,’ became connected with the Department of Agricul- ture for the purpose of carrying out the law and trying in a general way to place horticulture on a sound footing. This law empowered the authorities to deal with and regulate the introduction into the State of fruits, plants, insects, and diseases, and to make regulations for enforcing attention to any which might be already found injuring plant life in the State or which might from time to time be introduced. The law seems to have been rigidly enforced. In many cases disin- fection by hydrocyanic-acid gas was carried on, charges being imposed on the importer covering the expenses. Under Mr. Quinn’s direction, demonstrations in spraying experiments were carried out in the gar- dens of South Australia, and he worked for years in testing reme- dies, publishing bulletins and in giving lectures and personal advice. He had a good force, consisting at times of as many as 12 men. Some of Mr. Quinn’s more important publications have related to spraying against the codling-moth, to the banded pumpkin beetle and to the fruit-maggot fly pests. ; The Journal of the Department of Agriculture of South Australia, which began its publication in August, 1897, under the title ‘“ The Journal of Agriculture and Forestry ” and which ran for seven vol- umes under that title, is still being issued, and has always contained many shorter notes on injurious insects, published either editorially or as quotations from other journals. It seems strange that South Australia has never had a paid official economic entomologist ; but her inspection force, in combination with WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 395 competent advice from the South Australian Museum, seems to have handled the situation fairly satisfactorily. Quite recently there has been founded in South Australia the Waite Agricultural Research Institute under the University of Adelaide. This Institute was established for the purpose of furthering the cause of education and research in agriculture and allied subjects. Buildings have been erected upon large estates at Glen Osmond four miles from Adelaide. The active work began in 1925. From public funds, from funds contributed by the Empire Marketing Board, and from gifts by individuals, the Institute has assumed shape and prom- ises admirable work. Arrangements have been made for entomologi- cal research. An exceptionally well trained man, Dr. James Davidson, formerly of the Rothamsted Station in England, has been appointed Entomologist and is now on the ground and at work. Doctor David- son while noted for his investigations of the Aphididae, is a broadly trained man and admirably fitted to handle the entomological ques- tions of importance in South Australia. New South Wales—In 1885 a young Englishman named A. Sidney Olliff went from London to Sydney to accept the office of Entomolo- gist to the Australian Museum. He was a young man of great promise. Before leaving London he acted as volunteer assistant to Mr. C. O. Waterhouse in the British Museum and later was secretary and scientific assistant to Lord Walsingham. He was only 20 years of age when he reached Australia, and he had already published ento- mological papers in England. After arriving at his new post his pub- lished papers in the Proceedings of the Linnean Society of New South Wales were numerous. The Agricultural Gazette of New South Wales was started under the Bureau of Mines and Agriculture in 1890, and Mr. Olliff began at once to contribute many important articles to this journal on ento- mological subjects. It was only natural, therefore, that Mr. Olliff should have received the first appointment to the charge of the Ento- mological Branch of the Department of Mines and Agriculture. In a series of entomological bulletins begun in 1892 his name appears upon the title page as “ Government Entomologist, New South Wales,”’ but his appointment obviously dated from 1890. The first number of the Gazette contains an important article of his on the codling moth, and the subsequent numbers contain frequent valuable articles, nearly all very well illustrated. The volume for 1891, for example, contains no less than 19 such articles; that for 1892 has 20. He continued this important work until he died at the untimely age of 30 in 1895. He had, however, built up a sound reputation. We 396 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 were publishing the journal “ Insect Life” in the Division of Ento- mology of the United States Department of Agriculture at that time, and I well remember with what sound satisfaction his bulletins and articles were received and the great pleasure I had in giving them full reviews so that they would become known to the 3,000 or more people who received Insect Life. His obituary was published on page 1 of Volume 7 (1896) of the Agricultural Gazette, and a list of his published papers was added. This list comprised 72 titles. About this time Mr. Charles T. Musson, a professor in the Hawkes- bury Agricultural College, began to publish in the Gazette notes on entomological subjects. This college was a Government institution under the Department of Agriculture, and economic entomology was dealt with, and a course of 32 lectures with 15 practical exercises was given in the second year of the student’s residence. Professor Musson, however, covered in his work, not only entomology, but also botany, vegetable pathology, and nature study. And he had only one general assistant. It appears that at the time of Olliff’s death, Claude W. Fuller was holding the post of Assistant Entomologist. His first independent article occurs in the Gazette for January, 1896, and is entitled “ Insect Friends and Foes.” In a later number an article by Fuller entitled “Insect Pests’ carries under his own name the title “Acting Ento- mologist.” In the final number of the volume, an article by Fuller entitled “ Plant Galls formed by Insects’ carries under his name the title ‘“ Entomologist.” So, before the year was out he had been formally given Mr. Olliff’s post. The most important article by Mr. Fuller in this volume is entitled ‘‘ Bovine Tick Fever.” It covers 27 pages and a number of plates. Mr. Fuller’s subsequent career was in South Africa—first in a post in Natal, afterwards under the Union of Federated States—and apparently he left Australia in the early part of 1897. Fortunately, the colony had, in the person of Mr. W. W. Froggatt, a sound entomologist employed in the Technological Museum at Sydney, who had already published under the “ Technical Education Series” of leaflets at least one important paper bearing upon eco- nomic entomology. .Mr. Froggatt was appointed successor to Fuller ; took up the large correspondence upon entomology ; traveled through- out the State making investigations and giving lectures. He established an insectary where he carried on necessary breeding tests, and con- ducted a laboratory and an office in Sydney. His activity was very great, and in the volumes of the Agricultural Gazette from 1899 to 1906 inclusive are printed no less than 131 signed articles. WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 397 In addition, early in 1907, he published a large volume entitled “Australian Insects” which covers 449 pages and carries 37 plates and 180 text figures. In 1907 he took his trip around the world that has already been referred to. In later years New South Wales has continued to be very active. Mr. Froggatt held office until 1928. After his return from his circum- navigation tour, he continued his activities and published many articles in the Gazette and elsewhere. In June, 1928, he was given a farewell dinner by his colleagues in Sydney. I believe that he now has a post in the Forest Department. Mr. Froggatt was succeeded by Mr. W. B. Gurney who had been Assistant. Mr. Gurney began to write as early as 1912, and the first article of his that I have seen was on the subject of fruit-flies and other insects attacking cultivated and wild fruits in New South Wales. He continued to publish articles in the ensuing volumes. He was present at the Fourth International Congress of Entomology at Ithaca, New York, in 1928 as an official delegate from Australia. Mr. John L. Froggatt, son of Mr. W. W. Froggatt, was at one time an Assistant Entomologist in New South Wales, and his name appears as coauthor with his father of two articles in the Gazette for 1914. As appears elsewhere, he is now Assistant Entomologist in Queensland. The October (1929) number of the Agricultural Gazette of New South Wales has an excellent article called “ Preliminary Experi- ments in Cabbage Moth Control,” by W. L. Morgan, “ Assistant Entomologist ” which shows that Mr. Gurney is by no means working single-handed. Western Australia—Western Australia, naturally, as one of the newer colonies, was somewhat behind the others in beginning work with entomology. However, the Bureau of Agriculture of the colony began publishing a journal in 1894 in which the passage of an insect pests act was advocated in the first volume, which also published different notes upon insects, quoted from other publications. The second volume of this journal contained a number of articles on insects, some of them by Arthur M. Lea, who signed as Entomologist of the Bureau. I am not sure how long Mr. Lea kept this post. He afterwards went to New South Wales and became connected with the Australian Museum. In the Journal for 1902 was published a letter fron George Com- pere, of California, relating to his search for parasites. He had been 398 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VoL. 84 engaged by the colony in 1901. In 1904 Mr. Compere was employed jointly by the State of California and by the colony of Western Australia to import parasites of destructive insects. In the second volume of the Journal for 1903, apropos to the belief in Western Australia of the claims of the parasite school of Califor- nians, a letter from Prof. C. W. Woodworth, of Berkeley, California, was published, in which he stated bluntly that the California statements had been exaggerated; that California had then very many insect pests, and that the cottony cushion scale was the only one held in check by ,its enemies. This letter was answered by Mr. Compere in the Journal, and naturally the answer was very satisfactory from the point of view of the advocates of natural control, but nevertheless it contained misstatements and was misleading. It is interesting to note that in the Journal for 1904 was published an article by W. B. Wall, reprinted from the California Fruit Grower “ entirely bearing out the statements made by Mr. Compere.” In this article some unfortunate statements were made, as, for example, in referring to John Isaac, he quotes from him and calls him “one of the ‘best known horticultural writers in America.” In 1903 and 1904 Mr. Compere was on his journeys, and in the number for August 15, 1904, it was announced that he had returned, bringing with him “the parasite of the fruit-fly as well as some other valuable insects.” And on pages 68 to 72 is his report. Among other things, he says “ The Staphylinid beetles beyond question destroy the major part of the fruit-fly parasites in Brazil.” This was one of his characteristically optimistic statements. He always seems to have seen only one side of the question, and his Staphylinid importation was a flat failure. Moreover, the visit of Lounsbury and Fuller from South Africa to Brazil failed to substantiate Compere’s statement as to the efficacy of the Staphylinids. Apparently Western Australia gradually lost confidence in Mr. Compere. In the Journal for 1907 he is still referred to as Entomologist to the State, and claims to have successfully imported parasites of the soft brown scale and the grape scale from California into Western Australia. It may be worth while to give, as a good example of the looseness of Mr. Compere’s state- ments about this time, the following quotation referring to a species of Lecanium: “ Some years ago Mr. Ehrhorn discovered its parasite, Comys fusca.” This common parasite of Lecanium scales had been known to all good entomologists for very many years. I had studied it, and in fact named it, here in Washington nearly 30 years earlier. During the time of his employment in Western Australia he secured from the British Museum in London an assistant, Mr. Frederick WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 399 D. Lowe. Mr. Lowe stayed with him for a short time and then went back to England where I met him in 1906 or 1907 and heard his story of his disagreement with Mr. Compere’s statements and conclusions. In 1904, Mr. L. J. Newman became Compere’s assistant and suc- ceeded him as Entomologist to the Bureau of Agriculture of Western Australia. The first of Mr. Newman’s publications to which we have any reference is dated 1907. The statement is made in the same number that during the absence of Mr. Compere, traveling in different parts of the world, “the newly appointed Assistant Entomologist, Mr. L. J. Newman, attends to the reception of consignments,” etc. The Report of the Department for 1908 is signed by Mr. Newman as Assistant Entomologist. Mr. Compere resigned his Australian post in 1910 and returned to California where for many years he held a post under the State Government, engaged largely in port inspection under the State plant quarantine regulations. His earlier work, backed enthusiastically by Mr. Elwood Cooper, seems to have been practically void of good results, and it is a pity that a man of such indomitable energy and of so much resource should not have had a sound training in entomology and in scientific methods. He was the right hand of the element in California that really delayed the progress of entomology in that State for some years as we have pointed out in the section on California. Mr. Newman remained acting Entomologist to Western Australia, after Compere’s resignation until 1918 when he was made Entomolo- gist and has been active and apparently efficient. The colony was publishing spraying calendars and information about spraying in 1908 and again in 1913. Evidently as early as 1908 reliance upon natural enemies was weakening. Mr. Newman’s recent publications have covered a variety of subjects, but they are very well done. I am inclined to doubt his assertion that the importation of Aphelinus mali into Western Australia through Doctor Tillyard has resulted in the parasitism of other aphids by this parasite, but that is a matter that will be cleared up. Northern Territory.—The agriculture of the Northern Territory was at one time looked after by the Department of External Affairs at Melbourne, and later by a so-called Administrator ; and G. F. Hill acted as Entomologist. In a report published in 1915 he gave an extended account of the insect pests of plants in the Territory, and another report contains additional accounts of injurious insects, with especial mention of experiments in the control of termites. 400 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 NEW ZEALAND The naturalists who accompanied Captain Cook on his voyages of 1769-70 and 1773-74 collected some New Zealand insects, and the species were later described by Fabricius and Swederus. Much later expeditions incidentally collected New Zealand species, and with the gradual settlement of the islands residents began to col- lect and send specimens to England. Toward the latter part of the nineteenth century entomologists resident there began to appear, and W. M. Maskell and F. W. Hutton, for example, took up the study of insects and described many species. Economic entomology made its first appearance in the 1890's when T. W. Kirk was appointed Biologist to the State Depart- ment of Agriculture. He organized the biological branch of the Department which was destined to take the leading part in the study of the economic problems of the country. Professor Kirk was responsible for the study and recording of the major pests and for the introduction of many beneficial insects, among them Novius cardi- nalis against Icerya purchasi, Rhizovius ventralis against Eriococcus coriaceus, and of bumblebees for the pollination of clover. In 1900 A. H. Cockayne joined the staff, and, on Kirk becoming Director of Horticulture, he became biologist and held the office until 1924. The Biological Division of the Department of Agriculture grew into a large organization, and in 1916 David Miller was appointed to the staff as Government Entomologist and organized a specific ento- mological service for the Dominion. Outstanding investigations were taken up on the pear midge (Perrisia pyrt), the grass grub (Odontria sealandica), the sheep maggot fly, and forest entomology. A wealthy and public-spirited citizen of Nelson, Mr. Thomas Cawthron, died in 1915 and left in his will something over a million dollars to be devoted to scientific research. The Board of Trustees decided to devote the income of most of this sum to scientific research relating to agriculture, arranged quarters at Nelson and started re- search operations in 1920. Dr. Robin J. Tillyard, an Englishman and a graduate of Cambridge University, who had been connected with the University of Sydney (Australia), was appointed to take charge of the entomological work of the Institute. Tillyard began at once to push the subject of natural control, and, with the help of the Federal Bureau of Entomology of the United States and the Imperial Bureau of Entomology in London, began the importation of several para- sites of several imported pests of importance. He achieved a notable success against the wooly root-louse of the apple by means of the importation of Aphelinus mali from the United States, and in time WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 401 doubtless others of his importations will assume importance. He showed himself very pronounced in his ideas as to the value of the importation of the insect enemies of dangerous plants ; and, the black- berry having spread alarmingly in New Zealand, and encouraged by the reported success of the insect enemies of the lantana weed in Hawaii, he has made efforts to introduce blackberry insects into New Zealand. It was during his residence in New Zealand that Dr. Till- yard’s remarkable book “ The Insects of Australia and New Zealand ” was published. It contains 560 pages and is abundantly illustrated and contains some admirable colored plates. It is full of original observations and is a wonderful book. In 1928 the Commonwealth of the States of Australia having con- structed the new capital at Canberra and founded the Federal De- partment of Agriculture, Doctor Tillyard was appointed to take charge of the entomological work in that Commonwealth and left New Zealand. He was succeeded by Dr. David Miller and the Ento- mological Department of the Cawthron Institute was extended, and the entomological research for the whole Dominion of New Zealand was centralized in Nelson. Occasional published references will be found to the fact that at one time bumblebees (humblebees) were introduced into New Zea- land to bring about the fertilization and seeding of red clover; but the exact facts in the case were not fully displayed in print until 1914 when the New Zealand Department of Agriculture, Industries, and Commerce published as Bulletin 46 (new series) a pamphlet entitled “History of the Humble Bee in New Zealand: Its Introduction and Results,” by I. Hopkins. It seems that Mr. Hopkins, who was for- merly Chief Government Apiarist, had started large bee farms in the years 1882 to 1887. Although thousands of acres of red clover ad- joined his bee farms, he found that the hive bee visited the clover only occasionally and that seeding was far from perfect. He con- cluded that the hive bee simply collects pollen from red clover when it is scarce elsewhere, and is consequently seen on the plants only occasionally. Attempts to introduce humblebees from England were made as early as 1870, but failed. Mr. Hopkins began to try to bring them over in 1880. All attempts failed until 1885, when 48 were landed safely. The progeny of these bees spread over the country during the first few years with remarkable rapidity. Whole nests and queens were sent from Canterbury to various parts of the North Island. The species introduced proved to be two in number, namely Bombus terrestris and B, subterraneus. 402 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 The results appear to have been perfect, and, whereas it had pre- viously been possible to grow only a few seed, fertilization was, after the introduction, found to be almost perfect ; almost every head was full of “ fine, plump seed.” In 1913 the seed yield on one farm reached 720 pounds per acre. At the end of his writing, Mr. Hopkins stated that “ Not a trace of any change of habit (except perhaps in the period of hibernation) had been noticed in the bees from those natural to them in their origi- nal home.” A comparatively early knowledge of the insects of New Zealand was, curiously enough, due to three old soldiers, Capt. F. W. Hutton (1836 to 1905), Maj. Thomas Broun (1838 to 1919), and W. M. Maskell (1840 to 1898). Mr. Maskell went to New Zealand in 1860, Major Broun in 1863, and Captain Hutton in 1866. Captain Hutton served for some time as a midshipman in the Navy. Later he received a commission in the Royal Welsh Fusileers, saw active service in the Crimea and in the Indian Mutiny. In 1860 he joined the Geological Society of London, and in 1862 published a paper on the use of geology to military officers. In New Zealand he joined the Geological Survey Department, and continued through the rest of his life to work upon the geology and zoology of the islands. He was in 1880 Professor of Biology at Canterbury College, staying there for many years. He was Curator of the Canterbury Museum at the time of his death, which, however, did not occur in New Zealand but on his way back from England where he had gone on leave of absence. His work covered a very broad range of zoological sub- jects, and on entomology: he published over 30 papers of systematic importance. Major Broun joined the Army at the age of.16, during the Crimean War, and after the close of that war accompanied his regiment to Burma. Here he became attracted by the large size and brilliant colors of many of the tropical insects, and began to collect for the British Museum. Then came the outbreak of the Indian Mutiny, and his regi- ment served in India during the whole period of the Mutiny. He was present at the assault and capture of Delhi and at the relief of Luck- now. He retired from the Army in 1862, married, and later went to New Zealand. Then the Maori War broke out. He was commissioned as a Captain and served the whole war. He worked with the Auck- land Board of Education, and remained in the service until 1886. He was appointed Government Entomologist in 1890, holding the post until 1907. From the close of the Maoric War until his death he worked with insects. He knew the Hemiptera and Orthoptera and WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 403 had a good working knowledge of most of the other orders, but he was primarily a coleopterist. He intended to prepare a general work on New Zealand Coleoptera, and he was very industrious in describ- ing his species. He became known to entomologists all over the world. Mr. W. M. Maskell was born in England in 1840, and died in New Zealand in 1898 after a surgical operation. He was educated in Eng- land and in Paris, served in the Army for a short time, and went to New Zealand in 1860, where he was for some years a sheep farmer. In 1887 he became Provincial Secretary and Treasurer of Canterbury Province. Toward the end of his life he was Registrar of the Univer- sity of New Zealand. I should mention that he began originally as a microscopist and gradually became interested in the Coccidae, Aleu- rodidae, and Psyllidae, although he also worked on the Desmids in botany. He planned to do a large work, in parts, on the insects nox- ious to agriculture and plants in New Zealand. Of this, he published one part, the scale insects, which was issued in book form in 1887 by the Department of State Forests and Agriculture at Wellington. He had previously been describing species in the Transactions of the New Zealand Institute and was well known as a careful student who had the delightful task of being the first to investigate a new fauna. His book is not large, covering only 116 pages, but it is illustrated by 22 carefully drawn plates. He was the first to describe several species that have since become widely distributed and of very con- siderable economic importance. The famous cottony cushion scale, or fluted scale (Icerya purchasi), was first described by him, in the Transactions of the New Zealand Institute for 1878. Dr. David Milier, now Chief Entomologist and Director of the Forest Biological and Noxious Weeds Control Researches at the Cawthron Institute, was born in Scotland in 1890. He was appointed Government Entomologist in New Zealand in 1916, holding this post until 1928, when he succeeded Tillyard at the Cawthron Insti- tute. For some years prior to 1928 he also acted as Lecturer on For- est and Agricultural Zoology in the New Zealand University and as Consulting Zoologist to the State Forest Service. Since his estab- lishment at the Cawthron Institute the Entomological Department of that Institute has become recognized as the central entomological research station for the Dominion. Doctor Miller has taken hold of this work with great enthusiasm. In the spring of 1930 he spent some time in the United States, on his way to the meeting of the Imperial Bureau in London. In fact, he is in Washington at this time of writing (April, 1930). He expects to visit South America on his way back to New Zealand and to at- 404 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VoL, 84 tempt some interesting importations of beneficial insects. I expect great things from this comparatively young, well trained, and enthusi- astic man. THE PHILIPPINES Many collections had been made in the islands of the Philippine Archipelago, and many of the species were to be found in the differ- ent great collections of the world before the Spanish-American War. In fact, the fauna had attracted the attention of many naturalists. In 1895 and. 1896 a large three volume systematic catalogue of the fauna of the Philippines was published by the College of Saint Tomas in Manila, prepared by Fr. Casto de Elera, Professor of Natural His- tory and Director of the Museum of the Dominican Fathers of the “ Colegio-Universidad ” of Saint Tomas. Volume 2 of this great catalogue comprises the Articulata. It is little more than a list of spe- cies, but covers 676 large octavo pages. In the foreword, the follow- ing well known entomologists are mentioned as having worked upon Philippine insects: G. A. Baer, Maur, Reginbart, O. Mohnike, F. Chapuis, Roelofs, Candéze, Selys Longchamps, Osten Sacken, C. Stal, Semper, Staudinger, E. Grube, and Ignacio Bolivar. Of the 676 pages of this volume on the Articulata, 525 pages are devoted to insects. This great catalog was brought together by the author for the Regional Philippine Exposition. Soon after the Spanish-American War, added collections began to come in to the museums of the United States and to the European museums. For example, Fr. Robert Brown, S. J., Fr. W. A. Stan- ton, S. J., of the Observatory at Manila, and Dr. P. L. Stengl of the United States Army sent collections to the United States National Museum in Washington ; and the late Dr. W: H. Ashmead published in 1904 and 1905 some papers on the Hymenoptera of the Philip- pines based principally on material sent in by these men. About that time Dr. C. H. T. Townsend accepted a teaching posi- tion in the Philippines and went over there for a number of months, and of course did a certain amount of collecting, although I do not recall that he published anything about the Philippine fauna. Following the war also came the establishment of the Philippine Government Laboratories, afterwards changed to the Philippine Bureau of Science with Paul C. Freer as Director. Mr. C. S. Banks, who had been an assistant of Dr. E. P. Felt, the State Entomologist of New York, passed a Civil Service examination and was engaged by the Government Laboratories in December, 1902. He was: immedi- ately sent to the Island of Negros to study insects affecting the cacao. = WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 405 J. L. Webb, subsequently for many years connected with the Fed- eral Bureau of Entomology at Washington, entered the Philippine Government Laboratories in 1903, to take up the study of forest insects in the Archipelago, but remained in the islands only a few months, working mainly under the direction of the Bureau of Forestry of which Capt. George P. Ahearn was chief. Mr. Banks soon became interested in biting insects and took up systematic study of the mosquitoes. His report on cacao insects was published on pages 597-620 of the Report of the Secretary of the Interior, 1902-3. It was illustrated by a large number of admirable half-tone plates. By 1907 Mr. Banks had found 100 species of mosquitoes in the island, and had built up a considerable entomological collection. He was given an assistant, Willie Schulze, who was working with him certainly before 1908." In 1910 Charles R. Jones, an American, was appointed to help in the economic aspects of the work, and was trans- ferred in 1912 to the Bureau of Agriculture in connection with locusts. Mr. Banks took up the subject of silk culture and prepared a manual of silk culture. He further made an investigation of the in- sects affecting tobacco. In August, 1914, he was transferred to the University of the Philippines, returning to the Bureau of Science in 1919. Mr. Schulze resigned and entered commercial life in 1913. He had built up a large collection of Coleoptera and Lepidoptera and had completed a catalogue of Philippine Coleoptera. When Mr. Banks returned to the Bureau of Science he brought all of the collections, equipment, and books back to Manila, and in 1919 the collection of insects was said to approximate 350,000 specimens. Mr. Banks retired in June, 1922, and Mr. Schulze came back into the service, resigning finally in 1927. Mr. David B. Mackie, of California, entered the service of the Bureau of Agriculture as Inspector in 1912, and was in charge of the migratory locust campaign from its inception until 1918. The Government appropriated from 50,000 to 100,000 pesos a year and maintained a very active campaign, conducting its work through the Bureau of Agriculture and through the local provincial governors. At the peak of the locust outbreak, as I am informed by Mr. Mackie, practically every province in the Archipelago was infested. During his term of office—and he was later termed Entomologist—Mr. *Mr. Webb tells me that he remembers Mr. Schulze very well in 1903. He went with him on one or two extended trips. At that time Mr. Schulze knew no English. 406 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VoL. 84 Mackie did a great deal of valuable work. He prepared an article on coconut pests, and did the first work on vacuum fumigation in his efforts to destroy the cigaret-beetle, or cigar weevil as it is some- times called (Lasioderma serricorne). He had four vacuum fumiga- tors installed, and 6,000,000 cigars were treated and sold in the early work. In 1913 he organized the first plant quarantine service, and later published a number of very interesting articles. The details of his fight against the locusts are important and very interesting. He also did some work on fruit-flies. Following Mr. Mackie’s separation from the service, Mr. Gonzalo Merino was placed in charge of pest control for the Department of Agriculture. The large collections brought together by Mr. Banks had been studied by experts in different parts of the world and reported upon, but, large as they were, they sank into comparative insignificance when Dr. C. F. Baker got fairly started at his important work. Doctor Baker was a very extraordinary man, who had studied entomology at the Michigan Agricultural College, where he graduated in 1892, and afterwards worked with Professor Gillette in Colorado and later with Professor Cook at Pomona College in southern California. A fter- wards he worked at the Cuban Experiment Station at Santiago de las Vegas, and still later in Brazil where he made enormous collec- tions of both plants and insects which were presented to Pomona College when he returned in 1908. Baker was appointed Professor of Agronomy in the University of the Philippines in 1912, subsequently becoming Dean. He worked incessantly with insects, built up ex- traordinary collections, and died in harness in 1927. His collections had been sent to very many scientific centers in different parts of the world and were thus identified by the world’s best specialists. His will gave these collections to the United States National Museum, and, after his death, Mr. R. A. Cushman went to the Philippines and packed them carefully ; and they are now in Washington. The journal known as “ The Philippine Agriculturist and Forester,” published by the College of Agriculture of the University of the Philippines at Los Bafios, was started in January, 1911. Professor Baker was a contributor, and the journal shows his intense interest in investigation work and also his very great interest in the young ilipinos and his belief in them. His editorial reply to criticisms published in No. 1 of Volume 16 is such an eloquent tribute to young Filipinos that there is no wonder he inspired admirable work. In 1909 the Bureau of Agriculture of the Department of the Inte- rior began publication of The Philippine Agricultural Review in WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 407 Spanish and English. This excellent journal is still being published, and through its volumes are scattered very numerous important articles on injurious insects. In the last number received in Washing- ton the organization of the Bureau of Agriculture is displayed on the inner cover, and no strictly entomological officer is mentioned. Mr. Gonzalo Merino is still Chief of the Plant Pests Control Division. In this number is an important article entitled “Some Notes on the White Pyralid Moth Borer (Scirpophaga innotata Walker) and Suggestions for its Control,’ by Pedro L. Sison. Earlier volumes contain articles by Leopoldo Uichanco, H. E. Woodsworth, and others. In the volume for 1923 is the first article by Faustino Q. Otanes. Mr. Otanes was in the United States in 1922 studying in preparation for an official position in the Philippines. He visited Washington and spent some time studying the organization and methods of work in the Federal Bureau of Entomology. Articles by Mr. Otanes occur in the Agricultural Review for 1924, 1925, 1926, and 1927. In the number for the first quarter of 1927 he is given the title, Acting Chief, Plant Pests Control Division ; in that for 1926 he is the author of an article, and to his name is attached the title Entomologist. Aside from official work in economic entomology, the Victorias Milling Company on the Island of Negros and the North Negros Sugar Company, in the autumn of 1927 engaged Dr. W. Dwight Pierce (for many years connected with the United States Bureau of Entomology) for two years to go out to Negros and study the insects affecting the sugar cane. Doctor Pierce went to the island in August, 1927, and remained until March 1, 1930, when he returned to the United States with large collections and is now engaged in taxonomic work on these insects. In Negros he was given an excellent salary, a first-class laboratory outfit, and four collectors and assistants. He found a very large number of primary sugar cane pests, which complicated the situation very materially. There were ten species of borers causing dead-heart, and in order to obtain control of these it was necessary to have several series of parasites. Up to February, 1928, he was practically unable to find any parasites. In this month the egg parasitism of the principal borer (Olethreutes schistaceana) amounted to less than six per cent as an average over the territory involved. By adopting a system of redistribution of parasites in small units to many foci, he quickly brought the average parasitism in three months to over 80 per cent. There was a drop in parasitism which accompanied the great reduction in the host numbers, but from - 408 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 March, 1929, to the termination of his employment there was an average parasitism throughout the entire territory of over 70 per cent. This parasite was Trichogramma nana Zehnt. The second species was Diatraea infuscatella Zehnt. This borer became the primary borer as the Olethreutes was reduced in numbers, but its egg-parasite (Phanurus beneficiens) gained very rapidly under the system of field redistribution, so that its parasitism was over 50 per cent at the time of leaving. Larval parasitism was very low, but the same system of redistribution was followed and the mean para- sitism of all borers showed an upward trend in a six month period. Extensive studies were made of the weevil borer, Trochorhopalus triangulatus. This borer was unknown to the sugar planters, the dominant pest of sugar cane on the Island of Negros, causing more permanent damage than the dead-heart borers although the latter were apparently causing 20 to 30 per cent injury. This is because the dead-heart borers’ damage was replaced by a subsequent growth whereas the damage by the beetle borer was final. Tests were made of the damage on many cars, and analyses in the mill proved that the average damage was between two and three per cent loss of sugar, which amounted to over a million pesos in the territory involved. No parasites were found, but the obvious method of control seemed to be the handling of waste. The practice in the Philippines is to burn the waste after harvesting the cane, but usually large quantities of sticks remained in the field. His recommendation, made in March, 1928, to pick up and burn all pieces of cane left in the fields was prob- ably the most practical measure available at the time. This was fol- lowed by many planters, and may be the reason for the gradual reduc- tion in damage shown by investigations of the cars. The program of work followed out was divided into a survey of the entire entomology of sugar cane and its surroundings, the map- ping out of a complete program of cultural control,’ and the distribu- tion of parasites. The results of this work are embodied in a series of six reports on the insects and one on the climate, published by the Victorias Milling Company. Shortly after Doctor Pierce arrived at his Philippine post he wrote me that Dr. J. W. Chapman, a specialist on ants, was teaching zool- ogy at the Silliman Institute at Dumaguete, Oriental Negros, and that in addition to himself and Doctor Chapman the only other ento- * Doctor Pierce’s recommendations in regard to cultural operations, involving especially clean culture, were of such character as not to seriously interfere with the generally adopted practice. They were economical and are likely to be adopted in view of the resulting profit. WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOW ARD 409 mologists in the Archipelago were Uichanco at Los Bafios and Otanes and Banks at Manila. Recently I learned from a University of California publication that Alonzo W. Lopez (University of California class of 1928) is now Entomologist to the Philippine Sugar Association Research Bureau and is stationed at La Carlota, Occidental Negros, and that he has a good laboratory. HAWAII In 1893, the year before the Republic of Hawaii was definitely established, the provisional Government created a Department of Agriculture and Forestry, and Albert Koebele was appointed Ento- mological Expert for a term of three years. Mr. Koebele was charged with the duty of first carefully investigating the entomology of Hawaii and then of traveling in Australia, New Zealand, and other countries for the purpose of collecting and transmitting to Hawaii insects which will prey upon native and introduced insect pests. In the following years Koebele continued this work. In 1898 the former Republic was annexed to the United States as a Territory. Soon afterwards an Agricultural Experiment Sta- tion, under the Office of Experiment Stations of the United States Department of Agriculture, was established, and D. L. Van Dine, a competent entomologist who had been educated at Cornell University, was placed in charge of the entomological work. Under the Territorial Government, a competent inspection of intro- duced plants was begun at the port of Honolulu. Mr. Alexander Craw, well known for his previous work of a similar character in San Francisco, was placed in charge of this inspection. The Hawaiian Sugar Planters’ Association established a well equipped laboratory and appointed R. E, L. Perkins as Entomologist. Mr. Perkins was an Englishman who had been working in Hawaii under the auspices of the British Association for the Advancement of Science gathering material for the great ‘‘ Fauna Hawaiiensis.”’ His energies under the new appointment were largely devoted to the introduction of parasitic insects. He was given competent assistants. Mr. G. W. Kirkaldy, a well known British entomologist, was brought over, Albert Koebele was taken on, and the work under the Planters’ Association assumed large proportions. Later Frederick Muir, a very well trained man and son-in-law of the famous Dr. David Sharp, jomed?the toree; and) later ©. H. Swezey, D: 1. Fullaway, F. X. Williams, H. S. Osborn, and other competent men were taken from the United States. 27 410 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 The circumstances connected with Swezey’s appointment are in- teresting. Koebele had been instructed to find parasites of the sugar cane leaf-hopper. He came to Washington, knowing that I had a card catalogue of the host relations of the parasitic Hymenoptera, and asked me for some indication as to the parasites of leaf-hoppers known, in different parts of the world. As it happened, a short time before, Mr. Swezey, then working at the Ohio Agricultural Experi- ment Station at Columbus, had studied a leaf-hopper parasite belong- ing to the Proctotrypoid family Dryinidae, and I told Koebele that he should go to Columbus and talk with Swezey. He did so, and offered Swezey a place in Hawaii which he accepted. Since that time he has proved to be one of the very best men in the service of the Sugar Planters’ Association, and has remained there all these years. Following the death of Alexander Craw, E. M. Ehrhorn, who had succeeded him in the inspection work at the port of San Francisco, again succeeded him in Hawaii and has since remained in Honolulu. After the appearance of the Mediterranean fruit-fly in Hawaii and its rapid spread over the islands, it became very important to protect California against its possible introduction from that source. Conse- quently Dr. E. A. Back, a trained entomologist from the Massa- chusetts Agricultural College, was sent over by the Federal Horticul- tural Board of the United States Department of Agriculture and remained in Honolulu five years studying this insect and inspecting all shipments of fruit destined for United States ports. He was suc- ceeded in 1918 by H. F. Willard, who is still engaged in this work, assisted since 1926 by A. C. Mason, a well-trained entomologist. All of the insect pests of agriculture in Hawaii have been intro- duced accidentally. The mild and changeless climate of the islands and the fact that they are islands render parasite importation more effective than elsewhere. Therefore much work of this kind of very striking value has been done, practically entirely under the auspices of the Sugar Planters’ Association. The extraordinary results of some of these importations will be described in another chapter, but this is the place to state that the wonderful results reached by the entomologists employed by the Association have been very gratefully appreciated and the men engaged have been not only amply com- pensated during their active work but also cared for in a princely way when they have been forced by ill health to retire. Koebele went back to Germany on full salary, remaining there until his death in 1924. R. C. L. Perkins was retired on full salary in 1913 and is still living, in England. Frederick Muir was also retired on full salary a short time ago, and has gone to England to live. WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—-HOWARD A4II The far-sighted and liberal policy of the Sugar Planters’ Associa- tion must be accredited to the organization as a whole, but I have a conviction that Mr. Walter M. Giffard, for many years the Secretary of the Association, was the prime mover and the impelling force of the policy established at such an early date. I believe that Mr. Gif- fard’s interest in entomology was first aroused by R. C. L. Perkins. He became deeply interested in the whole subject and has done taxo- nomic work of value in the leaf-hopper family. With conditions so unusual and so favorable to entomological study, and with a group of men so exceptionally fitted and working in a climate that is one of the most agreeable in the world, it is not surprising that admirable work has been done. An Entomological Society of Hawaii was founded in 1905 and it has published its pro- ceedings which in many ways are the most interesting records of any entomological society in the world. I visited Honolulu in 1915, largely for the purpose of looking into the conditions resulting from the importation of parasites of the sugar cane leaf-hopper and of the sugar cane borer. The results reported had seemed so delightfully perfect that I wished to study the situation, My observations confirmed everything that had been written about the work, and it is no wonder that the Hawaiian people rely very greatly upon imported beneficial insects. In 1924 I revisited the islands, as Chairman of the First Pan- Pacific Conservation Congress. Entomologists from different coun- tries bordering on the Pacific were present, and there were very interesting sessions of that particular section. The Congress as a whole considered very many matters, and there were present leaders in agriculture in all of its departments, representing many countries. The Congress in general passed many important resolutions, one of them relating to the necessity of establishing crop pest investigations in all Pacific countries and the organization of a central bureau to correlate results. The conference of 1924 was largely attended, as I have said. It was in session for nearly three weeks, and there was a public luncheon or dinner, or both, almost every day. Honolulu is a very cosmopolitan town, and the national groups took turns in entertaining the Congress. It soon appeared that Sir Joseph Carruthers, a prominent delegate from Australia, was a very happy after-dinner speaker. He had a keen sense of humor, and, since I was the chairman of the conference, the two of us were asked to speak after almost every function. We, naturally, exchanged humorous compliments and gave each other mild digs. 412 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 The climax of this interchange of somewhat dubious compliments came at the final dinner, which was given by the Chinese community of Honolulu. The President of that community was Mr. Wang How, who made the opening address in the Chinese language. The toast- master was Mr. Charlie Wang, a Harvard graduate, who interpreted Mr. Wang How’s speech. And then I was called upon, as chairman of the conference, to speak for the guests. I paid many compliments to the Chinese nation, said that I had been very much impressed by Mr. Wang How’s speech, and stated that he had shown me that the Chinese were great inventors, not only in big things like the mariner’s compass and gun-powder, but also in little things, since his name How was evidently the beginning of my own name and that upon the Chinese How some Englishman, perhaps a thousand years later, had drafted the ard. So I greeted Mr. Wang How as a long-lost cousin. After a few moments of attempted pleasantries of that kind, I took my seat, and Sir Joseph was called upon. With his broad Australian accent, he remarked that he had been very much interested in what Doctor Howard had said but that he had anticipated him in the rela- tionship to Mr. Wang How, since he had noticed the facial resem- blance between the two men as soon as they had sat at table! In an earlier paragraph we have referred to the appointment of D. L. Van Dine as the first Entomologist to the Agricultural Experi- ment Station founded by the Office of Experiment Stations of the United States Department of Agriculture soon after the annexation of the Hawaiian Republic to the United States as a Territory. Mr. Van Dine was appointed in 1902 and held the office until March, 1909. His first bulletin related to mosquitoes, and his interest in mosquitoes in Hawaii continued. He published three bulletins on the subject. It was this work that eventually led to his appointment in charge of a station under the Federal Bureau at Mound, Louisiana, in which very important research was carried on relating to malarial mosquitoes and to the economic effect of malaria on the laborers on a large plantation in the Mississippi delta. He also published while in Hawaii on a number of other insect problems, writing 13 special bulletins and contributing articles to the Report of the Station. He wrote one bulletin on the insect enemies of tobacco in Hawaii. It was published in 1905. For a number of years there was a strong effort to establish a tobacco-growing industry in Hawaii, but it was found impossible to grow wrapper leaf which would compete in price with that grown in the United States, and the attempt was abandoned. Insect enemies were a part, but a small part. WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 413 In 1908 Mr. Van Dine was brought to the United States, and D. T. Fullaway. was appointed Entomologist to the Experiment Station. He held this post until June 30, 1915, when he resigned to take a post connected with the Territorial Board of Agriculture. While with the Station, he published a number of papers, including one on the insects injurious to tobacco and another on insects affecting cotton. The cotton industry started with good prospects in Hawaii, but the accidental introduction of the pink bollworm wiped it out. Since 1915 Mr. Fullaway has remained with the Territorial Board of Agriculture and has done admirable work. His place with the United States Experiment Station was not filled, since it was thought that, with the officials of the Territorial Board of Agriculture, the resident ento- mologists from the Federal Bureau of Agriculture, and those of the Hawaiian Sugar Planters’ Association, there were quite enough ento- mologists employed officially in the islands to handle all of the insect problems. An account of Hawaiian economic entomology would not be com- plete without mention of the investigations made by Mr. August Busck, of the United States Bureau of Entomology, who went to Hawaii in 1915 to study the pink bollworm of cotton. This extremely injurious insect had been discovered in Mexico, and the United States was threatened. It had also been accidentally imported into Hawaii and had virtually put a stop to experiments in cotton culture which were assuming considerable importance. Mr. Busck remained in the islands six months (May to October) and on his return to the United States published, in the Journal of Agricultural Research of the United States Department of Agriculture (Vol. 9, No. 10, June 4, 1917) the most complete study of this insect that has been made. The article considers the insect from all points of view, is illustrated with a number of careful figures, and has no less than 12 plates. Mr. Busck’s great knowledge as a student of the Microlepidoptera assures the accuracy and importance of this very careful article, which, by the way, is accompanied by a full bibliography. FIJI The Fiji Islands have been utilized by the British very successfully in an agricultural way for many years. The great Colonial Sugar Refining Company has founded there very considerable interests, which, however, extend out into Australia and New Zealand. In 1913 Mr. F. P. Jepson, who was then Government Entomologist of Fiji, made his importation of 5,000 Histerid beetles (Plaesius javanus) to destroy the banana weevil. He is said also to have brought 414 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 in the Agromyzid fly against the Latana weed as well as a Spalangia against the house fly. I have an idea that he left Fiji, at least tempo- rarily, since Mr. Robert Veitch was appointed Entomologist of the colony in 1914. However, the Report of the Division of Entomology in the Annual Report of the Fiji Department of Agriculture for 1919 was signed by F. P. Jepson and C. H. Knowles. Mr. Robert Veitch landed in Fiji in August, 1914. On his way out from England, he visited the United States and Hawaii, spending three months on the journey and visiting some of the important entomological stations on the way. He remained in the service about Ir years, but his work was not confined entirely to the Crown Colony of Fiji, since in 1917 he spent some months in Hawaii and also some months in the sugar cane districts of Queensland and New South Wales. He did a great deal of excellent work during these 11 years and published five illustrated reports dealing with the commoner insects associated with the sugar cane plantations, including the sugar cane beetle borer, wireworms, white grubs, hornets, and minor pests of the crop. He further published other articles in different journals. Mr. Veitch became interested at an early date in the subject of biological control. This subject had attracted some attention in Fiji before his arrival; and in fact, when Frederick Muir, on his way from New Guinea to Hawaii, left there a small colony of the Tachinid parasite (Ceromasia sphenophort) of the sugar cane borer, the colony died out, and in 1912, 1913, and 1917 further colonies were intro- duced ; and from the time of Mr. Veitch’s arrival great efforts were made to establish this particular parasite. Twelve of the Company’s officers were engaged in breeding the parasite at various centers. For a long time failure was feared, but by 1921 the percentage of borer- infested stalks had been very considerably reduced, the percentage dropping from 22 to 4 per cent. Mr. Veitch, however, does not think that this result can be laid entirely to the parasite, and he so stated in his report read at the Pan Pacific Food Conservation Congress in Hawaii in 1924. Mr. Hubert W. Simmonds joined the force of entomologists in 1919 and went to Tahiti for parasites of the coconut scale (Aspidiotus destructor). The so-called Levuana caterpillar, feeding upon the foliage of coconut trees, had become so destructive in 1922 and 1923 that a systematic effort was made to find natural enemies, and in 1923 Mr. Simmonds visited a number of Pacific islands, searching for the origi- nal home of the Levuana, but unsuccessfully. WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 415 In the meantime it was known as early as 1904 that there existed in Malaya a Lepidopterous insect known as Artona catoxantha, and in 1914 H. C. Pratt had published a statement that 20 per cent of the caterpillars were parasitized by a Tachinid fly. It was not, however, until 1924 that it was found that not only was this Tachinid the most important parasite of Artona but that it was possible to breed it on other caterpillars. The Fiji experts greeted this announcement with great interest. An account of what happened is published in an article entitled “ Further Remarks on Ptychomyia remota, a Parasite of Artona catoxantha,”’ by B. A. R. Gater, in the Malayan Agricul- tural Journal, Volume 14, 1926. Mr. Gater states that the first attempts to carry the parasite to Fiji were made by A. M. Lea of South Australia. He took a shipment of puparia on ice in early 1925, but all died on the way. In the same year Mr. Hubert W. Simmonds and Mr. C. H. H. Taylor went from Fiji to Malaya and, by most ingenious methods, succeeded in landing 300 living Tachinids that immediately laid eggs on Levuana larvae in Fiji. In the meantime Mr. Veitch had gone to Queensland to accept an appointment, and his important work there has been considered in another place. He was succeeded in 1924 in Fiji by Mr. J. D. Tothill, a Canadian expert, who had done some work for Canada in the Gipsy Moth Parasite Laboratory at Melrose Highlands, Massachusetts. A great deal of very interesting work, largely concerned with the impor- tation of different parasites, was accomplished by Mr. Tothill and his very able assistants, Messrs. Simmonds and Taylor. Mr. Tothill was later promoted to the position of Superintendent of Agriculture, and in 1929 was transferred to Uganda as Director of Agriculture. He was succeeded as Government Entomologist in Fiji by Mr. Hubert W. Simmonds. Aside from this work, the Empire Cotton Growing Corporation employed an expert on cotton insects in Fiji, Mr. R. R. Anson, who in 1928 published a report in which he wrote about pink bollworm, one of the cotton stainers of the genus Dysdercus, one of the so-called tipworms (arias fabia) and also a fruit-fly that infests cotton bolls. The Fiji entomologists have done a great deal of traveling, not only to other South Pacific islands and to Malaya and the Dutch East Indies, but on two occasions to the British West Indies and British Guiana and to New Guinea. , Mr. Simmonds, the present Government Entomologist, has been devoting much attention of late to the banana borer and has met with considerable success by using a vacuum fumigator and by prolonged partial immersion in water. 416 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 While Mr. Simmonds is the Government Entomologist, Mr. R. W. Paine and Mr. T. H. C. Taylor are the entomologists of the so-called Coconut Committee. Prof. T. D. A. Cockerell, of Colorado, visited Fiji in 1928, and in an article published in the journal Science for December 7, 1928, mentioned incidentally that the entomological work in Fiji was sup- ported to the extent of about one-half by the Government; the other half by the planters, through a tax on copra. SAMOA Several American entomologists have visited Samoa since the United States became interested in those islands, and before the World War German experts working in German Samoa conducted a number of investigations, the most notable being that of Dr. F. Fried- erichs on the coconut beetle. In 1926 G. E. Hopkins, of England, made a study of the pests of economic plants in Samoa and other island groups. He seems to have worked with Dr. P. A. Buxton who was sent out there from England and who reported on the human disease problems, especially the diseases carried by insects. Later Doctor Buxton became connected with the London School of Tropical Medicine, and is the medical entomologist of that institution. GUAM An Agricultural Experiment Station was established in Guam under the Office of Experiment Stations of the United States De- partment of Agriculture early in the present century. From May 16 to November 3, 1911, Mr. D. T. Fullaway made extensive collections on the island and published notes on some of them in the Report of the Guam Station for that year. In 1925 Mr. S. R. Vandenburg was appointed Entomologist to the Station, and has published several reports. He has been especially interested in the control of the coconut scale by biological means, and has been very successful. He has also established in Guam the Tachinid parasite (Ceromasia) for the sugar cane borer. Part VI SOUTEL AND CENTRAL AMERICA AND THE WEST INDIES ARGENTINA The Republic of Argentina was fortunate in having for many years, as a resident of Buenos Aires and as Director of the National Museum, Dr. Hermann Burmeister, the author of the famous ‘“ Handbuch der Entomologie.”’ The ravages of migratory locusts in several countries of South America have attracted great attention, and Argentina, like several of the other countries, has formed from time to time commissions of investigation. Doctor Burmeister devoted most of his time to the study of paleontology and to the building up of a general museum, but he also made large collections of insects and at a comparatively early date studied the migratory locust problem. In 1861, his “ Reise durch die Plata Staaten,” a two-volume work published in Halle, summarized previous writings upon locusts in Argentina and gave a rather full account of the life history of the insect and of the dam- age that it had done almost annually. The real beginnings of both systematic and economic entomology in Argentina, however, date from 1873. In that year the first Ento- mological Society in the country was founded, and a year later the Sociedad Cientifica Argentina was started and the Science Academy in Cordoba began the publication of its Annals. In 1897 a governmental locust commission was established, entitled Comision para la Extincion la Langosta. This was the immediate predecessor of the Defensa Agricola which still exists and is the organization for fighting the insect and other enemies of agriculture. Prior to the establishment of the locust commission, two German employees of the Argentine Government, Dr. H. Weyenbergh and Dr. E. Oldendorff, investigated and reported upon injurious locusts during those years. In 1897 the United States Department of Agriculture was ap- pealed to to nominate an entomologist especially skilled in the study of destructive locusts. Prof. Lawrence Bruner, of the University of Nebraska, who had been connected with the work of the United States Entomological Commission against the Rocky Mountain locust and who had later made survey journeys to note locust conditions for the Department of Agriculture, was nominated and went to Argen- tina where he carried on investigations for some time and submitted a very good report which was published in March, 1808. 419 420 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 In the 1890’s the famous French entomologist, J. Kunckel d’Her- culais, had made an exhaustive study of the migratory locusts of Algeria and subsequently the French colonial government published the results of his investigations in four volumes, 1893-1905.’ Kiinckel d’Herculais was a thoroughly skilled orthopterist and a man of pro- nounced practical views; and he also was invited by the Argentine Government to investigate their locust problem. This he did and a short report by him was published in 1go0. The Defensa Agricola has done good work, and its machinery is simple. I-am indebted to Mr. Everard Blanchard for the following facts. The country is divided up into 33 geographical divisions, each division being called a “ seccional.” [Each seccional is provided with a chief, or “ comisario,’” who has charge of as many men as the importance of his division warrants. The farmers included in each division report their insect troubles to the comisarios or to the per- sonnel in their charge, and these in their turn advise the farmers how to attack the pests, and, when necessary, provide spraying machinery or other implements required to combat the pest. For locust work, the Defensa Agricola has a stock of over 50,000,000 meters of zinc and galvanized iron sheeting, conveniently distributed in 43 depots. As a rule this sheeting is rented to the farmers at a very low rate, but in case the farmer is poor and unable to pay rent, the sheeting is pro- vided gratis. When the pest reported to the comisario is a new one, or presents unusual characteristics, the matter is referred to the cen- tral office in Buenos Aires, material of the pest or disease being sent to the Defensa’s laboratories to be studied. If the pest is of sufficient importance, competent entomologists or agronomists are sent to study the plague on the spot. Otherwise, after due identification of the pest, detailed information is sent to the comisarios who in their turn advise the farmers and cooperate, when necessary, to carry out the 21 do not think the story has been told in print of the report that was sent out from Paris over the world during Kiinckel d’Herculais’ work in Algeria. [t was stated that he had been devoured by a swarm of locusts and so completely devoured that nothing was left but a part of his red necktie. The story was believed in many scientific circles; obituaries were written, and laudatory addresses were given at several scientific societies (the Entomological Society of Washington among others). The story, however, proved to be imaginary, and I saw Kiinckel later many times in France, on one occasion at a dinner at the late Alfred Giard’s. Kiinckel was asked to tell the real story. He replied that there was no real story, but that he was immensely gratified on his return to France to read the laudatory things that had been said about him under the supposition that he had died so tragically. WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 421 destructive measures indicated by the central department. There are certain pests that have been decreed as such by law. The destruction of these is obligatory, and detailed control measures have been pub- lished and freely distributed. The study of the natural enemies of insect pests in this country has been carried out for the last 30 years, since 1897, when Bruner and d’Herculais studied the possibility of combating the “ langosta”’ by means of its natural enemies. Since then three efforts have been made to establish natural enemies—Prospaltella berlesei, to combat the white peach scale; Parexorista caridei for the control of the bag- worm, and Aphelinus mali for the control of the woolly aphis. The last mentioned parasite had been established with great success—as much cannot be said for the first two. Lately efforts are being made to establish the South African parasite of the Eucalyptus weevil (Gonipterus gibberus), but nothing can be said as yet as to the results. The Argentine has also played her part in supplying natu- ral enemies to the rest of the world, the most successful results being obtained from a shipment of Cactoblastis bucyrus to Australia to aid in the eradication of the cactus pest. As regards methods of spraying and implements used, most of the formulae and machinery are those that have been tried out in other countries, especially in the United States, which is considered to lead the world in that line of endeavor. Power sprayers are practically all of American manufacture, but the smaller types of knapsack sprayer are mostly French, Vermorel. This is not because the French article is superior but because it is considerably cheaper and gives equal results. Aeroplane dusting has not been definitely adopted in Argentina, although several official trials have been made with this method of insecticide distribution. Official production of insecticides has so far been restricted to lime- sulphur, which is sold at cost price to the fruit-growers of the country. In the earlier days, Carlos Berg, a well known entomologist pub- lished on Argentine insects from 1874 to 1895, and among his writings are several papers of economic importance, particularly those relating to the Phylloxera of the grape. There is a paper on the bibliography of Argentine entomology, published in Physis, November 15, 1927, by C. A. Lizer y Trelles. Under Applied Entomology, he gives 347 titles. The most prolific writer seems to have been H. Weyenbergh, to whom we have already referred. He published from 1873 to 1876, mainly concerning locusts. Between 1901 and 1909 several papers on scale insects were pub- lished by Eugenio Autran. Carlos Berg, a well known entomologist, 422 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 who succeeded Burmeister in the National Museum, published several economic papers between 1874 and 1895, the most important ones relating to the Phylloxera. One of the most prolific writers on Argentine insects was the late J. Brethes who died recently. His papers were in the main taxonomic but he wrote several that were concerned with injurious insects and were published between 1899 and the time of his death in 1928. The author of the bibliographical list, C. A. Lizer y Trelles, lists several titles of papers of his own. And the well known naturalist, L. Iches, also published a few articles of economic bearing, notably one on the plague of Stomoxys calcitrans which did great damage to cattle fol- lowing the neglect for a time of an ordinance requiring the destruction of old straw stacks. Then also, José M. Huergo, between 1905 and 1923, published a number of short articles relating to injurious insects, especially scale insects. Before that, E. Lynch Arribalzaga published several papers of economic purpose, the first on locusts in 1891. A younger man, Carlos S. Reed, a son, by the way, of Edwyn C. Reed of Chile (the latter an Englishman who lived for many years in Chile and died there) has written many shorter articles relating to Argentine insects, from I9Io on. During the present century occasional entomological articles of value have been published in the Gaceta Rural of Buenos Aires. I have especially noticed one on the Peach Fly (Chyliza persicarum) by José C. Castellano, which seems to be thorough and excellent. Carlos Lizer has written a number of sound articles in compara- tively recent years, published for the most part in Agronomia. He has especially interested himself in scale insects. The Bulletin of the Ministry of Agriculture for 1916 contains entomological articles by E. Molina and P. T. Canela, and in this Bulletin the interesting statement is made that during the month of October, 1916, 1,425,864 pounds of locusts were destroyed; 9,275 ants’ nests; and 34,025 pounds of bagworms. Another writer has been Dr. P. C. Massini, who has contributed to the Annals of the Rural Society of Argentina. This Rural Society, by the way, has had an Entomological Section, and Doctor Massini has written in the Annals on the general subject of biological control of injurious insects. A late publication of the Ministry of Agriculture was written by EK. E. Blanchard, on the subject of insects affecting mate. It was published as Circular 735 of the Ministry of Agriculture in 1928. It covers 42 pages and contains three figures and four plates. WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOW ARD 423 A. H. Rosenfeld, an entomologist from the United States, was employed for a time by a sugar organization in the Argentine, and wrote several papers. E. W. Rust, another North American ento- mologist, was for a time in the Argentine, and also wrote several papers of an economic bearing. I regret that I have never had the opportunity to visit Argentina. Mr. G. F. Moznette, of the Federal Bureau, and Mr. Max Kisliuk, Jr., working with the plant quarantine service of the United States Department of Agriculture, have both visited that country in recent years and have told me of their cordial reception and of the excellent character of the work being carried on. Both speak very pleasantly of Prof. Fernando Lahille, Chief of the Zoological Laboratory of the Ministry of Agriculture, who was also at that time President of the Entomological Society of Buenos Aires. Both met Everard FE. Blanchard, connected with the Argentine service, who was a graduate of the Maine State Agricultural College. BRAZIL While Brazil began to have an appreciation of certain branches of science at an early date, very little was done in entomology, and especially in economic entomology, until comparatively recently. Many naturalists visited Brazil in the last century, and enormous collections of one kind or another were sent to the great museums of Europe. Humboldt’s writings were widely read and everywhere appreciated. William Henry Edwards, an American entomologist, visited the valley of the Amazon and published a charming book about his observations as early as 1847, and it is interesting to note that Alfred Russell Wallace and H. W. Bates were so much interested by this book that it was the principal incentive that started them on their famous journeyings in the same region. Among the many collectors of natural history specimens who visited Brazil in the ensuing years, Herbert H. Smith may be especially mentioned. He originally visited the country on one of the early expeditions of Charles Fred Hartt, the first Professor of Geology at Cornell University, and the results of his collecting were incorporated in the collections of the Department of Entomology at Cornell. Later he visited Brazil many times. I believe that the Pittsburgh Museum contains the bulk of his material. He was a wonderful collector and cared for his specimens in a very perfect way. His work in this direction ranks with that of the later work of Albert Koebele and Carl KF. Baker: 424 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 During the reign of the Emperor Dom Pedro II, the country awakened to an appreciation of applied science, and many students were sent to the United States to study engineering and other branches. Possibly the earliest investigation in economic entomology was made in 1870 when B. Pickman Mann, of Cambridge, was sent to Brazil with personal letters of introduction to Dom Pedro from Louis Agassiz. He was given a commission to investigate the zoology, entomology, and botany of Brazil. He selected his own field of work, studied coffee and maize insects for five months and prepared a report on each topic. I do not know that these reports were ever published by the Brazilian Department of Agriculture, but Mr. Mann, after his return to the United States, published in the American Naturalist an interesting account of some of his observations upon coffee insects. In 1880, John C. Branner, afterwards famous as a geologist and who succeeded David Starr Jordan as President of Stanford Uni- versity, was sent to Brazil by the United States Department of Agri- culture, largely to investigate the occurrence in that country of the famous cotton moth (Alabama argillacea). He was accompanied by Albert Koebele. On his return he prepared two reports. The first was entitled “ Preliminary Report of Observations upon Insects In- jurious to Cotton, Orange, and Sugar Cane in Brazil.” It appeared on pages 63-69 of Bulletin No. 4, Division of Entomology, United States Department of Agriculture, 1884. The second was entitled ‘Cotton Caterpillars in Brazil,’ and was published in the Fourth Report of the United States Entomological Commission (1885). From this expedition Koebele brought back a very interesting collec- tion of insects of economic importance including very many Hymen- opterous parasites which he reared from the different cotton cater- pillars. . In 1880, Dr. Hermann von Ihring, a German by birth, and a zoologist of broad accomplishments, at the age of 30 left a position in Leipzig and went to Brazil. After various experiences he became head of the Natural History Museum in Sao Paulo and started early work in economic entomology, publishing at the same time papers in other departments of zoology. His son, Rudolfo, acted as his assis- tant and published several joint papers with his father. During the World War, like all other Germans in government employ, the elder Von Thring was discharged, and in 1920 went back to Germany where he died February 24, 1930, at the age of 79. While in Brazil, he had as early as 1882 begun to study the leaf-cutting ants, and he published a somewhat extensive paper on this subject in 1894. In 1898 he published a study on the injurious insects of the Jabota tree. Later WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 425 he published papers on insects injurious to the orange, to cotton and to the fig tree. In 1909 he worked on the wood-boring larvae injuring cultivated trees. The son, Rudolfo, published a rather long list of entomological papers over his own signature, a number of them of an economic character. In 1885, a Swiss, Dr. E. A. Goeldi, who at the time was Curator of Zoology in the National Museum at Rio de Janeiro but who had been previously a Phylloxera expert in Switzerland, was commissioned to study coffee-tree diseases. He prepared a detailed report which was published in the Archives of the Museum. He was also sent to Sac Paulo to study the viticultural interests of that State, and especially to report upon the danger from the Phylloxera. He published a book entitled “American Vines,” advocating the introduction of American root stock. This book, I believe, was published privately. In 1890 he left Rio and became the Director of the Museum of Natural History at Para. With the discoveries at the end of the last century in regard to the relations of mosquitoes to disease, Brazil became very active. Goeldi published a large work on the mosquitoes of Para; Adolfo Lutz, a German, resident in the State of Sao Paulo, published im- portant papers on mosquito-borne disease; Oswaldo Cruz started a hygienic institute in Rio, secured funds, brought together an able corps of assistants, and, with the adequate support of the Government, succeeded in practically wiping out yellow fever at an early date. Cruz visited the United States during these critical years, and later in IQ10, sent one of his experts, Dr. Arturo Neiva, to Washington to study mosquitoes here for several months. Neiva also studied the biting Hemiptera of the genus Triatoma, and, before returning to Brazil, pursued his studies of this group in European museums.’ One * Doctor Cruz told me that the experts in the Hygienic Institute in Rio at the expiration of a certain length of time were allowed a year to study abroad. They usually went to Europe. He was so impressed by what he saw in Wash- ington that he suggested to Doctor Neiva that when his turn for travel should come he should visit the United States. Doctor Neiva at that time was a charming man of 30 years, primarily perhaps a bacteriologist, but tremendously interested in medical entomology. He remained in Washington for several months. Not long after his return to Brazil, he accepted an invitation from the Government of Argentina to found in that country a Department of Medical Zoology and Parasitology. He remained in Argentina 18 months in I914, 1915, and 1916, and then returned to Brazil where he has done extremely important work and has assumed important responsibilities, largely with matters relating to health. He took a hand, however, in the work of the commission to investi- 28 426 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS vot. 84 of the Triatomas had, by the way, been found responsible for the transfer of Chagas’s disease in Brazil. The Oswaldo Cruz Institute gained a very high place at an early date, and has since maintained it. Its publications are printed in both Portuguese and English and are highly esteemed in medical centers. Organized Government efforts to control plant pests did not exist until 1910, and in fact there was no Governmént department of agri- culture. Prior to that time, on the appearance of some notable pest, some museum or botanic garden specialist was detailed to study it. In 1910, however, the Federal Department of Agriculture was founded, and two laboratories were started in the National Museum, one for research in economic entomology and the other for phytopathology. In 1920, under the Ministry of Agriculture, there was created a Biological Institute for Agricultural Defense (Instituto Biologico de Defensa Agricola). The laboratories of economic entomology and phytopathology were transferred from the National Museum to the new Institute, and there was added later a third section entitled Plant Inspection Police (Vigilancia Sanitaria Vegetal). I am informed that this institute has a good library and a very good laboratory with the necessary facilities, and very considerable collections. The plant- inspection system has a principal station at the port of Rio de Janeiro, and also has stations along the Brazilian coast, where plant inspections are permitted. These stations are Manaos, Belem, Recife, Bahia, Santos, S. Francisco, Rio Grande, Porto Alabre, and Corumba. The Institute publishes bulletins when the occasion arises, and, although not largely manned, has a competent staff. Prof. Carlos Moreira, in charge of the entomological work, is a very good officer. He visited the United States in the spring of 1918 and looked into the work of the Federal Bureau of Entomology. In 1923 I had the pleasure of meeting him again at the International Conference of Economic Entomologists and Phytopathologists at Wageningen, Holland. The bulletins published by the Institute are very well done. The first one published (in 1921) was entitled “ Brazilian Agricultural Entomology ” (Entomologia Agricola Brasileira), by Professor Mo- reira. It is a well illustrated book of 182 pages.’ The second bulletin gate the ravages caused by the coffee berry moth. Also he has made several visits to Argentina. Among other notable results of these visits have been the verification by him of the existence of Leishmaniasis and exanthematic typhus in that country. *A second edition of this valuable bulletin was published in 1929. This second edition is enlarged to 274 pages and has many new illustrations. It includes the new pests discovered between 1921 and 1920. WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY HOWARD 427 was published in 1925 and relates to the plant-lice of Brazil, also by Professor Moreira. Bulletin 3, published the same year, relates to the coffee borer; No. 4, to the leaf-hopper enemy of sugar cane— both of these by Professor Moreira. No. 5 relates to phytopatho- logical work. Adolph Hempel, born in the United States and educated at Rawlins College, Florida, and at the University of Illinois, went to Brazil in the closing years of the last century and became an assistant to H. von Ihring at the Museu Paulista. He began at once to study scale insects, and published a number of important papers on this group in the Annals and Magazine of Natural History of England for the year 1901. The previous year (1900) he had published a lengthy paper on the Coccids of Brazil in the Revista do Museu Paulista. In 1910 he published at Sao Paulo a catalogue of the Coccidae of Brazil which includes descriptions of new species. Later he was appointed to the Agronomial Institute at Campinas and held a position equiva- lent to that of a State Entomologist at an experiment station in this country. He taught in entomology and vegetable pathology, and re- mained there until 1902 or 1903. On giving up his work at Campinas, he went back to Sao Paulo and was appointed State Entomologist of that State; and in this capacity he investigated various crop insects, including the enemies of coffee. One of the important tasks that he undertook was a revision of the family Aleyrodidae. I am informed by his brother-in-law, Mr. F. L. Lewton, of the United States National Museum, that on January 20, 1929, he sailed for Uganda to search for parasites of the coffee borer, and expected to be gone three or four months. In the (translated) Archives of the Superior School of Agriculture and Veterinary Medicine, Rio de Janeiro, Volume 8 (1927), there is a tentative bibliography of Brazilian entomology which covers about 600 titles of papers written mainly by Brazilians but including a few by foreigners relating to Brazilian insects that had been sent to them, as for example, the Italian Bezzi on Diptera, and the American Cockerell on Coccidae. This bibliography is prefaced by a list of the injurious insects of Brazil, which runs to 864 numbers. This list and bibliography were prepared by Dr. A. da Costa Lima, a younger man who has been doing admirable work for the past 15 years. While perhaps most of his papers have referred to medical entomology, he has written a number on agricultural entomology. He has studied fruit-flies and Curculionid beetles as well as the parasites of a number of injurious species. In fact his main work seems to have been of an economic character. The first paper of his listed (1914) is entitled 428 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 (translated) “ Contribution to the Study of the Culicidae ; Observa- tions on the Respiration of the Larvae.” The very destructive out- break of the coffee borer (Stephanoderes coffeac) in the early 1920's started him to work on this, and a number of his later papers have been written on this subject. For example, an important article by B. de Toledo Rodovalho was published in 1925, and other articles by other writers have been appearing from time to time. The coffee-borer damage resulted in the establishment of a Govern- ment commission of investigation with, I believe, Dr. Arturo Neiva as chief, and a number of the best men in Brazil have been engaged in the investigation. Professor da Costa Lima’s last letter to me was written from the Instituto Oswaldo Cruz rather than from the Su- perior School of Agriculture and Veterinary Medicine which had been his earlier address. Another of the younger men who are doing admirable work in Brazil is Gregorio Bondar. It appears that in 1913 he was connected with the agricultural school “ Luiz de Queiroz ” at Piracicaba in the State of Sao Paulo. In that year he published two parts of a series entitled (translated) “ The Insects Injurious to Agriculture.” The first part considered the insect enemies of the cultivated fig. It is a pamphlet of 17 pages, with 13 figures. The second part considered the enemies of Myrtaceous fruits. This is a larger pamphlet, covering 39 pages, and is illustrated with 31 figures. Parts III and IV are indicated on the cover leaf of Part II, but I have not seen them. They include the enemies of the orange and other Citrus fruits, in Part II]; and, in Part IV, some enemies of fruit culture and arboriculture. Sometime between 1913 and 1922, Bondar was made Entomologist to the Ministry of Agriculture of the State of Bahia, and in the latter year he published, under this Ministry, a pamphlet of 111 pages on the enemies of the coco-palm. As usual, this pamphlet was well illustrated, with 73 plates and text figures. In 1923 he published, under the same Ministry, an important paper of 182 pages with 84 figures, entitled “‘ The Aleyrodidae of Brazil.” Although in a subtitle he called it a descriptive catalogue, it is rather more than that and is very full and very carefully done and contains a general statement regarding the morphology of the group. In the same year he published, in the Revista do Museo Paulista, a short account of some Brazilian Buprestidae. In 1925 was published Part II of what is evidently a series of papers on cacao, this part including the diseases and enemies of cacao plantations. This is a pamphlet of 125 pages, and is illustrated by 74 original figures. WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 429 In 1928, in the Correio Agricola, there appeared an article from his pen, on the coco-beetle. In 1929 he published a pamphlet entitled “ The Culture of Oranges in Brazil,” a work of 138 pages with 63 illustrations. The diseases ‘and injurious insects are considered in this pamphlet; and Part II, covering pages 79 to 126, is devoted to insects and mites. Between 1924 and 1929 he published, under the auspices of the Bahia Ministry of Agriculture, six numbers of an important Bulletin of the Laboratory of Plant Pathology of Bahia in which he has dealt with a number of different topics, including very many of an ento- mological character. Aside from the work done at Rio de Janeiro and in the States of Sao Paulo and Bahia, there is practically no Government or State work done in economic entomology. However, Dr. R. von Ihring informs me that in Rio Grande do Sul a periodical entitled.“ Egates ” is issued by the Polytechnic High School in Porto Alegre in which occasionally original articles touching upon entomological science are published. Doctor von Ihring also informs me that economic bee culture is assisted in Rio Grande do Sul by a periodical which has been issued since 1897. The editor of the journal, E. Schenk, has published a handbook on bees, which has reached an eighth edition. I am also informed that the Benedictine, D. Amaro van Emelen, in Sao Paulo, is an authority on bees and that his learning regarding bees is recognized throughout Brazil. An Agricultural College on North American lines has been estab- lished in the State of Minas Geraes with the organizing advice of Prof. P. H. Rolfs (formerly of Florida and originally an entomolo- gist). The journal Science for November 29, 1929, states that E. J. Hambleton, B. S. (Ohio), M.S. (Cornell) has been placed in charge of entomology in the new institution. Quite recently a publication has been started in Sao Paulo entitled (translated) “The Archives of the Biological Institute.” The first number contains no less than three articles of economic entomological importance: one by H. Eggers, on the Ipidae of South America; another by M. Autuori, on a Phorid parasite of Icerya purchasi, and one by A. Hempel on some new Coccidae. Among the Brazilian writers of late years we may mention J. Vizioli, J. S. Guimares, L. A. de Azevedo Marques, and A. F. M. Torres. Aside from economic entomology, the great work of Romu- aldo Ferreira d’Almeida on the Rhopalocera of Brazil should be mentioned. Senhor d’Almeida was given the Alcide d’Orbigny prize ’ of the Entomological Society of France, for his work, in 1929. 430 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 URUGUAY Uruguayan insects were collected at a comparatively early date, as indeed were those of all the accessible portions of South America. At one time the well known entomologist, Carlos Berg, was connected with the National Museum at Montevideo, but went to Buenos Aires where he eventually succeeded Burmeister; but Doctor Goding in- forms me that Berg always felt that Uruguay was a part of his field of operations even when he was in Argentina. Uruguayan crops must have suffered from insect damage very many year's ago. I notice, fer example, that C. F. Girard, in the Bulle- tin of the Entomological Society of France for 1860, page 73, reports the occurrence of a blister beetle (Epicauta conspersa) as swarming by millions on sugar beet fields near Montevideo, completely destroy- ing the crop which represented the first attempt to cultivate sugar beets in Uruguay. The adjoining fields of sorghum were said not to have been damaged by the beetles. In the following years comparatively little seems to have been done in economic entomology in Uruguay until 1911. It is true that an agricultural laboratory existed in which some studies were made on insects injurious to certain crops by Juan Puig y Nattino, and the Agronomic Institute also carried on certain entomological studies. In 1911, however, the “ Defensa Agricola” was instituted as a branch of the Ministry of Industry. Ing. Roberto Sundberg was appointed director, and this branch of the Government has done a great deal of work in economic entomology. It has been especially successful in the importation of beneficial insects from other parts of the world, and this highly important work will be described under Uruguay in our later section entitled “ The Practical Use of Preda- tory and Parasitic Insects.” In 1925, a Department of Agronomy was created under the Minis- try of Industry, and this department included a Division of Fomento and Defensa Agricola, this division having charge of work with entomology and phytopathology. Doctor Sundberg has been made Chief of the Department. The Government, through this official machinery, has been very active in that country, and it is stated that its activities have practically rid the country of its most dangerous insect pests. The Defensa Agricola has published many short papers and also large reports relating to locust outbreaks. In its monthly bulletin have appeared many articles relating to insects and their damage, by J. Bréthes, A. T. Peluffo, V. Giacomo, J. Molino, Roberto Sundberg, J. Girardi, and others. WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 431 In addition to the Defensa Agricola, there is under the Ministry of Public Instruction a National Institute of Agronomy in which Mr. G. B. Schurman was Professor. Professor Schurman was active in many of the movements in applied entomology in Uruguay, and his comparatively recent death is greatly to be regretted. There is at present in the National Institute a Professor of Entomology, Agustin Trujillo Peluffo, and a Professor of Applied Zoology, Gilberto Borras. PARAGUAY Economic entomology is comparatively new in this country, A good entomologist, Mr. A. de Winkelried Bertoni, began work upon the higher Hymenoptera nearly 20 years ago and published a long systematic paper entitled (translated) “ A Contribution to the Biol- ogy of the Wasps and Bees of Paraguay.” It was published in the Annals of the Museum of Buenos Aires in 1g11. In 1917 he pub- lished a paper relating to the edible Lepidopterous larvae that feed upon certain species of bamboo. About 1923, there was created in the Ministry of Fomento a Section of Agriculture and Agricul- tural Protection (‘“‘ Direccion de Agricultura y Defensa Agricola’’), and under this section there was a division headed by Senor Bertoni with the title Entomologist and Chief of the “ Mesa Fitopathologia.” Under this organization numerous bulletins have been published, a number of them relating to injurious insects and the remedies to be used. Especial attention has been paid to the insects injuring fruits, to those injuring cotton, to injurious ants, to the suppression of the migratory locust, and, under the Section of Chemistry, there has been an arrangement for the analyses of insecticide products. ECUADOR Very little has been done in economic entomology in Ecuador, although some interest has been taken in entomological matters for a long time. Medical entomology, however, has important applica- tions there. Guayaquil was long notorious for yellow fever. After the yellow fever mosquito discoveries had been generally accepted throughout Latin America and it began to appear that it was possible to rid the world of this disease, one of the last and most difficult tasks was to clear up Guayaquil. The attention of the International Health Board and the United States Public Health Service was for a time focused to a certain extent on this city, and the results were very beneficial. The services of Dr. J. H. White of the United States Public Health Service, who had done such efficient anti-yellow-fever 432 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 work in New Orleans in 1905, were loaned to the International Health Board for this purpose. Dr. F. W. Goding, of the United States, was Consul General at Guayaquil from 1913 to 1924. Doctor Goding is a trained entomolo- gist, and at one time (before he entered the Consular Service) did some admirable entomological work in Illinois. In Guayaquil he made a number of interesting observations, and has written me a most interesting letter about the plague of crickets which comes on in Guayaquil within a day or two after the wet season begins. They enter the. city in countless billions and are a frightful plague. He says that on one occasion, on the appearance of the crickets, thou- sands of sea gulls came inland to feed upon the insects, with such good effect that the plague was materially lessened both for that year and the following year. Thus this experience paralleled the old-time invasion of Salt Lake Valley by sea gulls in the early days of the Mormon settlement, to the great relief of the inhabitants whose crops were being eaten up by the so-called ‘ Mormon cricket.” In the Ecuador case the species seems to have been Gryllus assimilis Fab- ricius, a field cricket of very wide distribution. For a number of years Prof. F. Campos R. has been State Zool- ogist of Ecuador. He is Professor of Natural Sciences in the National College of Vicente Rocafuerte. The published list of his principal scientific works comprises 82 titles, of which a number are entomological articles of economic importance, most of them relating to medical entomology, but some to agricultural entomology. Some years ago Professor Campos collaborated with the Federal Horticultural Board of the United States Department of Agriculture in the study of tropical fruit insects. He is a very enthusiastic ento- mologist. Doctor Goding writes of him, “ His whole life is wrapped up in entomology.” His articles have been published mainly in the Revista del Colegio Nacional Vicente Rocafuerte, which is now in its 12th volume and is issued in “ trimestral”’ parts. This seems to mean that three parts are published with each number, but the numbers themselves may cover irregular periods. Thus, the roth volume includes January to December, 1928, incorporating Nos. 32 to 35; and the r1th volume runs from January to June, 1929, and includes Nos. 36 to 37. Professor Campos seems to be growing more energetic as the years pass by. I have received no less than 10 pamphlets from him that were published during the year 19209. One of these discusses the timely topic as to whether the Mediter- ranean fruit-fly exists in Ecuador. WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 433 I have seen references to several articles on economic insects pub- lished since 1926 by Ernesto Molestino O., of the Department of Agriculture, including one on a cane weevil (Eumycterus? sacchari- dis). These bulletins have been mimeographed, but so far as I know have not been otherwise published. The (translated) Agricultural Association of Ecuador is an or- ganization that has been in existence for quite a number of years. In 1918 this association issued a report on the diseases and pests of cacao by J. B. Rorer. The author considered ants, the cacao- beetle and a Capsid bug (Monalonion atratum). In 1920 and 1921 Mr. H. K. Plank, an American entomologist, was employed by planters’ associations in Ecuador to make a study of cacao insects, and in a bulletin of the Agricultural Association in 1921 he published a practical article on the control of Atta sp. in the cacao plantations. Professor Campos has been good enough to write me about the insect crop pests of Ecuador, and they seem to be rather numerous. All crops suffer occasionally from migratory locusts; and the coconut plantations, as well as the sugar cane, beans, coffee, peas, turnips, potatoes, cotton, Citrus trees, tomatoes, and others are rather seriously injured from time to time by different insects. The Government of Ecuador maintains, for agricultural investigation, two small experi- ment stations—one near the coast on the Island of Silva facing Guayaquil, and the other in the interior at a high elevation at Quinta Normal in the State of Ambato. In the field of agricultural ento- mology, however, no serious or important work has been done. CHILE As has been the case with most other countries of South America, the insect fauna of Chile was studied with more or less care many years before native entomologists began to write. Claudio Gay, an ambitious and indefatigable French entomologist (1800-1877), began to study Chilean insects as early as 1836, and after publishing some articles on the Coleoptera of Chile in the publications of the Ento- mological Society of France, he planned a great work entitled “ His- toria Fisica y Politica de Chile.’ Volumes 4 to 7 of this great work included an account of the insects. His collections in the different orders were sent to well known European specialists, and he had the assistance of the following competent entomologists: H. Nicolet, P. Gervais, A. Solier, Emile Blanchard, and M. Spinola. The last volume was published in 1852, and the whole work was printed in Paris. The publication of this work was naturally the basis for future work on Chilean insects and an incentive to such work. In 1865, 434 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VoL, 84 R. A. Philippi published a list of Chilean Diptera in the Verhandlung d’K.-K. Zool. Bot. Ges. of Vienna. In 1886 a catalogue of the Chilean Lepidoptera was published at Santiago, and in 1887 F. Philippi (a son of R. A. Philippi, resident in Chile) published in the Annals of the University of Chile, Volume 71, a catalogue of the Coleoptera of Chile. It is interesting to note, as an indication of the advance of knowledge, that Gay’s original list of Coleoptera comprised only 891 species, whereas Philippi’s later list mentioned 2,247. In 1869 an English naturalist, Edwyn C. Reed (born in Bristol, November: 7, 1841; died in Concepcion, Chile, November 5, 1911) went to Chile and took a position as Entomologist in the National Museum. He built a small museum at Los Bafios de Cauquenes in 1875, and in 1878 began the organization of a museum at Valparaiso. He then became Professor of Natural History and Physical Gecg- raphy at the Military and Naval Academy, holding this position for seven-years and then, on account of his health, moved up into the mountains. In 1902 he was made Director of the Museum of Con- cepcion, where he worked until his death. Mr. Reed published many papers on entomology and corresponded with the Bureau of Ento- mology at Washington from 1893 until 1907. His work was very largely taxonomic, and only occasionally economic. In 1902 he pub- lished an article on the invasion of grasshoppers into Chile. This report was an official one, and at that time it was expected that a large appropriation for grasshopper work would be made. But the emergency passed. In that year Mr. Reed sent a large collection of insects to the United States for exhibition in the Chilean department of the Buffalo Exposition. Through some misunderstanding, however, the collection was never exhibited at Buffalo, and it remained in New York during the period that the World’s Fair was open. Eventually, through the courtesy of Don Enrique Budge, the chairman of the Chilean exhi- bition committee, it was forwarded to Washington where it was incorporated in the insect collections of the National Museum. It contains very many interesting forms. Among the many subjects in entomology that especially interested Mr. Reed was the very strange subterranean scale-insect genus Margarodes. He studied one of the Chilean species and published about it. Before he arrived in Chile in 1869, Mr. Reed had spent five years in Brazil collecting and studying. He had three years of intermittent fever and a bad attack of yellow fever. He returned to England in 1868 badly broken down and was advised to take a long sea trip WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 435 and to settle down in a dry climate. And so he went to Chile, where he spent.the rest of his useful life. | Other names connected prominently with entomological research in Chile have been those of Prof. F. Lataste, Dr. F. Puga Borne, Prof. M. J. Rivera, Dr. Vicente Izquierdo, Hno. Claude Joseph, F. Germain, Prof. Abraham Montealegre, and, very notably, Prof. Carlos E. Porter. Professor Lataste published many papers, relating largely to tax- onomy; Doctor Puga Borne wrote extensively on the poisonous spiders of the genus Latrodectus; Hno. Claude Joseph has written extensively on the honey-bearing and predacious Hymenoptera of Chile and on the morphology and biology of Peripatus. His work in 1929 was honored by the Alcide d’Orbigny Prize of the Entomo- logical Society of France. Professor Montealegre was one of the few workers who, without failing to recognize the importance of taxonomy, occupied himself during the last years of his life with the study of the behavior of insects, and published many interesting articles in the daily press of Valdivia and in the Revista Chilena de Historia Natural. He was a teacher for more than 30 years; was a member of the Entomological Society of France and of the Academy of Sciences of Chile and the Society of Natural History of Chile. Filiberto Germain (1827-1913) was born in Lyons, and from 1853 he was the Director of the Museum at Santiago. He was an orni- thologist and an entomologist, and worked especially with the Cole- optera. He did a revised catalogue of the Coleoptera of Chile, and published on the Coleoptera of Chile in collaboration with Fairmaire, the noted French entomologist. Two other Chileans who have done work with insects have been Dr. Federico Teobaldo Delfin and Dr. Clodomiro Perez Canto. Doctor Delfin worked most of his life in the museum at Valparaiso. He was a broad naturalist and his entomological interests were con- cerned mainly with Coleoptera and Hymenoptera. Doctor Canto, while primarily a bacteriologist, published in 1896 an important article on the embryology of Margarodes vitium. Among the papers published by the men just mentioned, very few have any reference to economic entomology, but in 1897 Prof. Gaston Lavergne, Inspector in charge of the Phytopathological Service in France, came to Chile and founded a phytopathological station. He remained in Chile until 1906, when he returned to France. He pub- lished 17 papers largely relating to the vine, but included among them were one on the woolly apple aphis published in 1900, another dealing 430 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS vot. 84 with scale insects infesting olives and Citrus fruits, an account of Phylloxera work, a paper on mites as parasites of the grape (con- cerning Phytoptus vitis and Tetranychus telarius). The only strictly economic entomologist of Chile seems to have been Manuel J. Rivera (1875-1910). He became Professor in the Peda- gogical Institute at Santiago in 1897, and served as Professor of Natural Sciences at a normal school and then as Professor of Ento- mology at the Agricultural College of Santiago. In 1906 Professor Rivera visited Europe and the United States, informing himself as to books,. machinery, equipment and methods, arranging for an ex- change of useful insects between Chile and other countries. I had the pleasure of meeting Professor Rivera in Paul Marchal’s labo- ratory in Paris in 1907 and of greeting him when he visited the United States later in the year. He published a number of papers concerning Chilean insects and several reports under the Department of Agriculture. A very striking figure in Chilean natural history is Prof. Dr. Carlos IX. Porter, a man who has been publishing on scientific topics since 1894 and who was the founder and has been the Director of the Revista Chilena de Historia Natural since 1897. He has a very large bibliography and has written concerning very many insects. Some of his writings have been of an economic character, but they have been very varied. Many honors have come to him, and he is well known all through the scientific world. Americans who have visited him at Santiago speak in the highest terms of his courtesy, of his very great industry, of the breadth of his knowledge. He has an enormous correspondence. He is the founder of the Carlos Porter Prize of the Entomological Society of France. He is apparently a very remarkable man. He has been a warm supporter of the Annals of Applied Zoology, and many of his articles have been published in its pages. He has been untiring in his efforts to enlist the help of foreign naturalists in the working up of the extraordinarily wonderful flora and fauna of Chile and to bring the naturalists of the world into communication with Chilean naturalists and to make the careers of the latter known to fellow workers in other countries. Very many of the facts in this section have been gained through correspondence with Professor Porter, and I gratefully acknowledge his assistance. Professor Porter was Director of the Museum of Valparaiso, 1897- 1911; Chief of the Section of Invertebrates of the National Museum, 1912-1923; Director of the Museum and Laboratory of Applied Zoology from 1914 to date. He has also been a professor in the Naval School and in the Military School and was Professor of Zoology, WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 437 Entomology, and Microscopy in the Agronomical Institute, 1911- 1923, and also Professor of Animal Parasitology in the National School of Veterinary Medicine, 1919-1923. As an indication of the esteem in which Doctor Porter and his work are held in the United States, the following preambles and resolution were adopted at the meeting of the Biological Society of Washington, October 20, 1928: WuereEas, Dr. Carlos E. Porter founded, 32 years ago, the valuable scien- tific periodical known as the Revista Chilena and has continued it through all the years since, practically single-handed and unaided, with very great expenditure of valuable time and very considerable personal financial loss ; Anp Wuereas, He has, through this journal, made possible the prompt publication of the results of the work of recognized South American scientific men and of those endeavoring to achieve recognition by the publication of the results of their studies in the field of science; Anp Wuereas, He has built up an extremely valuable and noteworthy zoological library, particularly in the fields of entomology, carcinology, and economic zoology, the best of its kind in his own country, and in doing so has rendered inestimable service to science, not only in Chile but also in other countries in South America; Anp Wuereas, He has fostered science and encouraged other workers to the utmost of his ability, not only personally but through his teachings and lectures ; Therefore Be It Resolved, That the Biological Society of Washington extends to Carlos E. Porter its hearty commendation and recognition for the great service he has rendered his native land and science in general in the furtherance and perpetuation of scientific research and endeavor. Late writers (that is, within the last 15 years) in Chile have been S,.Camacho,'C. S. Fieueroa, A. A. da Matta, C. Lizer, and ©. Bruch. For example, in 1920 Sefiors Figueroa and Camacho published on the pests of potatoes and on the black scale respectively ; and in 1922 an inspection of the province of Tachna, the most northern province in Chile, was made, and the insect pests received especial treatment. The report was signed by C. Camacho. PERU In 1909, Dr. C. H. T. Townsend, a well known entomologist specializing in Diptera, who had worked with the Federal Bureau of Entomology of the United States and had held subsequent posts in New Mexico, Jamaica, and the Philippines, was appointed Ento- mologist and Director of Entomological Stations of Peru. He held this position for four years; returned to the United States and worked in the Gipsy Moth Parasite Laboratory of the Federal Bureau for four years more; then went to Sao Paulo, Brazil, where he was 438 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS vot. 84 Chief Entomologist for three years; then returned to Peru where he became Expert on Cotton Plagues of the Chamber of Commerce and Agriculture at Iquitos and in 1926 Chief Entomologist of the Agri- cultural Experiment Station at Lima. In 1912 he published a care- fully prepared statement entitled (translated) “ Entomological Work in Peru.” In this paper he attempted to estimate the damage done by insects to the principal crops of Peru, indicating the losses in pounds sterling, as follows: sugar cane, 929,301; cotton, 867,607; coco, 19,466 ; rice, 22,989 ; the vine, 79,814; coffee, 19,380; tobacco, 15,530; cacao, 3,630; other crops such as corn, beans, cereals, alfalfa and other forage plants, Citrus and other fruits, olives, yucca, potatoes, sweet potatoes, vegetables of all classes, etc., 625,000; making a total of 2,682,717 pounds [or, in American money, $12,039,028]. He further indicated that these figures do not include the enormous losses suffered by Peru from the following causes: locust swarms which occur nearly every year in certain parts of the Republic; diseases of cattle, some of which appear to be transmitted by ticks or other biting insects ; the practically complete elimination of Citrus cultivation in the coast region of central Peru due to pests which killed off the trees 40 years earlier ; the damage to rubber forests and rubber plantations by insects ; the immense losses in human lives caused by insects that transmit such diseases as verruga, uta, malaria, bubonic plague, typhus, tuberculosis, cholera, anthrax, and others. He argued for a governmental service in economic entomology and predicted that a saving of at least half the damage could be effected in a short time. In this paper he went on to generalize further from the situation in Peru as to the whole of South America, pointing out that that continent is the richest region on earth in the variety of insect life. ; In the course of his residence in Peru Doctor Townsend published many important papers treating of a great variety of crops and their insect pests. He also did important work in medical entomology and was the first to determine the insect carrier of verruga. He was given a year’s leave of absence by the Peruvian Government in 1927-28, and spent most of his time in Europe gathering data for the completion of a monograph of Muscoid flies. During his absence his post in Peru was held by George N. Wolcott who went there from Haiti where he had been for some time following his holding of an entomological position in Porto Rico. Mr. Wolcott published a good bulletin on plant-lice that attack the sugar cane in Peru, in which he considered the relation of these insects to the mosaic disease of the leaves of the plant. WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 439 Mr. Wolcott also published, in the Bulletin of Entomological Re- search of London *( Vol. 20, Part 2, August, 1929), an excellent article entitled “The Status of Economic Entomology in Peru.” In this paper he describes in a general way the topography and meteoro- logical conditions of the different parts of the country and the general distribution of the important crops. He shows that Doctor Town- send’s original journey to Peru in 1909 was made possible by a strong organization of the larger land holders in Piura for the purpose of making recommendations concerning the common white scale (Hemiu- chionaspis minor, Maskell) which was considered to be the most serious pest affecting cotton. Mr. Wolcott also mentions other cotton enemies, and states that for many years the use of arsenicals for killing the leaf-worms has been in practice in Peru but only by means of hand-operated spray pumps even on the largest plantations. He shows further that the cotton growers’ association of the Camtiete Valley brought Dr. W. E. Hinds, the Entomologist of the Louisiana Experiment Station, to Peru in 1925. Doctor Hinds was there for a few months only, yet, according to Mr. Wolcott, his influence was very great. He suggested dusting the poison on the cotton plants and was largely instrumental in having the airplane application of calcitum arsenate widely adopted. It is stated that the Huff-Daland Company went down there in 1926 and during the first season dusted approxi- mately 40,000 acres, doubling this area the next season with no larger personnel and only one additional airplane. Mr. Wolcott con- siders that airplane dusting is already a standardized commercial practice in Peru, “‘ giving practically perfect results in the control of 3 the leaf-caterpillars.”” He states that whereas in many cases four or five applications of poison by hand had been needed, one or two by airplane were found ample and the costs have been halved. Mr. Wolcott’s paper goes further, and contains many interesting statements. So it appears that Peru is on the way to an appreciation of the value of economic entomology and quite in the mood to follow up the work of Townsend, Hinds, and Wolcott. In 1926 O. B. G. Tafur published at Lima an article on cultivation of cotton in the department of Lambayeque, giving some account of a weevil congeneric with the Mexican cotton boll weevil. The species is Anthonomus vestitus. In the same year Doctor Townsend published a report on the cotton region of Iquitos, dealing with several species of insects affecting cotton. In 1927 Doctor Townsend published on the so-called white scale (Pinnaspis minor), a pest of cotton in some parts of Peru where there is an extreme drought in the hot season. 440 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VoL. 84 The results of Dr. W. E. Hinds’ stay in Peru will be found in his report on the important cotton insects of Peru,’ published in the Journal of Economic Entomology for August, 1928. There are three other titles that should be mentioned, namely, a report by Doctor Townsend on the insects attacking cotton and sugar cane in Peru, published in 1928 in the Bulletin of the Agricultural Experiment Station of the National Agricultural Society of Peru; another article on the principal cotton insects in Piura, by J. B. Poppe, published in 1929; and Mr. G. N. Wolcott’s paper on insects affecting the sugar industry of Peru, published in 1928. Commercial organizations in Peru seem keenly alive to questions of insect damage and the necessity for expert investigations and advice. The latest evidence of this fact that has come to my attention is the very recent appointment of E. Graywood Smyth, a competent North American entomologist formerly connected with the United States Bureau of Entomology, to be entomologist on the great sugar estates of W. R. Grace & Co. in Peru. Mr. F. P. Keen, of the Section of Forest Insects of the United States Bureau of Entomology has recently made a hurried trip through South America. Concerning Peru, he writes me the following : At the present time Peru is one of the most progressive countries in South America in respect to investigative work in economic entomology. This work is being led and directed by the Sociedad Nacional Agraria at Lima. The Society was organized in 1911 to assist the farmers with their agricultural problems. Ht is a private institution financed largely by the farmers but endowed to some extent by the Government. As a result the farmers demand more service than the Society is able to give with its limited personnel. The entomological work was started in 1926 under the Estacion Experimental Agricola which is a branch of the Society. At the present time Sr. Gerardo Klinge is Superintendente de la Estacion, Dr. Johannes Wille, Entomologo de la Estacion and Dr. James Pope, Entomologist for Cotton Insects. Dr. E. V. Abbott is Pathologist. Thus the Station now has three scientists on its staff besides the director, one German and two Americans. Sugar cane used to be the principal crop but now cotton has replaced it in value, and as a consequence the emphasis is now being placed on the cotton insects. THE GUIANAS Dutch Guiana.—North European travelers early made large col- lections in this coloriy. Madame Sibilla Merrian made her great . collections of Lepidoptera there, and her beautiful drawings which are still the admiration of lepidopterists. The principal contribution of the Dutch people to economic entomology from Guiana is the large monograph of the mosquitoes of Surinam made by Dr. C. Bonne and his wife, Mrs. C: Bonne-Wepster. Conceived and largely exe- WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 441 cuted during a long residence there, it was published in 1925 in Am- sterdam. The Bonnes were in frequent correspondence with the Bureau at Washington, and on their way home to Holland in 1919 they spent several months here studying the great mosquito collections in the National Museum with Dr. H. G. Dyar. British Guiana.—As we have pointed out under the head of the West Indies, British Guiana has practically the same entomological problems as Trinidad, the fauna and flora of Trinidad being essentially that of northern South America, as it is rather an island promontory than a removed island. A number of British collectors visited British Guiana in times past, and the English collections, especially those of the British Museum of Natural History, contain a great deal of material from that country. Many interesting observations on points relating to the biology of tropical insects were made there. Official economic entomology was not taken up in this country until 1912, when Mr. G. E. Bodkin, a young Englishman, was ap- pointed Government Economic Biologist. He passed through Wash- ington in December of that year, on his way to his post, and I met him afterwards at the conference of the Imperial Bureau of En- tomology in London in 1920. Mr. Bodkin was a well trained man and did admirable work. He remained in British Guiana, publish- ing mainly on entomological subjects, until 1922, when he went to Palestine. During the term of his British Guiana residence he pub- lished many important annual reports, and, from 1913 to 1923, 27 of his articles were reviewed in the Review of Applied Entomology. He was succeeded in office by Mr. L. D. Cleare who had previously been associated with him. A sound entomological article by Mr. Cleare is reviewed in the first volume of the Review of Applied Entomology (1913), but apparently he did not begin to publish extensively until after he assumed the position vacated by Mr. Bodkin. Probably the main entomological problems of British Guiana center around the cultivation of sugar cane, and the majority of the papers published by Bodkin and by Cleare relate to some phase of insect damage to this crop. The large sugar-planting companies of that colony, notably Messrs. Curtis, Campbell & Co. and Messrs. Booker Brothers, McConnell & Co., Ltd., carried on investigations for a time independent of the colonial government. Mr. John J. Quelch was for some years Curator in the Museum at Georgetown, and afterwards worked on a group of these sugar estates on the con- trol of the Diatraea borer and other pests. I am informed by Pro- fessor Ballou that Mr. H. W. B. Moore was discovered when a 29 442 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS vor, 84 youngster by Mr. Quelch and was trained by him, and that when Quelch some time in 1911 left British Guiana Mr. Moore took over the work. Mr. Moore corresponded with specialists in Washington and elsewhere on the subject of the identification of his material ; and the work started by Mr. Quelch and continued by him consisted largely of the collection of the moths and caterpillars of Diatraea and Castnia and also of their eggs. Since many of the eggs were parasitized, arrangements were made by Mr. Moore to collect them and keep them in such a way that the parasites could emerge while possibly surviving host larvae could not. Mr. Moore published from 1914 to 1917, but I have seen none of his reports later than that. It is interesting to note that the sugar planters of Trinidad have made several attempts to import parasites of sugar cane insects from Guiana, and that Mr. Harold E. Box, working for the Porto Rico Sugar Planters’ Association, made his first attempts to secure para- sites of the sugar cane froghopper from the Guianas. UNITED STATES OF COLOMBIA The United States of Colombia is a country that has been the prolific hunting ground of many collectors in natural history, but seems to have developed few native entomologists. The country has suffered from the cacao-beetle, and the Federal Bureau of Entomol- ogy in Washington has received letters from many individuals in reference to this and other insect damage. In the Revista del Ministerio de Industrias, Bogota, for May, 1916, is a report by A. Girardi on plant aphids, evidently written by a scientific man, and mentioning natural enemies and proper sprays. In the June number is an article on the potato tuber moth, and another one on the fungicides and insecticides most commonly used to combat the diseases of plants. In 1919, in the Agricultural Review, Bogota, was published an article by J. Figueroa on the cultivation of clover, in which the insect enemies are considered. In the same journal for that year is an article on the locust, by A. Lopez. In 1927 the Industrial Review at Bogota naniened an article by H. Apolinar Maria on insects in the pastures of the savannah of Bogota. In the year 1927 the Departamento de Agricultura y Zootecnia was founded, and among the Technical Divisions created in the Department was that of Entomology. Seftor Luis Maria Murillo was placed in charge of this division. He submitted a report on June 1, 1929, outlining his organization. A small laboratory had been estab- WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 443 lished in “La Picota” and work had been begun on the biology of fruit-flies and of grain weevils as well as parasites of coffee trees and a general study of parasites of injurious insects. An especial campaign had been begun against the woolly aphis of the apple. In 1929 an experiment station was established at Medellin in the State of Antioquia. A well trained economic entomologist from the United States, Mr. Charles H. Ballou, was appointed and is at pres- ent located in Medellin. Mr. Ballou is not fairly started. He writes me that he has been unable to find that any important work has been done in that country, although he has seen published documents relating to injurious locusts and to the Coccobacillus acridiorum of d’Herelle and recounting the work against locusts by Dr. Luis Zea Uribe in 1913 in Tocaima and that of Prof. Federico Lleras A. on work in Guduas, both, as I understand it, with the d’Herelle fungus and with good results. Mr. Ballou also tells me of a popular book on the domestic silkworm by Aureliano Vélez C., published in 1923, and still another on silk by Ernesto Murillo published the same year. Still another paper that Professor Ballou has seen is by Rafael A. Torro, a 34-page pamphlet published in 1927 and entitled (trans- lated) “The Diseases and Pests of Plants: Their Causes and Control.” VENEZUELA In Venezuela there have been many both foreign and native col- lectors, but economic entomology has received comparatively little attention. In 1925 the Ministry of Fomento of that country pub- lished a bulletin of 60 pages by Roberto Alamo Ybarra, Agricul- tural Engineer, entitled (translated) “ Two Insects Injurious to the Cultivation of Cotton.”” One of these insects is a leaf-worm and the other is a boll-worm. When the bulletin was published the author was of the opinion that the leaf-worm was Alabama argillacea, the tropical species which flies north every summer and gives birth to the so-called leaf-worm, or cotton caterpillar, of the southern United States ; but, according to Dr. C. H. T. Townsend, it is probably a species of Anomis. The insect considered as a boll-worm was, after the publication of the bulletin, sent to the United States for identification, and, on study, Dr. William Schaus of the United States National Museum decided that it is Sacadodes pyralis Dyar. As a result of this identi- fication and of further studies, a revision of the bulletin became nec- essary, since, on the supposition that this boll-worm of Venezuela was identical with the old cotton boll-worm of the United States, the author had assumed a secondary host plant in maize and had based 444 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS vot. 84 some of his remedial recommendations upon this supposition. I believe that the bulletin has not been reprinted, but is issued with certain portions relating to this supposed secondary host plant crossed out. Dr. G. Torres, the present Minister of Fomento of Venezuela, has informed me, through the Director General of the Pan American Union, that his Department has no special service in entomology, but that whenever some case of sufficient importance presents itself the Agronomist of the Department, Dr. Roberto A. Ybarra, is commis- sioned for its investigation. THE CENTRAL AMERICAN REPUBLICS I regret that there is not more to be said about Central America. In Panama Mr. James Zetek has long been stationed under the United States Department of Agriculture. His post has become a general entomological station for the humid Tropics. Many ento- mologists visit it for varying periods of time, and Mr. Zetek spends much energy in helping them. The specific problems attacked cover an attempt to gain a knowledge of tropical fruit-flies in America, their relationships, host preferences, and life cycles. The station in fact is devoted to the immediate problems of the Canal Zone and to research on pests native to the tropical rain forest areas. It is in fact the only American outpost laboratory in the humid Tropics where research can be done on some of the most dangerous pests. The insect fauna of the other Central American countries has long been studied, and collectors from different parts of the world have frequently visited the Central American republics. Many years ago the Englishman, H. W. Bates, published a fascinating book called “A Naturalist in Nicaragua,” which: aroused keen interest in the natural history of that part of the world. Much later, col- lectors were sent by Messrs. Godman and Salvin, of England, to get added material to be used in the production of the great work that afterwards appeared in parts, entitled “ Biologia Centrali- Americana.” Very many specialists worked over the material brought together for this great enterprise, the illustrations prepared for it were wonderfully well done, and the entire work was monumental. Economic entomology, however, has received little or no attention. Efforts to improve the agriculture of some of the countries have been very intelligently pushed, as for example in San Salvador, where a capable official from the United States, Mr. F. W. Taylor, for some time held the post of Director General of Agriculture. To Guatemala experts have gone on’several occasions to study agricultural problems. WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 445 The United Fruit Company has done much to encourage agricul- tural production, and from time to time has commissioned entomolo- gists for short periods to visit especially Honduras for investigations and advice. In the effort to secure official information for me, the Director General of the Pan American Union, Dr. L. S. Rowe, very kindly sent letters to the Ministers of Agriculture of the different countries asking concerning any official work that had been done or that had been undertaken regarding injurious insects. The Minister of Agri- culture and Labor of Nicaragua, Sefor J. A. Cabrera, courteously replied that there was nothing of note that could be reported. The absence of information from the other countries means plainly that nothing official has been done. There is at the present time, and has been for some years, an enlightened Ministry of Agriculture in Guatemala, and there has been published at Guatemala City a bulletin entitled “ Boletin de Agricul- tura y Caminos.” In the number for June and July, 1929, there are outlined the plans for a new Chemicoagricultural Institute under the Ministry of Agriculture, and in the number for May, 1929, was published an interesting article on the insects injurious to coffee by Manuel A. Bardales, Agricultural Engineer, apparently connected with the National Central School of Agriculture. In this he treats of the species of the genus Lecanium that affect the coffee plant. Collections and studies in Guatemala have been made by the writer’s colleagues, E. A. Schwarz, Herbert Barber, William Schaus, James Barnes, and O. F. Cook; and the last named, Professor Cook, being greatly interested in cotton, at one time found a predatory ant in Guatemala known locally as the “kelep” which he thought pro- tected cotton in that country from the so-called Mexican cotton boll weevil. He brought a colony of this ant to the States, and it was studied and encouraged for some time at Victoria, Texas, but the species did not accommodate itself to Texas conditions. A rather lengthy manuscript report has been received from the Ministerio de Agricultura of Guatemala, through the courtesy of the Pan American Union, which indicates that constant attention is being paid to the study of entomology in Guatemala although no trained entomologist seems to be employed. Two agronomical engineers, namely Sefior Jorge Garcia Salas and Sefior José Cosyins, have made trips through the different agricultural regions of the Republic, in- vestigating the occurrence of injurious insects and of plant diseases. It was reported that the European corn borer had made its appear- ance in the corn fields near Ciudad Veija. When this report reached 446 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS vot. 84 Washington, Mr. C. Heinrich, an expert in the Federal Bureau of Entomology, was sent to Guatemala on an investigating trip in 1929. He found that the European corn borer does not exist in that country but that the reports had been caused by a certain amount of damage done by one of the native corn borers, the larva of Diatraea lineata. A report from the Ministry of Agriculture shows that the pres- ent administration is thoroughly alive to questions of insect damage and that competent investigations will probably be made. Mr. Hein- rich reported that he was received with the greatest courtesy by Senor Manuel Herrera, the Minister of Agriculture, and was given every facility for carrying out his investigation. Mr. Heinrich was also greatly assisted by the United Fruit Company, and informs me that a good entomologist from the United States, Mr. Marston Bates, has been appointed Entomologist to the United Fruit Co. and, al- though his headquarters are at Tela, Honduras, spends considerable time in scouting and field work in Guatemala. BRITISH WEST INDIES A great many West Indian insects were sent to the principal museums of the world, and especially the British Museum of Natural History, from very early dates; and insect damage to crops began at an early time. In the year 1801 a special commission composed of members of the General Assembly of the Bahamas was appointed to investigate the damage done to the cotton crop by the red bug (Dys- dercus sp.) and the chenille (Alabama argillacea). Insect damage to cotton was very marked even before the beginning of the nine- teenth century. It is probable that early in the eighteenth century cotton cultivators were accustomed to the injuries of a worm that appeared in great numbers. In Guiana the cotton caterpillar was known to the earliest cultivators of cotton in that country: (1705 to 1752). In the Bahamas it was also destructive. In 1788, 250 tons of cotton were devoured by this worm. In 1794, the crop suffered severely in the same way. In 1801 and 1802 there was an emigration of French cotton planters from Martinique to southwest Georgia on account of the ravages of the cotton caterpillar. After the special commission of 1801, however, no governmental er other work seems to have been done or authorized for approxi- mately 90 years. About 1890 the Department of Agriculture at Washington began to receive requests for information about injurious insects from several of the West Indian islands. Mr. H. De Courcy Hamilton, of Montserrat, began to study the insects injurious to Citrus trees which WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—-HOWARD 447 were being grown extensively on that island. A little later, Mr. Claude W. McCallan, of Bermuda, appealed to Washington for sug- gestions in regard to the Mediterranean fruit-fly which was destroy- ing the peach crop of that island. A correspondence began with Mr. C. A. Barber, Superintendent of Agriculture of the Leeward Islands, on the subject of the sugar cane shot-borer, and with Mr. H. Caracciolo and Mr. F. W. Urich of Trinidad. In 1891, T. D. A. Cockerell, of England, was appointed Curator of the Institute of Jamaica at Kingston under the especial condition that he should conduct investigations in economic entomology and answer all correspondence of this kind which might come from the planters. Mr. Cockerell found scale insects extremely abundant in Jamaica and began’ their study. He started a series of stylographic notes, mainly about injurious insects, and distributed them among the planters. He was succeeded by C. H. Tyler Townsend, who held office for about a year. In 1898 the Imperial Department of Agriculture for the West Indies was established with headquarters at Barbados, and Sir Daniel Morris, coming from Kew Gardens in London, was appointed Com- missioner. In 1899, Mr. H. Maxwell Lefroy was sent over from London to take the position of Entomologist. In 1903 he was trans- ferred to India. Mr. H. A. Ballou, of Massachusetts, was appointed as his successor, and still retains the position. In the late nineties, the Trinidad Field Naturalists Club was active in entomological work, and succeeded eventually in having an entomologist appointed in the person of Mr. F. W. Urich, who had as assistant Mr. P. L. Guppy. The first publication was on the life history and control of the cacao-beetle, by Mr. Guppy, a well illus- trated pamphlet with an excellent colored plate. This was followed by regular annual reports and by other papers, including one on some insects affecting the coconut palm by Messrs. Urich and Guppy, one on the cotton stainer by Mr. Guppy and Thomas Thornton, one on froghoppers by J. C. Kershaw, and an admirably illustrated account of the sugar cane froghopper with biological notes on other species by Mr. Urich, as well as other papers. It is interesting to note that, in the opinion of many residents of Trinidad, the damage done by insects on the island and the great increase of this damage, especially by the sugar cane froghopper, must be attributed to the introduction of the Indian mongoos into Trinidad in the closing part of the last century. It was brought in to destroy rats. It increased rather rapidly, and was found to destoy young pigs, kids, lambs, kittens, puppies, poultry, birds of all kinds 448 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS vot. 84 nesting near or on the ground, ground lizards, snakes, frogs, turtle eggs, and land crabs. Many of the animals it destroyed feed normally on insects. So in 1902 the Government began to give bounties for the destruction of this animal. Whether the increase of the sugar cane froghoppers was due to the introduction of the mongoos or not, a thorough study of the insects was necessitated by their increase. In 1915 Mr. C. B. Williams, an English entomologist who had studied in the United States, was en- gaged by the Board of Agriculture. He attempted to find an efficient parasite elsewhere. Foreign travel was rendered very difficult by the war ; so he confined his investigations to near-by countries and islands, going as far as Panama. He returned to Trinidad in July, 1917, and continued his investigations. At the close of 1920 he published a full report which was well illustrated. After that he went to Egypt to accept an entomological position under the Government of that country. In 1925 a Froghopper Investigation Committee for Trinidad and Tobago was established, and this committee has continued in exis- tence until the present time. It has published its minutes and pro- ceedings in 14 pamphlets, the last one being dated 1929 and includ- ing the proceedings of the meeting of December 19, 1928. At this last meeting Dr. J. G. Myers, an expert connected with the Imperial Bureau of Entomology in London, stated that he had been sent to the West Indies and the adjacent mainland with a view to the intro- duction of natural control methods so far as possible in cases of severe insect damage. To revert once more to Jamaica, a number of years after C. H. T. Townsend resigned, A. H. Ritchie, a Scotsman who had been studying as a Carnegie Scholar in the United States, was appointed Entomologist for a period and made some very good studies both in agricultural and medical entomology. After the World War he was appointed Entomologist to the Tanganyika Territory, and was suc- ceeded in Jamaica by Mr. C. C. Gowdey who had been Entomologist to Uganda. This must have been in 1920. Mr. Gowdey died in 1928. Mr. Gowdey’s term in Jamaica was filled with industry. Perhaps the most important thing that he did was to prepare his catalogue of Jamaican insects, which was published by the Department of Agri- culture as Entomological Bulletin No. 4, Parts 1 and 2. It was very carefully done and well printed, covering 114 pages, with a compe- tent index. All the species known to have been found in Jamaica down to July 31, 1925, are included. The catalogue includes as an appendix a paper on “ New Diptera from Jamaica ” by C. H. Curran. WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 449 Late in 1929 the post was filled by the appointment of Mr. W. H. Edwards, by transfer from Mauritius where he had been Assistant Entomologist. To return again to Bermuda and the Bahamas: it should be stated that these islands have been outside the control of the Imperial Bureau of Agriculture and that little official work has been done in them. Toward the close of the last century the Agricultural Society of Bermuda became intensely interested in the increase of the Medi- terranean fruit-fly. Mr. Claude W. McCallan, as previously men- tioned, appealed to Washington for assistance, and the United States Government became especially interested in this insect at that time. I prepared an illustrated article entitled ““A Peach Pest in Bermuda,” which was published in Volume 3 of Insect Life, pages 5 to 8 (Au- gust, 1890). This article called attention to the danger of the importa- tion of this pest into the southern States, indicating that such acci- dental importation is always possible. A committee of the Agricul- tural Society of Bermuda under the leadership of Mr. Ambrose Gosling, after exhausting apparently all other resources, made an attempt to wipe out the pest by destroying for a single season all fruits of the kinds known to be affected. This expensive and at- temptedly radical effort failed through the fact that some inconspicu- ous fruit (I think, the so-called ground cherry) was overlooked ; and it is thought that the present Florida infestation came from Bermuda. In 1923 Mr. L. Ogilvie was appointed to the position of Plant Pathologist of Bermuda, and his duties included investigations of injurious insects. In 1929 he was succeeded by Mr. H. S. Cunning- ham. Mr. Ogilvie left Bermuda in 1928 and is at present Advisory Mycologist to the Agricultural and Horticultural Research Station, Bristol University, Long Ashton, Bristol, England. Just before he left Bermuda, he published under the Department of Agriculture a 52-page pamphlet entitled “ The Insects of Bermuda.” It is a list of species with comments. The story of the work undertaken under the auspices of the Imperial Bureau of Agriculture for the West Indies during the period from October 1, 1898, to March 31, 1911, is carefully con- sidered in a lengthy article entitled “ Entomology in the West Indies ” published on pages 282 to 317 of the West Indian Bulletin, Vol- ume 11, No. 4, 1911. It was written by Mr. H. A. Ballou, who, as we have just stated, assumed the office of Entomologist in 1903. In referring tu early work before the establishment of the Bureau, Mr. Ballou mentions the work of W. Fawcett in Jamaica, that of C. A. 450 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 Barber in Antigua, of J. H. Hart in Trinidad, and J. R. Bovell in Barbados. The contributions made by Mr. Ballou himself during that period were very important and include strong articles on insects affecting cotton, sugar cane, and cacao. He also published numerous shorter notes, as well as an important monograph of the insects known as “cotton stainers ’—true bugs of the genus Dysdercus. He con- tinued work of this kind and carried it on very efficiently under the same governmental position until 1922 when the Imperial College of Tropical Agriculture was established at Trinidad. This was the outcome of the efforts of Sir Francis Watts, Commissioner of the Imperial Department of Agriculture for the West Indies, who had been advocating such an educational institution for many years. He was made the first Principal of the College. The nucleus of the College staff was the staff of the Imperial Department, and for the first year or two this nucleus did the whole work. The College was charged, in fact, with the carrying on of the work of the Imperial Department, and since 1922 the Professor of Entomology (Mr. Ballou) has still functioned as the Entomologist of the Department of Agriculture. On the establishment of the College, he not only became Professor of Entomology but carried on his work as Assistant Commissioner of Agriculture for the West Indies. More recently he has been appointed Commissioner of Agriculture, and still carries on the duties of Professor of Entomology and all the entomological work for the Lesser Antilles. At the end of 1927 Mr. F. W. Urich retired from the Trinidad Department of Agriculture and was ap- pointed Assistant Professor of Entomology at the College. During the past few years the majority of the students have been postgraduates, mostly from British universities and colleges of rec- ognized standing, most of them going directly from college to ap- pointments on existing agricultural staffs in the colonies. The insti- tution is one of high standing, and fills a very useful function in the British Empire, since so many of her dominions and colonies are situated in the Tropics, and of course a thorough training in the tropical aspects of the different agricultural sciences is necessary to the experts who take positions around the world within tropical limits. There is one more entomological officer in the British West Indies. Mr. R. W. E. Tucker holds the official position of Government Ento- mologist of Barbados. A number of other men should be mentioned in connection with West Indian work, from the Rey. Landsdown Guilding who during his long residence on*the island of St. Vincent published a dozen WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 45I or more important papers in the Transactions of the Linnean Society and the Magazine of Natural History on West Indian insects, includ- ing an important paper on the insects which infest the sugar cane and the first account of that extraordinary Coccid, Margarodes formicarum (1828), down through the later workers. It should be noted that C. C. Gowdey, befure he went to Uganda, went to the West Indies to join Ballou shortly after his own graduation from the Massachusetts Agricultural College, and published a good paper on the Aleyrodidae of Barbados. It should also be stated that Dr. J. C. Hutson worked down there on cotton insects and that W. Nowell and J. S. Dash also worked in Barbados. The work of the English- men, Guelch, Moore, Bodkin, and Cleare, in British Guiana might also be mentioned here, but has been taken up under the head of South America, although Trinidad, which is considered in this sec- tion as one of the West Indies, has the Guiana fauna and is really little more than an island promontory from the South American coast. Fortunately, a summary of the entomological work undertaken by the Imperial Department of Agriculture during the period from October 1, 1898, to March 31, 1911, was published by Professor Ballou in the West Indian Bulletin, Volume 11, No. 4, 1911. This is a very careful and detailed report and brings out very many points that cannot be mentioned in this limited account. In addition to the names already mentioned, it should be noted that W. K. Morrison, Dr. R. Hamlyn-Harris, and Charles W. Jemmett were temporarily attached to the staff of the Imperial Department as Honorary Assis- tant Entomologists at one time or another during the period men- tioned. Doctor Hamlyn-Harris was there from October Io, 1902, to January 31, 1903. He has recently been doing admirable work as a sanitary entomologist in Australia. Appended to the article is a list of entomological publications in the West Indian Bulletin, Volumes 1 to 11, and specially published pamphlets. The list includes 45 papers on different aspects of economic entomology. In the closing days of 1929 an excellent paper comes to my desk entitled “ The Giant Moth-borer of the Sugar Cane (Casinia licus Dr.)” by H. Martin Skinner, in charge of plant control work of the Ste. Madeleine Sugar Co., Trinidad. It contains a very beautiful colored plate of the insect. CUBA The very interesting tropical fauna and flora of Cuba attracted attention at an early date, and many of the great museums of Europe 452 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 contained species sent from Cuba by travelers and by residents. But Cuban natural history was not at all well understood as a whole until the days of Felipe Poey (1799-1891) and Juan (Johann) Gundlach (1810-1896). Poey was born in Habana, studied in Paris as a young man, and spent the rest of his life in Cuba. In one of his biographies it is stated that he was one of the founders of the Entomological Society of France. In the list of 35 founders in the Annals of this great Society for 1832, occurs the entry, “ Poey, Avocat a la Cour royale.” If this were indeed the Cuban Felipe Poey, he must have been a resident of Paris at that time (at the age of 33). Poey was an indefatigable naturalist, collected and wrote extensively, published several papers on Cuban Lepidoptera, and was the author of a great “ Natural History of Cuba.” Gundlach was born in Magdeburg, went to Cuba in 1838, and, indifferent to financial gain, spent his life collecting and studying birds, fishes, and insects as well as other animals. He was in active correspondence with scientific societies and museums in Europe and the United States, and much of his collected material passed through the hands of foreign specialists. In the 1880’s he began to build up the Museum of the Institute of Habana, and spent several years in thorough collecting expeditions over the island. The years 1884-88 were spent largely in the museum at Habana, working over the collections. The Cuban Agricultural Experiment Station (Estacion Experi- mental Agronomica) at Santiago de las Vegas, Province of Habana, was founded in 1904, and began operations on April 1. I am indebted to Mr. S. C. Bruner, Chief of the Department of Plant Pathology and Entomology of this Station, for the following full account of applied entomology in Cuba. The Department of Plant Pathology of the new Station included both plant pathology proper and entomology. The head of this De- partment was Dr. Mel. T. Cook who served until September, 1906; the assistant of this Department was Mr. H. T. Horne. While both of these gentlemen were primarily plant pathologists, work in both fields was carried out. In June, 1905, Bulletin No. 1 of the Station was published, entitled “ Insects and Diseases of Tobacco,” by Doctor Cook and Mr. Horne. In the first report of the Estacion Agronémica (1906), in the report of work of the Department of Plant Pathology (period April, 1904, to June, 1905), Doctor Cook gives an account of the very considerable amount of work done on the insects and diseases of tobacco, coffee, orange and other fruits, corn, cotton, sugar cane, vegetables, etc., although this was necessarily of a preliminary nature. WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 453 In 1905 Bulletin 3, also by Cook and Horne, on “ The Coffee Leaf- miner and Other Coffee Pests,” appeared. Mr. W. T. Horne, in September, 1906, succeeded Doctor Cook as Chief of the Department of Plant Pathology. In May, 1907, Bulle- tin 7, entitled “ Insects and Diseases of Corn, Sugar Cane, and Related Plants,” by Cook and Horne, was published. Following the pro- motion of Mr. Horne, Mr. J. S. Houser was appointed assistant in the Department of Plant Pathology to fill the vacancy, having served prior to that time as assistant entomologist in the Ohio Agricultural Experiment Station.’ The following year, 1907, a position of second assistant was created and Sr. Sebastian Pla was appointed to the position. Bulletin 9, “‘ Insects and Diseases of the Orange,” by Cook and Horne, was published in February, 1908, and in May, 1908, Bulletin 12, entitled “‘ Insects and Diseases of Vegetables.” In July, 1908, Bulletin 15 by Mr. Horne, on “ Bud Rot and Other Diseases of Coconut in Cuba,” was published. This includes reference to the insects, as well as diseases. In Part 2 of the Second Report of the Experiment Station (June 30, 1905, to January I, 1909), published in 1909, Mr. J. S. Houser published a paper on “ The ‘ Candelilla’ or Leaf-miner of Tobacco, Phthorimaea operculella Zell.” In the same publication there appeared an article on the “ Damage to Pines in Cuba Due to Dio- ryctria sp. and other Lepidoptera,” by Horne and Houser. Mr. Houser retired from the Station in the early part of 1909 and Mr. Horne also, at which time there was a radical change in the personnel. The next bulletin containing information on economic insects was No. 20, published in July, 1911, entitled “ Insects and Diseases of Cassava in Cuba (Insectos y enfermedades de la yuca en Cuba)” prepared by Sr. Patricio P. Cardin (B.S., 1909, Massa- chusetts Agricultural College, Amherst), who alone carried on the work of entomology and pathology from July 29, 1909, until July, 1914. He was primarily an entomologist. In September, 1914, a Plant Pathologist was appointed and a separate department for this work temporarily created, Sr. Cardin remaining in charge of the Depart- ment of Entomology. Mr. H. C. Eagerton was appointed Assistant Entomologist in November, 1914, but remained at the Station for only a month and a half. Dr. J. C. Hutson (Ph. D., Massachusetts Agri- cultural College) became Assistant Entomologist in July or August, 1915, and served until October, 1916. Mr. Reginald Hart (B.S., Mass.) was appointed to succeed him, reporting for duty October 1, 1917, and served until July 19, 1918. Sr. Oscar Arango was then 454 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS vot, 84 appointed to this position on September 10, 1918. In the meantime the Departments of Plant Pathology and Entomology had been reunited with Sr. Cardin as Chief, and S. C. Bruner as Assistant Chief (Segundo Jefe). On the death of Sr. Cardin, on September 29, 1919, Mr. Bruner was appointed Chief of this department, and Sr. Arango was promoted to fill the vacancy left by the latter, Sr. Braulio T. Barreto being appointed Assistant Entomologist at the same time. The position of Assistant Entomologist was abolished for economy in 1921 together with a number of similar positions at the Experiment Station, but Sr. Barreto continued at the Station with a temporary appointment until December, 1925. There have been no other changes in the staff of this Department to date, February, 1930. Following the publication of Bulletin 20 on insects and diseases of Cassava plant in Cuba, Sr. Cardin published in 1912 and 1913, in Circulars 42 and 43, a paper on “ The Insects and Diseases of Avo- cados.” In the same Circular No. 43 (1913) appeared a short paper by Mr. J. S. Houser entitled “ Informe preliminar sobre las Plagas de la Cafia de Azticar en Cuba (Preliminary Report on the Sugar Cane Pests of Cuba)” translated from the English by Sr. Cardin; he also was author of Circular No. 33 (March, 1909) on Insecticides and Fungicides. In 1915 the third report of the Cuban Experiment Station appeared (period February, 1909, to July 30, 1914) which includes (pp. 98 to 216), in the Report of the Department of Plant Pathology and Entomology by Sr. Patricio Cardin, an annotated list of economic insects and plant diseases of Cuba arranged alphabetically according to the plant attacked. This work contains much valuable information. Sr. Cardin also published a paper on the black fly ( Aleurocanthus woglumi Ash.) in the official Revista de Agricultura, Comercio y Trabajo (May, 1918) and another on pests of the castor oil plant in Cuba (October, 1918). In the report for 1917-1918 of the Station (published 1919) Sr. Cardin gives a short account of his studies of the black fly of Citrus and other insects. Mr. Reginald Hart published a number of papers in the Revista de Agricultura, Comercio y Trabajo, including a paper on the pepper weevil (Cryptorrhynchus cubae) (September, 1919), Grosella looper (Melanchroia geometroides) (November, 1919) and in the same year an annotated list of Cuban agricultural pests in tabular form, in two parts including a number of new items. Sr. Barreto, during the time he served in the Department, published in a series of short papers on economic insects, particularly on pests of sugar cane, lima beans, fruit trees, bees, etc., mostly in the Revista de Agricultura referred to, and Bulletin 42 of this Station, WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 455 entitled “La Bibijagua y modos de Combatirla” (The Leaf-cutting Ant | Atta insularis, Guerin] and its Control). Sr. Oscar Arango published several short articles in the official Revista de Agricultura, Comercio y Trabajo (Habana) on economic insects, and in 1927, Circular 63 on the preparation and application of insecticides ; also a leaflet, prepared jointly with S. C. Bruner, on the control of the black fly (Aleurocanthus woglumt Ash.) published in 1928. The contributions of S. C. Bruner, aside from work in plant pa- thology, mycology, and systematic entomology (Hemiptera and Ho- moptera) consist of Bulletin No. 38 of the Experiment Station on the diseases of the orange and other Citrus plants, prepared jointly with Prof. J. R. Johnston (August, 1918), in which are considered the rust mite and red spiders attacking these plants in Cuba; a paper on the transmission of sugar cane mosaic by insects (Revista de Agricultura, Comercio y Trabajo, Vol. 5, No. 1, March, 1922), obser- vations on the Citrus black fly, on certain sugar cane pests, on the seed chalcid of annonaceous fruits (Bephrata cubensis Ashm.), notes on royal palm bug (Xylastodorts luteolus Barber), on the green Citrus aphid in Cuba (Aphis spiraecola, Patch), on the use of paradichloro- benzene for destroying the leaf-cutting ant (Atta insularis, Guerin), on the use of calcium cyanide for destroying the same insect (with S. W. Bromley), on scale insects attacking coffee in eastern Cuba, on the appearance of the cottony cushion scale (Jcerya purchasi, Mask.) in Cuba and the subsequent importation of Rodolia cardinalis, etc., published largely in the Revista de Agricultura, Comercio y Trabajo. He is also author of the general report of the work of the Department of Plant Pathology and Entomology for the years 1925 to 1928, etc., included in the “‘ Memoria General de la Secretariade Agricultura, Comercio y Trabajo” (1928), Habana, and of Circular No. 68 (June, 1929) of the Experiment Station, on the pests of the coffee plant in Cuba. In November, 1928, an agreement was entered into between the Departments de Agricultura of Cuba and the United States for the importation into Cuba, from the Orient, of parasites and other natural enemies of the Citrus black fly (Aleurocanthus woglumi Ash.), the work to be carried on as a cooperative project. Dr. A. C. Baker of the Bureau of Entomology was designated to represent the United States Department of Agriculture, and Mr. Ernesto Sanchez Estrada, acting Chief of the Seccidn de Sanidad Vegetal, Habana, and S. C. Bruner, Chief of the Department of Plant Pathology and Entomology, of the Agricultural Experiment Station, Santiago de las Vegas, were desig- nated to represent the Cuban Government. This work is now under 456 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS vo. 84. way, Mr. C. P. Clausen is at present in the Malay Peninsula collecting and preparing the insects for shipment, while at the Cuban Experi- ment Station an insectary has been built, and the necessary work is being carried on to care for them as shipments are received. Mr. Paul A. Berry, of the United States Bureau of Entomology, is now engaged in this work at Santiago de las Vegas. Notes on the Plant Quarantine and Pest Control Service in Cuba.— The first organization of this kind in Cuba was called the “ Comision de Fitopatologia ” and was created in the year 1913 or 1914. Its president was the Director of Agriculture (the late Don Roberto Luaces). The positions of the officials as well as of the inspectors were all honorary in nature. On July 3, 1916, the “ Comision de Sanidad Vegetal ”’ was created, being composed of three members: Mr. J. R. Johnston, President, Plant Pathologist of the Experiment Station; Sr. P. Cardin, Ento- mologist of the Experiment Station, and Dr. M. Sanchez Roig, Professor of Natural History in the provincial agricultural institute or high school (Granja Agricola). On September 12, 1917, a separate organization for this work was created under the name of “ Oficina de Sanidad Vegetal.” Mr. J. R. Johnston was appointed Chief with three inspectors and three foremen with provision for the employment of laborers. The appearance of the Citrus black fly (Aleurocanthus woglumi Ash.) a short time previously was really responsible for the creation of the “ Oficina” at this time, when an unsuccessful campaign for its control was begun which lasted several years. A month later (October I, 1917) ad- ditional inspectors were provided for. On July 1, 1925, the name of the Office was changed to that of the present time: “ Seccion de Sanidad Vegetal.’. Its personnel consists of (nominally): a chief, 3 chief inspectors, 1 second-class inspec- tor, 4 third-class inspectors, and 6 fifth-class inspectors; as well as 3 foremen and 20 laborers. There are, in addition, 20 temporary inspectors (fifth class) and the necessary clerks, typists, etc. The service is also provided with two omnibuses, or trucks, equipped for extension work, as well as several automobiles and trucks for other work. The publications of this service consist of annual reports, bulletins, and circulars, the two latter consisting largely of information in popular style on means of controlling the mosaic disease of sugar cane, the Citrus black fly, the coconut bud-rot disease, the Panama banana disease, scale insects and other pests; and the regulations in force concerning plant quarantine and pest control. WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOW ARD 457 The personnel of this service has of course undergone many changes since it was created. Mr. R. Hart and Mr. C. H. Ballou served at one time as inspectors, the latter also as “‘ Entomologist.” Dr. M. Sanchez Roig (D. en C. and D. en M.) succeeded Mr. John- ston as Chief of the service, and served until early in 1926. Mr. S. C. Bruner acted as Chief ad interim a short time during the fall of 1926, until Dr. Ruiz Mesa (D. en M.) the present Chief was appointed. Mr. E. Sanchez Estrada is now the Acting Chief of the Service, and Major Jesus L. Vega (D. en M. V.) is the “ Military Supervisor.” In 1924 the Tropical Plant Research Foundation of the United States National Research Council established an experiment station at Central Baragua, at the request of an association of Cuban cane planters known as the Cuba Sugar Club. The station is known as “Estacion Experimental del Club Azucarero de Cuba.” Mr. D. L. Van Dine, long-time member of the staff of the United States Bureau of Entomology and at one time engaged in entomological work in Hawaii and later in Porto Rico, went to Cuba in November, 1924, with C. F. Stahl, also an old employee of the United States Bureau, as his assistant. Later Mr. Van Dine became local director of all the work, including pathology, agriculture, and chemistry, and the organization was changed from a project basis to the standard experiment station plan, Mr. Stahl became chief entomologist, and Mr. H. K. Plank, also formerly of the Bureau, was engaged later. Mr. Stahl resigned’in 1929, and his place was taken by U. C. Loftin, also formerly of the United States Bureau. Mr. L. C. Scaramuzza has been an entomological assistant and has been working on the biology of moth-borer parasites. These men have done excellent work and have published seven Bulletins and eight Scientific Contributions. An especially good article by Mr. Plank entitled “ Natural Enemies of the Sugar Cane Moth-Borer in Cuba” was published in the Annals of the Entomological Society of America, Vol. 22, No. 4, December, 1929, pp. 621-640. PORTO RICO’ The insect fauna of Porto Rico and other islands of the West Indies has attracted the attention of naturalists since the early days *The major part of this section on Porto Rico has been prepared at my request by Dr. R. T. Cotton, who tells me that the statements regarding the early entomological history of Porto Rico have been gathered from an account prepared by Augustin Navarrete, a former secretary of the Sugar Producers Association of Porto Rico and from Doctor Wolcott’s “ Insectae Portoricensis,” Journ. Dept. Agr. P. R., Vol. 7, No. 1, 1923. 30 458 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VoL. 84 of the Spanish colonization in 1509. Captain Gonzalo Fernandez de Oviedo who visited the island at that time mentions some of the insects common to Porto Rico, Santo Domingo, and Cuba in his “General and Natural History of the Indies.” Antonio de Herrera, in his ‘‘ General Chronicle of the Indies,” published in 1518, gives an extensive account of a plague of ants that ravaged the island in 1518. He describes in detail the measures used to control them. Probably the first extensive account of the insect fauna of Porto Rico was given by Brother Ifigo, a priest known as the Abbot of the Sierra, who lived for many years in Porto Rico and in 1788 pub- lished his “ Geographical, Civil, and Political History of the Island of San Juan Bautista de Puerto Rico.” In chapter 35 entitled “ Natu- ral History of the Island of Porto Rico,” he describes the life history and habits of many of the common insect pests of the island, includ- ing several species of ants, the common termite, the chigoe, the fire- fly or “ cucubano,” cockroaches, ticks, bees, wasps, etc. The earliest recorded collection of insects in Porto Rico was made by Andres Pedro Ledru and is reported in his paper entitled (trans- lated) ‘‘ Journey to the Island of Porto Rico in the Year 1797,” pub- lished in Paris in 1810. Doctor Wolcott states that, of the 46 species listed in this publication, to can be readily identified. The next extensive account of insects of the island was published by Dr. Augustin Stahl, of Bayamon, Porto Rico, in a work entitled “Fauna de Puerto Rico.” In this work, pages 82 to 102 discuss the systematic classification of insects, and pages 169 to 249 list the speci- mens in Stahl’s collection from Cuba, Trinidad, and Porto Rico. This was published in 1882. It seems also that a number of years before Stahl’s paper, Dr. Leopoldo Krug, the German Consul at Mayaguez, had been collect- ing insects and that, at his invitation, the well known naturalist, Dr. Juan Gundlach, of Cuba, made two trips to Porto Rico and, with Krug, collected insects in various parts of the island. These collec- tions were sent to Berlin for description and identification. As a result Gundlach, between May, 1887, and September, 1893, published the sections dealing with insects of his “ Fauna Porto Ricquefia” in the Annals of the Spanish Society of Natural History at Madrid. The insects had been identified and described not only by German specialists but also by Saussure of Switzerland and Uhler of Balti- more. When, following the Spanish-American War, Porto Rico was taken over by the United States, important advances on entomology, and WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY HOWARD 459 especially by the workers in economic entomology, were made. A Federal experiment station was started at Mayaguez, and the ento- mological workers at this station have published many important papers. Mr. O. W. Barrett held the position of Entomologist and Botanist from 1903 to 1905, Mr. W. V. Tower from 1906 to I9gI1I, Dr. C. W. Hooker in 1912, Mr. R. H. Van Zwaluwenburg from 1914 to 1917, and Mr. Tower again from 1918 to 1924. These men have all been excellent entomologists and have done valuable work. In 1913, Dr. E. F. Phillips of the Federal Bureau of Entomology visited Porto Rico, at the invitation of the Porto Rico Experiment Station, and prepared a bulletin on Porto Rican bee-keeping, published as Bulletin 15 of the Station. The Sugar Producers Association of Porto Rico started an experi- ment station at Rio Piedras in 1911, for the purpose of studying the problems of sugar cane growing. A year later the Board of Com- missioners of Agriculture was created by the Porto Rican legisla- ture, and a separate organization developed to study the agricultural problems of the island. In the years that followed, the entomological workers of both organizations did much cooperative work on the insect pests of sugar cane. In 1914 the Board assumed charge of the work of the Sugar Producers Experiment Station and took over the entire staff. The combined organization was given the name of the Insular Experiment Station of the Department of Agriculture and Labor, the name under which it is now known. Mr. D. L. Van Dine was the first Entomologist of the Sugar Pro- ducers Experiment Station, holding that position from 1910 to 1913 when he resigned and Mr. T. H. Jones, his assistant took charge. Mr. W. V. Tower was appointed Entomologist for the Board of Commissioners of Agriculture at the time of its creation in I9QIT. He retained this position until 1914 when the two stations were com- bined. He was then made Director of the Insular Experiment Sta- tion, and Mr. T. H. Jones became chief Entomologist. With this Station Messrs. C. E. Hood, S. S. Crossman, G. N. Wolcott, E. G. Simytn, G: Bs Merrill, 'R.T. Cotton, J. D. Moore, F. Sein, Jr., and H, L. Dozier have also been connected. Doctor Wolcott has been connected with the entomological work of the Station longer than any other worker. Appointed as a traveling entomologist in 1912 to aid in the work of introducing parasites of sugar cane insects, he was promoted to the position of Chief Entomologist in 1914. He resigned in 1916 but returned in 1921 and resumed charge of the work until 1924. Dr. M. D. Leonard is now Chief Entomologist. 460 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS vot. 84 The insect pests of the sugar cane provide the most important entomological problems of the island, and the effort of a majority of the workers of the two stations have been directed towards solving these problems.’ The major pests of tobacco, Citrus fruits, vegetables, coffee, pineapples, and cotton have been studied, however, and are the subjects of numerous publications. The comparatively recent dis- covery that the mosaic disease of sugar cane is carried by Aphis maidis increases the importance of entomological work in the island. In 1925, Mr. Harold E. Box, an Englishman who had been doing work in British Guiana, was made Entomologist to the Central Aguirre Sugar Company of Porto Rico, and held the post for rather more than two years, working mainly with the subject of sugar cane borer control. While holding this position he visited Santo Domingo and British Guiana and spent some time in Venezuela searching for appropriate parasites for Porto Rico. In May, 1927, he joined the staff of the Agricultural Experiment Station at Tucuman, Argentina, where he has remained and where his main problem has been the sugar cane borer. Mr Herbert Osborn, Jr., succeeded Mr. Box in Porto Rico. Added note-——A natural history survey of Porto Rico and the Virgin Islands has been conducted by the New York Academy of Sciences and its results are now being published in cooperation with the Government of Porto Rico. Volumes 11, 12, and 13 of this exten- sive series of reports will be devoted to insects. Four portions of Volumes 11 and 12 are in preparation as follows: The Diptera, by C. H. Curran; the Heterocera (exclusive of the Geometridae and Microlepidoptera), by William T. M. Forbes; The Geometridae and Microlepidoptera, by William Schaus; the Rhopalocera, by F. E. Watson. HAITI The natural history of Haiti has been of great interest to a number of naturalists, particularly during recent years. As a zoological field, it possesses an interest possibly foremost in character among the West Indian islands. The birds have been studied by James Bond and Alexander Wetmore; the Mollusca by Paul Bartsch and the late C. R. Orcutt; the Reptilia by Thomas Barbour and Miss Doris Cochran; and Dr. William Beebe and his staff have studied the fishes, sponges and other forms of the Port-au-Prince Bay. * As late as 1928 Doctor Wolcott read an important paper before the Fourth International Congress of Entomology which was entitled ‘‘ Weather and the Non-burning of Trash in Borer Control in Porto Rico.” This was published in the proceedings of the Congress. WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 461 In 1923 a branch of the Government service known as the (trans- lated) Technical Service of the Department of Agriculture and of Professional Instruction was established. Dr. George F. Freeman, from the United States, was appointed Director General of this Service. The technical work was organized under three divisions, and Dr. George N. Wolcott was made head of the Department of Ento- mology and Entomologist of the Experiment Station. He served from July, 1924, to March, 1928. Entomological problems were taken up, and the following native Haitians were engaged in the different prob- lems: Marcel Dartiguenave, Adonis Muller, Emanuel Ducasse, Andre Audant, Alphonse Noel, Auguste Daumec, and Ernest Guéry. In July, 1928, Doctor Wolcott was succeeded by Dr. Roger C. Smith, who had been, with Dr. George A. Dean, a professor in the Agri- cultural College of Kansas. In January, 1929, Doctor Smith was made Director of the Central School in addition to Department work, and in the later months of 1929 was Acting Assistant Director General. Five projects were begun during his administration, namely (1) Cotton insects; (2) Insects affecting staple crops other than cotton ; (3) Fruit and vegetable insects; (4) Insects and rodents injurious to man; (5) Bee culture. Much time was also devoted to the mak- ing of an insect pest survey of Haiti and to the bringing together of a representative collection of identified insects as a basis for instruc- tion work in the Central School. Doctor Smith completed his work in the winter of 1929-30, and returned in the spring of 1930 to Kansas. Dr. H. L. Dozier succeeded Doctor Smith as the head of the depart- ment in the Technical Service on October 1, 1929. Doctor Dozier had served in Porto Rico and later occupied the post of Entomologist of the Delaware Agricultural Experiment Station. Doctor Smith informs me that the Department has a good equip- ment for the usual entomological work, and that the zoological library is probably the best of any in the technical branches. Doctor Wolcott, in beginning his work in 1924, took up especially insect enemies of sugar cane and cotton. The pink bollworm was found to occur in certain regions and particularly with certain varie- ties of cotton. In 1926 the International Institute of Rome published a report by Mr. Wolcott on insect pests in Haiti. In 1927, a very well done book of 440 pages was published by the Technical Service at Port-au-Prince, on the entomology of Haiti, under the authorship of Doctor Wolcott. It is written in the French language, of course, and carries 133 figures of which a number are original and are very well done. They were drawn by Fritz Maximilien, a former student of the Central Agricultural School and employed as an assistant in the 462 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS vot. 84 Technical Service. At the Fourth International Congress of Entomol- ogy in August, 1928, at Ithaca, New York, Dr. Wolcott read an inter- esting paper entitled “‘ The Pink Bollworm in Haiti,” which will be found in the Proceedings of the Congress. THE DOMINICAN REPUBLIC Some work was done in the Dominican Republic prior to 1920 by O. W. Barrett and E. A, Barthe, and in 1919 there was published in the Agricultural Review of Santo Domingo an article on the eco- nomic importance of the sweet potato weevil by M. A. Crespo. In 1920 George N. Wolcott was appointed to the National Agricultural Station of Haina. Mr. Wolcott’s term of office was short and he seems to have published nothing at the time, but some years later, while in Porto Rico, he published an article on the insects that attack cacao in Santo Domingo. In 1927 Dr. Giuseppe Russo began to pub- lish as Chief of the Entomological Section of the National Agronomi- cal Station and College of Agriculture. He has written a short pam- phlet on the insects injurious to the principal cultures and the meth- ods of fighting them, and especial articles on the insects of various crops, and also upon apiculture and honey. In a magazine entitled Revista de Agricultura, the official organ of the Department of Agri- culture, of which I have seen several of the 1929 numbers, Doctor Russo has good articles upon a number of entomological topics. Early in 1929 Dr. Juan Gomez Menor was appointed to the Service of Plant Sanitation of the governmental Department of Agriculture. He has published an article on the Mediterranean fruit-fly and two on the biology of scale insects. VIRGIN ISLANDS Soon after the United States Government purchased the Virgin Islands from Denmark in 1917, an Agricultural Experiment Station was started; and Mr. C. E. Wilson was appointed Entomologist in April, 1919. He served until August, 1922. He published notes on the insects of the Virgin Islands and means for their control, in the reports of the Station from 1920 to 1923, and among these notes an extensive list of scale insects. He was also the author of a bulletin (No. 3) on the insect pests of cotton in St. Croix, and of one (No. 4) on truck crop pests in the Virgin Islands. Other articles containing insect notes were published under the authorship of L. Smith. Parr VII MEDICAL ENTOMOLOGY THE INTERNATIONAL USE OF PARASITES OTHER MATTERS MEDICAL ENTOMOLOGY It will be remembered that, in our consideration of economic ento- mology in North America, in Part I, we devoted some time to the consideration of the extraordinary events of the last decade of the nineteenth century which served to focus universal attention on ap- plied entomology. One of those events was the proof of the carriage of disease to human beings by insects. That, however, was a dis- covery by no means confined to America, and was not only of world- wide importance, but investigations in that direction were begun im- inediately by men in all parts of the world. It therefore deserves consideration in a section that will not be limited geographically. Medical entomology, although so important today, extending as it does in numerous directions, is of very recent development. The first exact proofs of the carriage by insects of disease organisms was gained less than 50 years ago. It is true that here and there sugges- tions had been made as to the role of insects in the carriage of dis- ease for many years previously. The idea seems to have sprung up and gained ground among the aboriginal peoples of India, Africa, and South America; and even on the Roman campagna, a home of malaria, the poor peasants long ago connected the idea of mosquitoes with the idea of fevers. And nearly a hundred years ago two medical men, Dr. Josiah Nott, of Mobile, and Dr. Louis D. Beauperthuy, of the West Indies, argued that mosquitoes were instrumental in the carriage of yellow fever. But all this was before the era when the medical world learned, through Pasteur and his school, that the old humoral and vitalistic doctrines concerning disease were wrong, and that a great number of diseases have as their only causes infinitely minute beings of both animal and vegetable nature which penetrate the bodies of warm- blooded animals and produce not only specific lesions but general disease. The Pasteur discoveries related only to bacteria. He was followed by hundreds of workers who showed that other parasitic organisms exist and that these organisms are excessively variable in type, in biology, and in resulting diseases. Some of the higher of these forms—the parasitic worms—were discovered before Pasteur ; and the first parasitic Protozoan, causing dysentery, was found a few years before Pasteur’s bacterial discoveries were announced. And then followed the discovery of the Spirochaete of relapsing fever, the Ameba of tropical dysentery, the Protozoan cause of malaria, the 465 466 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 Trypanosome of sleeping sickness, the Leishman bodies of kala- azar, the Spirochaete of syphilis, and others. The first discovery which implicated insects as carriers was the finding by Sir Patrick Manson in 1879 of the rdle of the mosquito, Culex fatigans, in the development and carriage of filarial worms. The second was the discovery by Theobald Smith in 1889 to 1891 of the carriage of the causative microdrganism of Texas fever of cattle by a tick. The third was the discovery by Sir (then Major) Ronald Ross in 1898 of the carriage of malaria by Anopheles mosquitoes. The fourth was that by Reed, Carroll, Lazear, and Agramonte of the carriage of yellow fever by the mosquito, Aédes aegypti (then known as Stegomyia fasciata). The fifth was the discovery by Graham in Syria that dengue fever is carried by mosquitoes. Then followed the discoveries of the carriage of certain spirochaete diseases by ticks, the carriage of a fatal disease of cattle in Africa by tsetse flies, and the carriage of sleeping sickness in Africa by tsetse flies. In all of these diseases, insects or ticks were found to be necessary secondary hosts of the parasitic organisms, but along with these dis- coveries were others in which insects were shown to be mechanical carriers of disease. Among these were the carriage of bubonic plague by fleas, typhoid or enteric fever by the house fly, typhus fever by lice, and so on. Practically all of these discoveries were made by medical men, but they indicated in a most striking way the value of entomological knowl- edge. They gave an entirely new aspect to the study of entomology, and it is not to be wondered at that the skilled entomologists at once turned their attention to the groups of insects that were involved. At first the medical men seemed to feel that entomology was after all a rather simple thing and that it would be easy for them to handle the whole field thus developed. But it has become obvious that to secure the best results men trained in economic entomology and broadly trained in the biology of insects are of the utmost importance. One way to control the disease is to control the insect that carries it ; hence, men trained in the control of insects are the ones to do the work to best advantage. The greater importance of insect-borne diseases in the Tropics was early recognized, and England’s great colonial possessions justified and in fact necessitated the founding of the great schools of tropical medicine at Liverpool and London. A similar school was founded later at Hamburg by the German Government, but the loss of her tropical possessions has minimized the later work at this institution. WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 467 The work at Liverpool was greatly facilitated by the employment of Robert Newstead as professor of entomology. That at Hamburg was strengthened by the addition of Dr. Erich Martini, a medical man trained in entomology, to the research staff. There was early estab- lished in Rio de Janerio the Oswaldo Cruz Institute, where two trained entomologists, Dr. Adolfo Lutz and Dr. Arturo Neiva, have been working. Departments of medical entomology have been established in several American colleges, notably at Harvard, at Cornell University, at the University of California, and at the University of Minnesota. Books have been written, periodicals have been started, and the enormous and promising field is rapidly being exploited. The effect of the discoveries on public health is very apparent. Thousands upon thousands of lives have already been saved as their result. The intensity of many great scourges has been relieved. One of them, yellow fever, has measurably become a thing of the past. The work in this direction regarding the Tropics has shown that tropical coun- tries may be inhabited safely by the white race, and what that means for the future of the world no one can now estimate. All over the United States even—a country which is, fortunately, for the most part situated in the healthiest of climates—life on the average is longer and happier because of the knowledge that has been gained regarding insect-borne diseases. But this book is historical. The history of medical entomology has been treated more or less fully in a number of different text-books and general volumes that have been published. The writer in 1921 wrote “A Fifty-Year Sketch History of Medical Entomology ” which was published in the Jubilee Volume of the American Public Health Association and reprinted, with some change, in the Smithsonian Report for 1921. So the main features of the history of the subject (which after all is so recent) have been covered in an accessible way. It will possibly be of interest, however, to add some facts from the personal experiences of the writer. Having had more or less of a medical education and being, there- fore, interested in medical subjects, this new development of ento- mology naturally appealed to me. And then chance led to the study of mosquitoes, house flies, and fleas in the preparation of a work on household insects in 1895 and 1896 before any of these insects had been implicated in the carriage of disease. In fact, mosquito remedies had been studied by us even before this. I had used kerosene in a water trough when a boy at Ithaca as early as 1867, and in the summer of 1892 conducted a series of careful experiments in the use of kero- sene on a mosquito-breeding pond, determining the spread qualities 468 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS vot, 84 and film durability of illuminating oil (Insect Life, Vol. 5, pp. 12-14). In the earlier volumes of Insect Life, drainage, and the use of kerosene and fish that feed on mosquito larvae were recommended. In 1896 the bulletin on insects of the household was published (Bulletin No. 4, new series, Division of Entomology, United States Department of Agriculture) containing chapters on mosquitoes, house flies, and fleas by the writer, and on bedbugs and cockroaches (as well as other domestic insects) by C. L. Marlatt. These chapters included original observations on life histories, and pointed out remedies... After the publication of the Insect Life articles, which received considerable newspaper publicity, there was much correspondence on the subject of mosquitoes, and this correspondence became even larger after Bulletin 4 was issued. The importance of Ross’ dis- coveries in India was early appreciated, and by 1899 this work and that of Grassi, Bignami, and Bastianelli in Italy were becoming well known through notices in the medical journals. In 1899, G. H. F. Nuttall’s large and extremely important paper entitled “On the Role of Insects, Arachnids, and Myriapods as Car- riers in the Spread of Bacterial and Parasitic Diseases of Man and Animals—A Critical and Historical Study ” was published as Volume 8 of the Johns Hopkins Hospital Reports. The term “ exhaustive research ” is overworked, but that is the sort of thing Nuttall did in preparing this paper. Its publication placed those of us who were prepared and anxious to enter the new and immensely important field in possession of a full and careful account not only of all previous work but of all published theories and guesses. It was far from being a mere compilation. Had it been only a compilation, the thorough- ness with which it was done would have made it invaluable. But it was a skilled study by a skilled parasitologist of the highest train- ing in which he digested and contrasted the views of previous authors, critically examined their statements and proofs, and introduced new statements gained from correspondence or from his own observations. I had already worked out and published three or four years before the full life history of Culex quinquefasciatus ( I called it C. pungens), and I was anxious above most things to study Anopheles, The genus Anopheles was known to the men who studied Diptera. It was de- scribed by Meigen as early as 1818, and a North American species—- Anopheles quadrimaculatus—was described by Thomas Say in 1824. His specimens came from the Northwest Territory. The type of Meigen’s genus was A. maculipennis. Say, in his description, states that his new species is closely allied to maculipennis. In 1823 Say had WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 469 described Culex punctipennis, which he said was common on the Mis- sissippi and that he had observed it in considerable numbers on the Eastern Shore of Maryland. Following his description of A. quad- rimaculatus a year later, he stated that he had been informed by Wiedemann that his Culex punctipennis was a true Anopheles. We had been collecting mosquitoes with much assiduity for some time, and were fortunate in having associated with us Mr. D. W. Coquillett, a very well informed dipterologist. In the late spring of 1goo, Mr. F. C. Pratt, of the office, brought in from his home across the Potomac in Virginia not far from Alexandria some living mos- quitoes that had been annoying him and which, he noticed, differed not only in appearance from those that he well knew but also in their humming note which, he said, was distinctly lower in the harmonic scale than that of the other mosquitoes. Mr. Coquillett recognized this form as Anopheles quadrimaculatus, and gravid females were confined in breeding-jars, and immediately deposited their eggs. Dur- ing the following weeks I kept these jars in my office and was able to follow the transformations of the species for a complete generation and have competent figures made of the different stages by Miss Sullivan. So great was the interest at that time in the malarial discoveries that I published at once an account of the transformations, with illus- trations, in the Scientific American for July 7. Earlier in the season, by invitation, I attended the annual meeting of the American Medical Association at Atlantic City, and gave a paper on malarial mosqui- toes before the section on the theory and practice of medicine, illus- trating it with lantern-slides. The paper excited much interest and an active discussion. Bringing together all the facts that had accumulated in the office and laboratories about mosquitoes, I prepared that summer Bulletin 25, new series, entitled “ Notes on the Mosquitoes of the United States: Giving Some Account of Their Structure and Biology, with Remarks on Remedies,” and this bulletin was published in a large edition to meet a very great popular demand. Fortunately it appeared in time to be used by Gorgas and LePrince in their clean-up of Habana. In the spring of 1901, following a year of much activity in work- ing, writing, and lecturing on the subject, I prepared the volume entitled “ Mosquitoes: How They Live; How They Carry Disease ; How They Are Classified; How They May Be Destroyed.” The volume was promptly published by McClure, Phillips & Co. of New York, and was widely read. Surgeon General Sternberg had a large 470 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 number of copies bought for the use of the Army surgeons, and there seems no doubt that it was published at a psychological moment. Just before this book was published the Century Magazine published an article of mine entitled “ Malaria and Certain Mosquitoes” (April, IQOl). There was one rather unfortunate episode connected with the pub- lication of the book. It had not been out two days before I was told by a friend that Dr. Walter Reed’s friends felt hurt by the way I had told the yellow-fever story. I had often talked with General Sternberg during the progress of the work of the Yellow Fever Commission in Habana. In fact, we met almost daily at the Cosmos Club, and he told me of his latest news from Reed or I told him of some letter that I had received from him. I thought that I was famii- iar with the situation, and stated in the book that the Commission had been appointed by General Sternberg and instructed by him to investigate the disease from the mosquito standpoint. It seems that this was not the case. Their instructions were general and not specific. The mosquito investigation was undertaken on Reed’s sole initiative. As a matter of fact, before going to Cuba for their work, Reed and Lazear spent some time in my office studying mosquitoes in order that they might most easily identify the old “Culex fasciatus” with which Carlos Finlay of Habana had done his earlier work; and during their investigations Reed frequently wrote me and sent me mosquitoes for examination. When I learned that my phraseology had been criticised, I at once called on Reed and found him in an office in the Army Medical Museum. He was rather solemn, though perfectly courteous and friendly, and when I had made my explanation he said “ That 1s how I thought it happened, but as a matter of fact I went into this line of work without instructions.” And he went on to tell me that he had been doing some work at Johns Hopkins University and had often talked with W. S. Thayer who had visited Italy and studied the Anopheles-malaria work there and had therefore become anxious to do experimental work with yellow fever and mosquitoes. I did the best I could under the circumstances, and wrote an article which was published in the American monthly Review of Reviews for August, 1901, and which was entitled “ Mosquitoes as Transmit- ters of Disease.” In this article I omitted all reference to instruc- tions from the Surgeon General’s Office and gave to Major Reed the whole credit for the inauguration of the work. I followed this with another article “ Yellow Fever and Mosquitoes,” in the Century Magazine for October, 1903. WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 471 This interest in moquitoes naturally brought me into correspon- dence with Ronald Ross. One of his characteristic early letters (dated Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, February 20, 1902) is of sufficient interest to quote: I am delighted to hear that you like my ‘‘ Mosquito Brigades.” However it is not a patch on your work, which I wish I had got hold of before. I sail for Sierra Leone in two days, and hope to find work progressing. We have forced the Gambia Colony to take up the same work, and by dint of constant driving, I think we are getting this old country to do something at last. It is however doubtless the example of Havana that has chiefly set them going. We never do anything here unless some other country takes it up first. Yes, I think that the Italian School requires a little medicine in the shape of plain speaking. I suppose that you have seen the last effort of Grassi and Noe, who pretend that they have found out about Filaria bancrofti. As a matter of fact they have hardly ever seen one, much less found out anything about them. Believe me, Yours very sincerely, Ronatp Ross. In the summer of 1904 Ross came to the United States to take part in the International Congress of Arts and Sciences which was held under the auspices of the St. Louis Exposition. I saw a great deal of him at that time, and he seized the opportunity on the trip to visit Panama and look into Gorgas’ great sanitary operations. In later years I visited him several times in Liverpool, saw him in 1912 at the 250th anniversary of the founding of the Royal Society, and in 1927 visited him at his home near London. Following Ross’ work in India, the Rt. Hon. Joseph Chamberlain requested the Royal Society of England to appoint a committee to cooperate with the officials of the Colonial Office in the investiga- tion of the causes of malaria and the possibility of controlling that scourge of tropical lands. Prof. E. Ray Lankester, of the British Museum of Natural History, was appointed a member of the com- mittee, and came to the conclusion that a most important service might be rendered in the preparation of a work describing the mos- quitoes of all parts of the world so as to enable medical men engaged in tracing connection between mosquitoes and human disease to iden- tify and speak with precision of the species implicated. As it hap- pened, the collection of mosquitoes in the British Museum of Natural History was small, and the result was that with the help of the Colonial Office, the Foreign Office, and the India Office, circulars were sent out to the colonies, and a very large series of mosquitoes from all parts of the world was secured. The committee then secured the services of Mr. F. V. Theobald, who plunged into the mono- graphic work. It is extraordinary that Mr. Theobald was able to do 472 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 such an enormous amount of work in so brief a time. Three vol- umes were published in 1901, one in 1903, one in 1907, and one in TQIO. Even earlier than the publication of Theobald’s first volume, there was issued in London privately a volume of 374 pages by Maj. George M. Giles entitled “A Handbook of the Gnats or Mosquitoes ” which had been brought together with much care but at the same time with much expedition to fill the need which was at once obvious. Major Giles made an extensive study of the literature and brought together in English descriptions of all of the mosquitoes which had been described down to that time. Later (in 1902) a second edition, rewritten and much enlarged, was published. Realizing that neither Theobald’s work nor that of Giles had prob- ably been based upon competent material from North and Central America and the West Indies, I applied in 1902 to the recently founded Carnegie Institution of Washington for a grant which should enable the preparation of a monograph to include all possible informa- tion concerning all the mosquitoes of the geographical regions just mentioned. The grant requested was made by the trustees of the Institution in January, 1903, and organization work was begun at once. It was at first expected that the monograph could be completed in three years, and the grants made by the Institution covered that period. At the expiration of the third year, however, it was found that the material was by no means complete. Too much reliance had been placed upon promises of volunteer observers, and important regions were for this reason not properly covered. The writer had the good fortune to have Dr. H. G. Dyar and Mr. Knab associate themselves with him in this work; and at the expiration of the three years we were not content to publish the material accumulated, since it was our earnest desire to make the work as complete as possible and as valuable as possible to biologists and to sanitarians. The inves- tigations were therefore continued during 1906, 1907 and 1908, partly by the help of funds appropriated to the United States Department of Agriculture by Congress for the investigation of insects affecting the health of man and animals, partly by the assistance of the Isthmian Canal Commission, partly by the help of volunteer observers in the West Indies and Central America, and partly at the expense of two of the authors (Doctor Dyar and Mr. Knab). Perhaps it was for the best that the first two volumes were not published until 1912, the third in 1915 and the fourth in 1917, but it seems rather sad to con- trast this delay with the promptness with which Mr. Theobald’s and Major Giles’ works. were put out. There can be no doubt, however, WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 473 that the monograph gained greatly by the delay and that it has been of much use. Activity in mosquito work has been so great, however, that it has become necessary to revise and extend the taxonomic por- tions, which fortunately has been done by Doctor Dyar and was pub- lished by the Carnegie Institution of Washington in a single large volume in May, 1928. In 1902, while in England, I spent a week-end with Professor Theobald at his charming home at Wye (Kent). We had an ex- tremely interesting time talking about mosquitoes and other things. We discussed, for example, the rather interesting question of au- thority in nomenclature. As it happens, he had sent me in correspon- dence his new generic name Stegomyia for the old Culex fasciatus— the yellow fever mosquito—and I had published it in my 1901 book, with excellent illustrations. His own volume did not appear until after mine, and he quite strenuously argued that the genus would be accredited to me and not to him. I am glad that it was not, since it is rather an awkward word, even if it has become implanted into (especially) medical literature. This reminds me that in June, 1912, when I entered the big hall of Burlington House in London, on the occasion of the celebration of the 250th anniversary of the founding of the Royal Society the first person I saw was Ross. I advanced exuberantly, but he put his hands behind him and said, “ I will not shake hands with you until you tell me that you chaps in Washington are not going to change the name of the yellow fever mosquito again.” I regretfully confessed that Dyar and Knab had recently decided that the name should be changed from calopus Meigen to aegypti Linnaeus ; whereupon he called out to Lt. Col. Alcock and Lt. Col. Skinner, “ Here, boys, lock the doors and send for a bobby; we have got this Washington man here and we will keep him until he promises that that name will not be changed.” The publication of the bulletin on household insects (Bulletin No. 4, 1896) interested us once more in the subject of the house fly. I was not surprised to find that the full life history of this com- monest of all insects had not been studied with much care. The information from Europe was scanty, and in this country Dr. A. S. Packard had described the rearing of one generation in 1873 at Salem, Massachusetts. When it came to the preparation of the manuscript for Bulletin 4 on household insects, it was obvious that the house fly should receive careful treatment, and therefore in 1895 rearing experiments were begun. It was unexpectedly found that it was rather a difficult insect to rear in confinement, and in fact we were unable to get it to lay its 31 474 _ SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS vot. 84 eggs on anything except fresh horse manure. Nevertheless, rearings in this substance were carried out during the summer, and the first rather full account of the species, since Packard, was published. Not content with this, however, further rearings were made during the following years, and experiments were made in the control of house- fly breeding in stables, since it had become our conviction that the horse stables, then so exceedingly numerous in cities, furnished the principal house-fly supply. While kerosene and chlorid of lime were found to be effective, especially prepared receptacles for manure attached to stables were found to be equally effective, and were recom- mended in Bulletin 10 (18908). It is interesting to note that in the 1896 bulletin, with the idea in mind that horse manure was by far the principal breeding place, the prediction was made that with the “lessening of the numbers of horses and horse stables consequent upon electric street railways and bicycles, and probably horseless carriages,” the time would come when house flies would cease to be a nuisance. It will be remembered that the horseless carriage at that time was an extremely rare object. While suggestions as to the carriage of disease by the house fly had been made at intervals for very many years, it was not until the short war between the United States and Spain, in 1898, that the prevalence of typhoid fever in concentration camps brought about the appointment of an Army typhoid commission which concluded that flies undoubtedly serve as carriers of the infection. This conclusion intensified interest in the house fly. Further experiments had shown that, under certain conditions, this insect will breed in a variety of fermenting organic material, including human excreta, and the con- stant possibility of infection of food supplies by contaminated house flies was obvious. I therefore planned an elaborate series of experi- ments which resulted in the publication in December, 1900, of a lengthy article entitled “A Contribution to the Study of the Insect Fauna of Human Excrement [With Especial Reference to the Spread of Typhoid Fever by Flies]”—Proceedings, Washington Academy of Sciences, Volume 2, pp. 541-604, 21 text figures, 2 plates. In the years following 1900, the house fly as a disease spreader received an enormous notoriety. Newspapers and other publications contained many articles on the subject. Women’s clubs and other citizens’ organizations in a gradually increasing number of towns and cities and health officials here and there took up the question seriously until it became evident that in the United States a very general crusade against the insect was under way. WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 475 I believe it was Doctor Krumbhaar, of Kansas, who coined the not very pleasant but very expressive slogan ‘‘ swat the fly,” and many communities offered prizes to the school children bringing in the great- est number of “ swatted ” flies, much to-the distress of some of the tender-hearted members of the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. These campaigns were of educative value although the destruction of the adult flies had probably only a slight effect on the fly population. Nevertheless, people came to know the danger of flies and to learn how and where they breed. During these years I published many articles on the subject and gave a number of public lectures, and other people were doing the same. In 1910 I prepared a book which was published by F. A. Stokes & Company, of New York, early in 1911 under the title “The House Fly, Disease Carrier; an Account of Its Dangerous Activities and the Means of Destroying It.” An edition of this book was published simultaneously by John Murray in London, and it was subsequently reprinted in a number of countries and in a number of different languages. England had in the meantime become exercised on the subject of this insect, although at no time in England have I known the house fly to abound as it did formerly almost everywhere in the United States. It happened, however, that only a very few years after our own disastrous experiences with the house fly as a carrier of typhoid in our concentration camps at the time of the Spanish War, England found herself at war in South Africa, and our own experience was repeated there. Enteric fever (as they call typhoid in England) was responsible for a large loss of life, and its carriage was obviously due in great part to flies. So at home the English began to study the question. The London County Council took it up through its health officers, and a number of small but very useful pamphlets were pub- lished. C. Gordon Hewitt, then a professor in the University of Manchester, began to study the house fly very carefully ; and Dr. G. S. Graham-Smith, of the University of Cambridge, in the “ Cambridge Public Health Series,” prepared and published two volumes on “ Flies in Relation to Disease.” When the success of anti-typhoid innoculation became evident shortly before we entered the World War, one of the great dangers from house flies seemed to have been removed, and there was appar- ently a slowing down of many of the fly campaigns. Other diseases, however, may be carried by flies, notably infantile diarrhea, and there was abundant justification for the continuance of the strenuous move- ment started in the early part of the century. 476 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 As indicated in a previous paragraph, owing to the extraordinary increase in the number of horseless vehicles and the consequent enormous decrease in the number of horses in cities and towns, the house fly problem is by no means as great as it was even a few years ago. The heaith departments of even small towns understand the best means for preventing the breeding of flies, and even in the country where horses are still used the problem is by no means as great as it was formerly. All this refers to the United States. In certain other countries the situation is different, and the house fly still exists in enormous numbers and still carries pathogenic organisms to exposed food supplies. Within a week (it is now May 14, 1928) I saw that the Italian Government had decided to institute mandatory regulations for the abolition of all possible breeding places. The Bureau of Entomology of the United States Department of Agriculture, having a large staff of trained entomologists who have immediate access to very large collections and libraries, has naturally been appealed to in numerous directions in this field of medical ento- mology and in veterinary entomology as well. The advantages of enlisting the services of this organization were so obvious that as early as 1904 the writer, as Chief of the Bureau, was made official Consulting Entomologist to the United States Public Health Service, and later Senior Entomologist with the grade of Senior Surgeon in the United States Public Health Service Reserve. Also, during the World War he was made chairman of the subcommittee on medical entomology of the National Research Council. The work of the Bureau against the cotton boll weevil in Texas in the early days brought the field men into contact with the extensive live stock industry, and they were appealed-to for information on several live stock problems in which insects were concerned. A little later certain important cotton men applied for information as to malaria under plantation conditions in the Mississippi delta. As a result, Congress made a small appropriation of $10,000 a year to the Bureau for “ investigation of insects affecting the health of man and animals.” Under this appropriation some work was carried on for a time on the Rocky Mountain spotted fever in Montana, and for many years important work on malaria and the control of its vector under large plantation conditions has been going on with headquarters at Mound, Louisiana. And at the same time investigations have been made on certain important live stock insects. For many years this work was done under the immediate direction of Dr. W. D. Hunter, who at the same time directed the work against southern field crop WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 477 insects. After his death in 1925 the health-insect work was taken over by Mr. F. C. Bishopp, the part relating to malaria remaining in charge of Dr. W. V. King who had succeeded the original appointee at Mound, Capt. D. L. Van Dine. Quite recently Dr. G. F. White and Dr. W. E. Dove of the Bureau have investigated the cause of creeping eruption in Florida, discov- ering that it is not due as had been supposed to a larval insect but to a nematode worm. All through this period the Bureau, in this work, has been in a some- what ambiguous position. Live stock work belongs to the Bureau of Animal Industry of the Department of Agriculture. All work relating to public health belongs to the United States Public Health Service. At the same time, it was felt that the Bureau could make important contributions, with its force specifically trained in economic ento- mology. The World War brought about great and immediate stimulus to the study of medical entomology, The necessity for the services of entomologists was appreciated by the warring nations in Europe at a considerably earlier date than in this country, but later the ento- mologists over here were drawn in and important work was carried on in cooperation with the office of the Surgeon General of the Army and with the Committee on Medicine of the National Research Coun- cil. A number of entomologists were drawn into the Army, largely for work in connection with the health of the troops in concentra- tion encampments on this side, and in several of these great con- centration camps entomologists were placed in entire charge of mat- ters of mosquito and fly control, under medical command or under sanitary engineers. I have gone into the matter of entomology and the war rather extensively in an article under this title published in the Scientific Monthly for February, 1919, and reprinted in the Smith. sonian Report for that year. Following the war, a number of articles and several books were published describing the details of procedure in malaria control at various points near the front and in concentration camps. A good example of these papers is a small book by Willoughby and Cassidy, of the British service, entitled “Antimalaria Work in Macedonia Among British Troops” (H. K. Lewis & Co., Ltd., London, 1919). It is interesting to note that in this book is stressed the importance of the choice of camp sites for the many troops not actually in the front line. This is an interesting contrast to the deliberate choice by the medical authorities of our own Army of many concentration camps in this country in notorious mosquito and malarious regions. 478 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VoL. 84 This was due probably to Surgeon General Gorgas’ confidence in his ability to control mosquito breeding, based upon his successful work in Habana and the Panama Canal. Entomology links up in a way with another medical matter of great importance. Early in the century, the danger in the use of bisulphide of carbon as a fumigant for stored grain to kill grain wee- vils of different kinds became so very apparent that it attracted the earnest attention of the firé insurance companies. The Bureau of Entomology, therefore, tried to get an efficient substitute which lacked this danger. Carbon tetrachlorid had been mentioned at that time in connection with fire-extinguisher work, and experiments were under- taken by F. H. Chittenden and C. H. Popenoe of the Bureau with the use of this substance against grain insects; and in IgII a bulle- tin was published (Bureau of Entomology No. 96, Part 4), under the authorship of Chittenden and Popenoe, in which the results of their experiments were shown to have justified the use of this chemi- cal in small compartments, although its expense would hardly justify its use in large buildings such as warehouses and mills. Later, Dr. Maurice C. Hall, of the Bureau of Animal Industry, used carbon tetrachlorid with effect against intestinal worms in ani- mals, and this chemical has since been used with admirable results against the hookworm in human beings. It is more effective than the old thymol and chenopodium and is infinitely more agreeable as a dose. It has been used on mass populations in several tropical coun- tries, notably perhaps in Fiji. Dr. S. M. Lambert, in the Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene (May 15, 1928), says of Hall’s discovery, “ I reckon this as the greatest contribution to tropical medi- cine after the work of Ross on malaria and the work of Reed e¢ al. and Gorgas on yellow fever.” Thus the entomologists were indirectly concerned in another great contribution to human health. From the rather rambling way in which we have treated medical entomology in this section, it is perfectly evident that the section is not to be considered as a definite history of medical entomology, but rather as a somewhat lengthy contribution to such a history. As previously stated, I have already published a paper entitled “A Fifty- Year Sketch History of Medical Entomology ” which appeared in “A Half Century of Public Health—Jubilee Historical Volume of the American Public Health Association”? (New York, 1921), pages 412-438. This was reprinted by the Smithsonian Institution in its Annual Report for 1921, pages 565-586, with ten portrait plates WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 479 (the plates do not appear in the Public Health volume). That paper brought the subject down to 1920, and it is comparatively easy to trace the subsequent advances and discoveries with the aid of several very competent review journals, especially the Review of Applied Entomology, Series B, Medical and Veterinary (London), and the Tropical Diseases Bulletin (London). There is, however, one thing that I might touch upon to advan- tage since it fits in somewhat with personal experience. In September, 1927, I paid a visit to Sir Ronald Ross in England. He had been very ill (a stroke of some kind), but was very talkative and interesting. He vigorously inveighed against Grassi and his claim of originality in the discovery of the carriage of human malaria by Anopheles. As is happens, Grassi had talked to me with equal vigor in support of his claim, the last time I saw him in Rome, in 1925. Possibly there will always be followers of Grassi, but it seems to me that the Ross claim is perfectly just and that the Nobel Prize Committee was entirely sound when it awarded the prize to Ross, The story has quite recently been told in a very definite way by Dr. G. Car- michael Low in his presidential address before the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine on October 18, 1929 (see The Lancet, No- vember 2, 1929, page 927). The review in The Lancet relates to that part of Doctor Low’s address that deals with Sir Patrick Manson, but includes a long section on ‘“‘ Malaria and Mosquitoes.” It seems that Ross had studied malaria in Bangalore in 1889 but had failed. to confirm Laveran’s discovery of the malaria para- sites. In 1894, visiting Manson, he was shown the parasite. In Au- gust, 1897, Ross, in Secunderabad, found, in the stomachs of “ spotted- winged mosquitoes’ bred from larvae and fed on a patient with malaria crescents in the blood, certain cells containing pigment gran- ules indistinguishable from those seen in malaria parasites; and a month later he found such cells in another species of Anopheles— also bred from larvae and fed on malarial blood. Very unfortunately, Ross was then sent to another part of India, but in January of 1898, by Manson’s intercession, he was sent to Calcutta to continue his malaria research.” Human malaria was rare in Calcutta; so he turned to the malaria of birds, and found plenty of material. He then traced the cycle of the parasite’s development in a Culex mosquito, Manson wrote Ross July 3, 1899, the following significant words: ‘“ Many thanks for the generous way you have recognized my small part in the malaria business. It is more than I deserved. My only claim is that in a measure I discovered you.” (See Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene, February I, 1930, p. 38). 480 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VoL. 84 and his results were announced in July, 1898. As Doctor Low puts it, “ But the ‘mugwumps’ had not finished with Ross.” He was sent away, this time to Assam, to study kala-azar, and while he was gone Grassi, Bignami, and Bastianelli in Rome verified the discovery for human malaria and Anopheles. Doctor Low concludes, ‘‘ This would not have been done at the time but for Ross’ work—the Italian re- searches followed his, and were not independent of them.” Ross tells the story very effectively and rather at length in the first chapter of his big book “ The Prevention of Malaria ”’ (London, John Murray, 1910). This book carries 330 pages by Ross himself, followed by 330 more by special contributors, the latter part being accompanied by many plates. The writer furnished one of these con- tributions at Ross’ request. PERSONALIA I have been very fortunate in meeting very many men who have accomplished things in medical entomology, not only in the United States but in other countries. I knew Dr. A. F. A. King very well. When he was filled with the idea of the relation between malaria and mosquitoes in the early 1880’s and before he read his extended paper on this subject before the Philosophical Society of Washington (afterwards published in the Popular Science Monthly) he came down to the entomological offices in the Department of Agriculture and discussed the question at some length with Professor Riley and myself. I am sorry to say that we gave him no encouragement. The idea appeared to us to be altogether too farfetched. It 1s worth not- ing also (I have referred to it in my Sketch History of Medical Ento- mology) that when he read his paper before the Philosophical Soci- ety, although the late Dr. John S. Billings and Dr. Robert Fletcher, both very keen medical men, were there, there was no helpful dis- cussion. Doctor King was a successful gynecologist and obstetrician who lectured at the Medical College of the Columbian University (now George Washington University) and acted as Registrar of the College. Then too, I knew Theobald Smith. We were at Cornell together. While he was engaged upon his investigation of the cause of the cattle-tick disease we occasionally discussed the matter. His demon- strations (1889-1892) of intraglobular parasites in Texas fever and their transmission by the second generation of cattle tick was revolu- tionary in its character, but his results do not seem to have been known by Laveran or by Ross at the times when their discoveries were announced. This happens to have been the only work in con- nection with medical entomology that was done by Doctor Smith, but WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 481 his later accomplishments at the Harvard Medical College and at the Rockefeller Institution branch at Princeton have placed his name very high in the annals of medical research. I have had the pleasure of knowing W. G. MacCallum who in 1889 published a paper in which the true function of the flagella in a cer- tain stage of certain malarial organisms was first shown. Years later I became well acquainted with Walter Reed, James Carroll, and Jesse W. Lazear. They came to the entomological offices in the Department of Agriculture to study mosquitoes before they went to Cuba where their immortal discoveries were made. During the progress of the Cuban work Walter Reed wrote me frequently for information about mosquito questions. Henry R. Carter, whose investigations had a strong bearing on the results reached by the Army Commission later became a friend and a frequent visitor to the Bureau of Entomology. Dr. J. H. White, of the United States Public Health Service, who had charge of the work in New Orleans during the epidemic of 1905 and who succeeded in stifling the epi- demic in a most dramatic and spectacular manner by his intensive work against the yellow fever mosquito, was then well known to me. I visited New Orleans toward the close of his work, and since that time we have often talked over this and similar matters. The well known parasitologists, Dr. C. W. Stiles and Dr. H. B. Ward, are old and warm friends. Prof. R. W. Doane of Stanford University, who wrote the earliest American book on insects and disease, is also an old and valued friend. D. L. Van Dine, who began the first anti-mosquito work in Honolulu and who has since carried on some extremely fine malaria investigations for the Bureau of Entomology in Louisi- ana, has been a friend and associate for many years. The late Gen- eral Gorgas and his right-hand sanitary engineer J. A. LePrince came to the Bureau of Entomology before they left for Panama, and corresponded with us for many years. One of the last letters that Gen- eral Gorgas wrote before his lamented death in London was addressed to me in answer to one I had written to him inquiring as to the truth of the statement that he endorsed Doctor Campbell’s ideas concerning bat roosts and malaria. His reply was to the effect that he did not endorse them. In his successful clean-up of Habana and his later work in Panama the remedial measures against mosquitoes published by the United States Bureau of Entomology in 1898 were used as a basis with later elaborations and details suggested by the fertile brain of Mr. LePrince. This assistance is acknowledged by Mr. LePrince in the book that he published later, in collaboration with Dr. A. J. Orenstein, entitled “ Mosquito Control in Panama” (New York, 482 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VoL, 84 1916). The present excellent teachers and investigators, William A. Riley of the University of Minnesota, Robert Matheson of Cornell University, and W. B. Herms of the University of California, are warm friends of mine. I know Doctor Cort of Johns Hopkins, and wish that I knew him better. W. V. King, in charge of the impor- tant malaria work at Mound, Louisiana, of course, is a colleague and associate. I have been almost equally fortunate in my association with English investigators. Sir Ronald Ross (then Major Ross) came to the United States in December, 1903, to attend the meeting of the Ameri- can Association for the Advancement of Science held in December 1893—January 1894. He came as an invited guest, and read a paper dealing largely with the mathematics of malaria, which aroused much interest. We became friends at once, and I visited him in Liverpool at the School of Tropical Medicine two years later. During this visit we talked at length concerning mosquito work, and Prof. Rubert Boyce (afterwards Sir Rubert) discussed with us the advisability of recommending Dr. James Carroll, of the United States Army Yellow Fever Commission, as a candidate for the next Nobel Prize. I think Walter Reed would undoubtedly have received the prize had he lived, and, since Carroll was the only surviving American member of the Commission, it was thought that possibly the trustees of the Nobel fund should be urged to award the prize to him. It was decided, however, that Reed was without question the great moving spirit in the investigation, and that Carroll was only one of three willing sub- ordinates, and that, although he was connected with the great dis- covery, he was not responsible for it. The intimacy of this discus- sion and the charming courtesy of Ross and Boyce, who in fact went with me to the steamer and stood on the dock waving farewells as the great vessel moved off, are delightful memories. In 1912, attending the 250th anniversary of the Royal Society as a delegate of the Wash- ington Academy of Sciences, I met Ross again. In the intervening years he had been knighted and had received many other honors, but these had not altered his frank, open, friendly disposition or his delightful courtesy. From that time on, Sir Ronald was much in the limelight, and, unfortunately, felt obliged to do much controversial writing. He fought very vigorously the claims of the Italian school and vigorously defended his own rights in his great discovery. However, the Ross Gate was dedicated in Calcutta, the Ross Institute near London was founded, and his name was known and honored all over the world. In 1927 he had a stroke, from which he had measurably recovered aa WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 483 when I called on him September 20th of that year in company with Malcolm E. MacGregor. We found him in a charming apartment at Putney Heath, sitting up and waiting for us. He looked strong and well colored, but his left side was nearly helpless. His speech was a shade thick, but he talked constantly and wanted us to drive with him in the park. He talked of the Ross Institute and wanted us to visit it. Tle showed us a big cabinet in which he had, systematically filed and indexed, all of the papers relating to his malaria work. He swore about the Italians, spoke of Grassi as a damned liar, but said that Celli was a good fellow and a gentleman. He spoke of De Kruiff’s book, “ The Microbe Hunters,” with profanity. He talked much about the sale of his cabinet. He seemed nervous, and ran on from one subject to another, forgetting many names. He constantly re- verted to the subject of tea and to the proposed drive and to Grassi and to his cabinet of documents. He gave us each a copy of his latest paper on the Grassi claims. He said he was going down to Gibraltar to visit his son-in-law, and also said that he would like to be invited to the International Congress of Entomology to occur in August, 1928." He told us that his stroke was not caused by a bursting capillary but by a chalky stoppage of a blood vessel in his brain. He seemed pleased at this. He said that he could see the chalky deposits in some of his veins. On the whole it was a painful experience to see this splendid fellow whom I had known in his prime in 1904, 1907, and again in 1912, and with whom I had often corresponded (I wrote a chapter in his first big book on malaria), under this cloud. When Ross left St. Louis early in tg04 he returned to New York and then sailed for Panama where he studied with interest the work of Gorgas in the Canal Zone. The following year (1905) Rubert Boyce, accompanied by Viscount Mountmorris, came to the United States. This was the year of the last New Orleans outbreak of yellow fever. Professor Boyce went down there and assisted as a volunteer in the work carried on so wonderfully by Dr. J. H. White. Subsequently he wrote a very interesting book entitled ‘“ Mosquito or Man?” in the course of which he gives a most admirable account ° of the New Orleans epidemic, printing the proclamations and notices that were issued in the course of the campaign, and closing his account with these quotable words: ‘Thus an outbreak which in previous years would have developed into the usual awful epidemic was in a few weeks at a comparatively small cost completely stopped, and that in the face of a dense population, open drains, and a sultry summer.” (The italics are mine.) * An invitation was sent to him later, but there was no reply. 484 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VoL. 84 I have known for many years Prof. Robert Newstead (a dear and very able man), formerly the Entomologist of the Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, and while visiting him have met most of the workers there, including J. W. W. Stephens and Warrington York. In London, I have known Lt. Col. A. Alcock, formerly head of the London School of Tropical Medicine, for whom I have a great admiration. And I have the same admiration for Dr. (now Sir) Andrew Balfour, formerly of the Wellcome Research Laboratories and now head of the London School. Sir Andrew is a very remark- able man—an investigator of the highest rank, an admirable adminis- trator, a delightful public speaker and a very charming writer. It is not very well known among his friends that he is the Andrew Balfour who has written several mighty good novels. I accused him of this authorship once, and he replied that he had in former years, in his leisure moments, written some stories. I think it must have been good practice for him, for his public addresses and his occasional essays are models. One has just reached me. It is entitled “ Health and Empire” and is a printing of “‘ The Hastings Popular Lecture ” delivered in the great hall of the British Medical Association on March 12, 1930. Malcolm E. MacGregor, at one time a Carnegie Student in this country, and who married a charming American wife over here, has been connected with the Wellcome Laboratories since his return to England, and I count him one of my best friends. He did an admirable piece of work in his malaria investigation in Mauritius, and was one of the first writers to direct attention to the physical and chemical condition of mosquito breeding waters. Of course I know Maj. IX, E. Austen and F. W. Edwards, distinguished dipterists of the British Museum of Natural History. Major Austen’s study of the tsetse flies has been of great help in the African work against the sleeping sickness; and F. W. Edwards, with Dr. H. G. Dyar of Washington, has helped to keep the scientific world informed and sane on the subject of mosquito taxonomy. Then too, I had the pleasure of knowing well Sir Arthur Shipley, one of the most delightful men I have met, keenly and charmingly humorous and of great ability as an investigator, writer and lecturer. As head of Christ College in Cambridge, his beautiful chambers were the evening resort of the choice spirits at the Darwin Centenary in 1908. During the World War, Shipley came to the United States at the head of a delegation of Englishmen for the avowed purpose of addressing representative audiences in principal cities concerning European conditions and the English attitude. They came to Wash- WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD | 485 ington in 1917 I think; and that was the last time I saw the dear, fine man, as he died not long afterward. Once in London, in inviting me to a dinner at his club, Shipley appended to his note of invitation the following : You may not have noticed that the hookworm has been discovered in Cornwall. The discovery suggests these lines— If Cornish saints worked miracles The bishop of this diocese Would quickly rid the Cornish mines Of ankylostomiasis. I shall always remember my meetings with Raphael Blanchard, who wrote the first French book on mosquitoes following Ross’ epochal discovery. Blanchard was a great worker and a very impres- sive man. He was a great teacher. He was an orator and a most delightful companion. In his big mosquito book he used many of my illustrations, and I am very proud that he did so. It would be diffi- cult to exaggerate Blanchard’s personal charm, and yet he had, if not enemies, still scientific workers who apparently did not like him and his work. I found that in Paris some of the workers at the Insti- tut Pasteur apparently did not approve of Blanchard. At all events, they did not seem to be on speaking terms. There was indeed some- thing of the spectacular about him. It was not his fault ; he was big, handsome and eloquent, and full of energy, and I imagine that one element in whatever antagonism existed might have been due to a slight admixture of envy and jealousy, perhaps unappreciated by those who were influenced by it. He was a great traveler (for a Frenchman), and he was a linguist (that too is rare among French scientific men). I remember meeting him once in Paris, and he invited me to dine with him at a famous restaurant. He had recently learned the English language, and, out of consideration for my indifferent French, he had invited a fine Frenchman and his wife, both of whom spoke English, to dine with us. During the dinner, Blanchard was called to the telephone, and while he was gone his French friend said, ““Oh, Professeur Blanchard is a great voyageur; he has been in Russie, in Algerie, in Allemagne, and he speaks all the language, even the language of the Btats-Unis, and he has visit your country!” At this moment Blanchard returned from the telephone, and his friend said, ‘‘ Oh, Professeur Blanchard, tell us of your visite to the Etats- Unis.” To this Blanchard replied, “I will not, but I will tell you of my retour to France. We are arrive at Havre; we descend from the ship; we arrive at the quai. Behold, there was a railway train. I regard. I say to myself, ‘Can it be posseeble that that is a railway train? No, it is not posseeble; it is a toy for the children.’ We enter 486 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS vot. 84 that train. We proceed into la France. I regard through the fenétre. I say, ‘ Is it posseeble that this is agriculture?’ I reply to myself, ‘ No, it is not posseeble ; it is a gigantesque checker-board.’ We are arrive in Paris. I enter a taxi. Whisht! J’étais chez moi. I had sought that Paris was a great city; it is not. Where are the skyscrapers? They do not exist. In going to America I have lost part of my supreme admiration for my city and my country.” He had learned his English the year before at the Berlitz School in anticipation of a visit to London to attend the congress on sleep- ing sickness and the Seventh International Congress of Zoology held in Boston in the summer of 1907. As he told me when I met him on the Channel steamer in the spring of that year, ‘I have studied the English in the School Berlitz, and they tell me I now speak it par faitement.” Blanchard’s student and successor, Dr. E. Brumpt, the author of a famous “ Precis de Parasitologie,” I first met at Roscoff in 1912. He had a laboratory there and was studying various phases of parasitism. He also is a man of many attractions and a worker of the Blanchard type. Etienne Roubaud is a younger man who for many years has had his laboratory at the Institut Pasteur. I met him first in Bouvier’s lab- oratory in the Museum of Natural History. He was then studying black flies (Simulidae). Later he became famous through his writ- ings and investigations, and I have since talked with him in his Pasteur laboratory and have corresponded with him on many subjects connected with medical entomology. A most interesting experience with the Institut Pasteur occurred many years ago. The brothers Sergent in Algeria were much con- cerned with a trypanosome disease of camels, carried by Tabanid flies. They wrote to me in Washington, inquiring whether there was in the United States an effective natural enemy of Tabanids. I wrote them at once about the giant wasp known as Monedula carolina, and, largely through the help of Wilmon Newell, then in Louisiana, a large nesting ground of the wasp was discovered on the shore of the Gulf of Mexico ; pupae were collected ; photographs were taken show- ing the physical conditions of the region and the exposure, and the pupae were sent under refrigeration to the Institut Pasteur at Paris. The Sergents had them conveyed by hand from Paris to Algeria and placed in the sand under conditions as closely resembling those in their original Louisiana habitat as possible. During this operation I visited the Institut and had a formal interview with Roux, the Direc- tor, Mesnil, and several of the other experts. I took an interpreter WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 487 with me, but found that my somewhat halting French was sufficient, and explained to a deeply interested group the habits of the wasp in the southern United States and as much of its life history as we knew. I think that was my first visit to the Pasteur Institute, and at that time I had the pleasure of meeting Metschnikoff and especially A. Laveran, the discoverer of the causative organism of malaria. Laveran was at that time a scholarly looking man in his late sixties (1 should say); with a full but well cared for white beard. We talked at some length on two or more occasions. On one of them he asked me whether we had some one in Washington who could identify bit- ing Diptera from Indo China. I replied that we had, but said, “ Why don’t you send them across the Channel to Major Austen, who has recently published an admirable work on the tsetse flies?’ Laveran pointed to the book on his shelf, shrugged his shoulders, and changed the subject. I did not quite understand, but imagined that it might have been one way of saying without words something about “ La perfide Albion.” But I did him an injustice, as I discovered a week later. Then I happened to be in Major Austen’s room in the Brit- ish Museum, and I told him the story. “Oh,” he said, ‘‘ Doctor lLaveran! There is a box I had from him more than a year ago, and I have not had time to open it!” Later Laveran sent his French Indies flies to Washington and they were studied by Coquillett. I have had very interesting talks with Celli, Grassi, Tiraboschi, and Negri in Rome, and knew A. Caccini after he came to the United States, but I will tell my story about these men in later paragraphs. I shall never forget a two hours’ journey from the Campagna to Rome over the Appian Way in an ox-cart with Celli, Doctor Vail of Philadelphia, and Doctor Ivantcheff of Bulgaria, a journey which Celli called “ our triumphant entry into Rome.’ This was in 1910, and the Appian Way and the ox-cart did not suggest a modern cement road and a six-cylinder automobile—far from it. Dr. Erich Martini, of the Hamburg Tropical Disease Laboratory, in 1913 spent part of the summer in Washington studying mosqui- toes and other disease-bearing insects. He was a very able and very interesting young man. During the four years cf the war he was very busy over there, but since the war has resumed his investiga- tion work, has traveled in southeastern Europe, and has written many good papers. I ran across him one day in 1927 in Major Austen’s office at the British Museum. Later I met him and talked with him at the International Congress of Zoology in Budapest in September, 1927; and, fortunately, in August, 1928, he was able to visit the United States again on the occasion of the Fourth International Con- 488 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS — VOL. 84 gress of Entomology. He remarked to me that it would seem as though the Hamburg Institute for Tropical Medical Research had no longer a very good excuse for existence, since Germany had lost all of her tropical possessions. I did not know Dr. A. Hase, of the Biologische Reichsanstalt in Berlin, until 1927 when I ¢alled on him in Berlin and talked over some questions relating to the parasites of injurious insects. I met him later the same year at the Zoological Congress at Budapest. The one big piece of work relating to medical entomology that was done by Doctor Hase was his lengthy and very careful study of the body- louse carried on during the war and after the louse had been proved to be an agent in the carriage of typhus fever and the modified form of typhus known as trench fever. Hase’s is the best study of this insect that has been made. He is a well trained man, an enthusiastic worker, fertile in ideas and in the invention of new methods. In the early part of the century I had the pleasure of meeting Dr. Carlos Finlay of Habana, the man who first conceived the idea that yellow fever is carried by the mosquito then known as Culex fasciatus and now known as Aédes aegypti. Doctor Finlay spoke little English. He was a man of medium height, well filled figure, a little past middle age, rather slow and deliberative in his manner, and obviously a thinker. The occasion was one of the Pan American Medical Congresses held in Washington. In attendance at this con- gress also was Dr. Juan Guiteras, a Cuban educated in the States and before the Spanish War a lecturer at the Medical College of the University of Pennsylvania. In 1904, returning by steamer from Mexico, I visited Habana and called on Doctor Guiteras at the Las Animas Hospital. It will be remembered that Doctor Guiteras took up the work with mosquitoes and yellow fever the year after the Army Yellow Fever Commission left Cuba, and carried on a series of experiments confirmatory of the conclusions reached by Reed, Car- roll, and Lazear. As it happened, the steamer stopping at Habana ahead of ours in 1904 had come from Tampico, and a case of yellow fever had been found on board. Instead of becoming excited over the finding, Doctor Guiteras had the patient taken from the vessel and carried into the heart of Habana and put in the hospital, realizing that, if protected from mosquitoes, the disease could not be conveyed. He showed me the patient (a man of 40), and showed me his abdo- men especially, to prove that there were none of the roseola spots of typhoid, and, since both the room and the bed were screened, we had no fear whatever of contagion—a striking early effect of the mos- quito transfer demonstration. It is perhaps worthy of remark that WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 489 Guiteras never quite believed Noguchi’s announcement years later of his discovery of the causative organism of yellow fever. And it may also be worth mention that when I wrote a review of Guiteras’ paper (published in Habana) and submitted it to two scientific jour- nals in the United States, publication was refused. The Oswaldo Cruz Institute in Rio de Janeiro has a very high repu- tation in medical circles. It was one of the first administrative organi- zations to accept and act upon the mosquito discoveries in regard te yellow fever ; and the energetic work inspired by this organization rid Rio of yellow fever in an amazingly short time. In 1909 Dr. Oswaldo Cruz himself visited the United States and spent some time in Wash- ington. Dyar, Knab, and I were engaged at that time in the prepa- ration of the Carnegie monograph of mosquitoes, and Cruz, a hand- some and delightful man (apparently in his forties), was much im- pressed by what he saw here. He told me that the principal assis- tants in the Institute of which he was the head were given traveling fellowships from time to time and that most of them had gone to Europe to study, but that he wanted the next one to come to Wash- ington. So in 1910, Dr. Arturo Neiva came on traveling leave and spent some months here. While he was here he wrote for us an impor- tant part of the chapter on malaria in the first volume of “ The Mos- quitoes of North and Central America and the West Indies.” The section headed “The Malarial Organisms” (pages 188-194) was written by him. Although it was not signed by him, its authorship is stated on page 6 of the introduction. In 1912 Dr. A. Goeldi, a Swiss long resident in Brazil, visited us. I met him later in the same year at Oxford. He was author of a large work, published in 1905, on the mosquitoes of Para. Dr. A. Lutz, very well known for his important work at Sao Paulo and later at Rio de Janeiro and who had long been a correspondent, visited Washington in 1927. In former years Doctor Lutz, in addition to his other important investigations, carried on in Brazil important work with insect-borne diseases and was the first author to take up the subject of the importance of the forest malaria, about which there has since been considerable contro- versy arising no doubt largely from the rather widely differing habits of the different species of Anopheles and due possibly also to the presence in forests of other mammalian hosts of the disease.’ * The Oswaldo Cruz Institute in Rio de Janeiro has continued to do wonderful work in medical entomology. It issues a publication called “ Memorias de Insti- tuto Oswaldo Cruz,” now in its 23rd volume, and each part is‘filled with im- portant articles, many of which relate to medical entomology, written by a number of younger investigators of high standing. Dr. A. da Costa Lima, 32 490 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 I shall never forget my very pleasant acquaintance with Dr. Eduardo Liceaga, the President of the Superior Board of Health of Mexico and the personal physician to President Porfirio Diaz. Tak- ing advantage of a trip to Mexico in 1902, I made an effort to study the geographic distribution of the yellow fever mosquito in that Republic. I called on Doctor Liceaga in the City of Mexico, knowing that he had accepted the conclusions of the United States Army Yel- low Fever Commission and had instituted antimosquito work through- out at least a part of the Republic. I was cordially received and given letters of introduction. Doctor Liceaga told me with great pride of the organization he had brought about, and mentioned the number of inspectors he had appointed at different points. I was especially inter- ested in the progress of the yellow fever mosquito from Vera Cruz at sea level, through various towns, higher and higher quite to the City of Mexico itself at an elevation of over 8,000 feet. Doctor Liceaga told me especially of his numerous inspectors at Orizaba and Cordoba (towns on the railroad between Vera Cruz and the City of Mexico). My subsequent visits to these towns indicated that, while these inspectors were probably on the pay roll, they were not func- tioning ; although I did meet a physician in Cordoba who told me that he had once seen a lone Indian with a sign on his cap who carried a quart can of kerosene! Later Doctor Liceaga attended the Pan American Medical Congress at Washington at which I had the plea- sure of first meeting Finlay and Guiteras. And by no means must I omit mention of Dr. C. Bonne and his charming wife, Dr. C. Bonne-Wepster, whose great volume on the mosquitoes of Surinam was published in Amsterdam in 1925. They began to correspond with us in 1916, and in 1919 came to Washington and spent many happy weeks with us. They were young, enthusiastic, and did admirable work. Doctor Bonne’s high standing in matters of general sanitation gave the work a medical authority that has been lacking in many mosquito papers. From Washington, they went to England and studied in the British Museum, and then returned to mentioned in our earlier section on Brazil, has done some admirable work under this Institute, and Dr. Cesar Pinto has become known as a worker of great merit. In the current number of the Memorias (that for March, 1930) each of these writers has an article. Just as this book goes to the printer I have received a large, two-volume work by Doctor Pinto entitled (translated) “Arthropod Parasites and Trans- mitters of Disease.” The two volumes are admirably illustrated and cover 845 pages. Unfamiliar as I am with the Portuguese language, it seems to me that these two volumes cover the field more thoroughly and more satisfactorily than any work on the same subject hitherto published. WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 491 Surinam for two years, eventually going to Amsterdam where Doctor Bonne took the post of Director of the Laboratory of the Dutch Cancer Research Institute. It is too bad that he has left medical ento- mology, but I notice that recent papers by Dr. E. W. Walch on mosquito matters relating to the Dutch East Indies have had the advantage of cooperation with Doctor Bonne-Wepster. Doctor Walch himself was in Washington in 1924. In medical entomology, of course, the Italians have taken a very considerable part. Battista Grassi, a man of broad training, educated in part in Germany, and married to a German wife, and who had written extensively upon many entomological topics, claimed to have ’ antedated Ronald Ross in the discovery that human malaria is carried by Anopheles. The bitter controversy that ensued was carried on vehemently until Grassi’s death in 1925. Even in 1927, when I called on Ross in England, he could not speak of Grassi without profanity. “ Celli,” he said, “ was a gentleman, but Grassi was a damned pirate.” In his earlier writings Ross used to include Celli in his denunciations, and in fact the whole Italian school. In rg1o0, however, in an expedition with Celli on the Roman campagna, I asked him, rather ironically, whether he had heard recently from his “‘ friend Ross,” and he replied that they were now good friends and that he (Celli) had contributed a chapter to Ross’ big book, “ The Prevention of Malaria,” which was published in that year. The economic development of Italy had been so hampered for so many years by the prevalence of malaria in the southern half of the peninsula that the disease had been more diligently studied there than in any other part of the world. The Italian medical literature on the subject was very great. A number of medical men, including Marchia- fava, Celli, Bastianelli, and Bignami, who afterwards became noted in the medico-entomological work, had been assiduously studying malaria and publishing for many years before Anopheles was dis- covered to be the vector, and especially in the interval between the finding of the causative organism of the disease by Laveran in 1880 and the eventful year 1898 when the mosquito relation was discovered by Ross. But Grassi, who was primarily a zoologist, did not really enter the field until 1898 when his “ Relations Between Malaria and Certain Insects ”’ was published, but from that time on his papers were frequent, often in collaboration with Bignami and Bastianell1. I have taken the stand that the award of the Nobel Prize to Ross must have been preceded by so careful an examination of the evidence of priority in the great discovery that the scientific world might well consider the question as settled ; but as late as 1923, when calling on 492 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 Grassi in Rome, he handed me printed documents which he said conclusively proved that Ross deserves credit only as the discoverer of the vectors of sparrow malaria. Celli, during the latter part of his life, was fully absorbed in the malaria fight. He was a man of charming personality and of much influence. He was largely responsible for the formation of the anti- malaria association (La Societa per gli Studii della Malaria) and the publications issued under its auspices,’ and was instrumental in raising a large sum of money, to which the King himself contributed largely from his-private funds, for large-scale work on the Campagna. These facts were recognized, not only by the scientific men of Italy, but were apparently perfectly well known to the peasants on the Campagna. I visited the Campagna in the summer of 1902, and saw the distressing conditions that existed there before the elaborate “ boni- fication” (as Celli called it) began. Eight years later I visited the region again, this time in Celli’s company. The change that had occurred was marvelous. At the first visit the population was scanty ; the men and women were most of them obviously chronically malari- ous ; their complexions were yellow and their eyes were dull; the half- clad children were sluggish, many of them with greatly enlarged spleen which produced the appearance known to physicians as “ rat-belly ” ; the agriculture was primitive, and the whole land looked impoverished and half deserted. On the second visit the contrast was marvelous. The population had increased very greatly ; the men were vigorous; the women had rosy cheeks ; the children were as active and as healthy as the children of the mountainous regions of Lombardy; capital had evidently gone into the region; great barns and factories were being erected; the land was covered with crops, principally lucerne at that time (my visit was in May, and they were already cutting their third crop). Perhaps what pleased me most was to see the respect and the genuine love that the peasants showed Celli. It was a Sunday, and most of them had just returned from church. The children gathered around Celli in numbers, and he told them stories that evidently were of great interest to them. This extraordinary result had been brought about, first, by the screening of all habitations on the Campagna, and second, by the virtual quininization of the whole population, on the theory that if the ‘I contributed two papers to the Atti of this Society at Celli’s request (see Vols. 11 and 12). WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY HOWARD 493 parasitic organisms could be destroyed in the humans there would be no malaria for the Anopheles to carry. So the price of quinine was not only greatly reduced by the State, but it was given without price to the indigent, and it was coated with sugared chocolate to make it attractive to small children. Of course the mosquitoes still bit them, but they were for the most part uninfected. I asked Celli whether it would not be much simpler to fight the mosquito population by the drainage or treatment of breeding places, as we did in America. He replied that they had not the financial means to undertake such measures on a large scale and that the character of the soil was such as to make proper drainage practically impossible. As a matter of fact, of course, both the Romans and the Etruscans, as Celli had shown in his admirable book on malaria, had carried on extensive drainage operations on the Campagna, but these did not go far enough to obliterate the many collections of water in which mosquitoes breed. I noticed that they were breeding freely in the ditches. Then too, of course, large-scale operations on the Campagna would have been hampered by the prevalence of the absentee ownership of the greater part of the country, the owners not only being absent but apparently for the most part indifferent as to the health of the peasants. For example, in 1923 I went by automobile with Grassi from Rome to Fiumacino where he had been working for a long time with the help of a very able assistant, Signor Negri, on the problem of malaria reduction. On the property that we visited there were large and apparently useless lakes, the grass-grown margins of which afforded perfect protection to Anopheles larvae. Grassi had introduced fish, and talked to me about the possible use of Paris green which had at that time just come into prominence as the result of the work of Roubaud of France and Barber and Hayne of the United States, and also of W. V. King. Of course, I at once asked him why the useless lakes were not drained ; and he replied that the absentee owner would not go to the expense. It was on this trip that Grassi showed me the interesting mating of Anopheles at nightfall about certain pigsties on the estate. He had been the first person to observe this mating, in spite of the efforts of many men in many countries for many years. Grassi’s work, especially in this region, had been systematic, and he showed me a mass of records that had accumulated and which undoubtedly contained many facts of value. His especial interest in this region continued until the time of his death. Since 1924, the 494 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 International Health Board has stationed a representative (Dr. L. W. Hackett) in Rome, and it is possible that, through this incentive, work may be carried forward on a larger scale. The Italian Society for the Study of Malaria was founded in July, 1898, by Celli, G. Fortunati and L. Franchetti, and from that time on its activities were extraordinary and the results of its work, as we have already pointed out, were marvelous. The work, as was obviously necessary, covered not only the medical aspects but also the socio- logical conditions and studies of everything connected with mos- quitoes, including particularly control measures. The earliest and almost the most extensive experiments that have been made with fumigants and larvicides (in other words, measures for destroying both adults and the early stages) were made by Italian workers under the auspices of this society. Celli and O. Casagrandi, as early as 1899, published an important paper entitled (translated) ‘On the Destruc- tion of Mosquitoes—A Contribution to the Study of Culicidal Sub- stances,” and in 1900 C. Fermi and S. Lumbao published an important paper entitled (translated) “ The Freeing of a City from Mosqui- toes’’; and the same authors published further important papers. A competent entomologist, E. Ficalbi, who had written about mosqui- toes before they were proved to be carriers of malaria, published in 1899 and 1901 important papers upon the Italian Culicids. Grassi was a man of much personal force and of high distinction in his own country as well as abroad. He was not only an accom- plished entomologist known for his investigations in many directions, but also a broad zoologist, and was greatly interested in the medical sciences. That he was made a Senator of the kingdom for life, shows the esteem in which he was held in Italy. I have already referred to his German education and his German wife.*° In 1910, when I first called on him, we soon found that my Italian was not good enough for close conversation. He could not speak English, and when I tried him in French he asked me whether I understood German, and our conversation was carried on in that language. In appearance he was typically German; he had all of the German mannerisms. He would not talk mosquitoes, although I had called especially for that purpose, but he insisted on talking about the Phylloxeras of the oak, a subject upon which he was at work at the time. So the interview was not at all satisfactory. Later during that visit to Rome I met Celli and Tira- boschi, both of whom spoke French fluently; and on subsequent visits to Italy before the war I consulted with Celli rather than with Grassi. WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 495 After the war, however, when I visited Italy in 1920, Celli had died, and, meeting Silvestri by appointment in Rome, he insisted that we should look up Grassi, for whom he had great admiration. In fact, he brought Grassi to my hotel at eight o’clock in the morning. To my surprise, I found that Grassi had entirely dropped his Germanisms and had become apparently a most polite, most suave and almost typical Frenchman ; his French was fluent, his gestures were French, and it was hard for me to realize that I was talking to an Italian and particularly to the Germanized Italian I had known ten years previ- ously. Evidently this was one of the minor results of the war. I enjoyed my visit with Grassi greatly. And again, in 1923, we had an extremely cordial and very instructive visit. He urged me in 1923 to translate into English one of his manuscripts relating to his important work at Fiumacino and to secure its publication in the United States or in England. But he never sent me the manuscript, and he died in the spring of 1925 before I reached Italy that year. Grassi was greatly opposed to the project of erecting bat-roosts on the Campagna which had been urged by an Italian General of Engi- neers who had been in the United States as a liaison officer during the war and, stationed for a while at one of the great concentration .camps in Texas, had fallen in with Dr. A. R. Campbell and had become impressed by his bat-roost scheme. This officer tried to push the plan in Italy; and Grassi told me that Mussolini had consulted him con- cerning the merits of the idea. Grassi said that he told “ I] Duce” that bats were more abundant in the most malarious regions of Italy than elsewhere. A story that | am fond of telling relates to the visit I made with Grassi to Fiumacino in 1923. We were returning to Rome just before dusk in an automobile. We passed a farm where a peasant and his wife were working in the field within hailing distance from the road. Grassi stopped the car and called out, “ Hola, Guiseppe.” The man dropped his hoe, and instead of coming down to the road turned abruptly and went into the house some distance to the right ; but the woman came down to the road and shook hands with Grassi, who turned to me and remarked, “ Guiseppe is a great anarchist.” Where- upon, I supposed that he had gone into the house to avoid meeting the Senator. Presently, however, the man came out and approached the car, with a bottle of white wine under one arm and three eggs in the other hand. He gave the eggs to the Senator, who took them after a murmured protest, and he offered me a drink of the wine. The Senator, all amiability, remarked, “ You know Guiseppe is a great anarchist ; and the gentleman here, Guiseppe, is an American.” To 496 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VoL. 84 which I replied, “ Yes, and we have no anarchists in America.’ “ On the contrary,” said Guiseppe, “ I have a cousin who lives in Chicago, who is a much fiercer anarchist than I am.” As we drove away through the dusk the Senator told me that Guiseppe had been arrested the previous winter for a stabbing affray and had been put in prison. He himself had supported the family while its head was incarcerated, and had used his influence to secure Guiseppe’s discharge. This made the peasant eternally grateful, and the gift of the three eggs was an incident of every time the Senator passed the place. He was endeavoring in this way to pay his debt in part. — Evidently Grassi had taken a leaf out of Celli’s book and had succeeded in endearing himself to the peasant population of the Campagna in much the same way that Celli had done before the war. I took a photograph of him standing with his arm around a peasant woman. That is a good indication of his change of attitude. Grassi entirely lost the sight of one eye at some date between 1910 and 1920, and wore very dark spectacles the latter part of his life. Addendum.—lI have referred to Dr. J. H. White and my visit to him when he was closing up the work against the last yellow fever outbreak in New Orleans in 1905. This work of Doctor White and of the Public Health Service has a great historical value since it was the first epidemic of yellow fever to threaten the United States seri- ously after the demonstration by Reed, Carroll, and Lazear in Cuba. The New Orleans work was such a triumphant success that every detail connected with it should be recorded and preserved. During that summer I was in Europe, and returned to the United States about the first of September. On landing at New York, I heard for the first time of the yellow fever situation in New Orleans and learned of the death there of my old friend, Archbishop Chappelle, whom I had formerly known when he was in charge of Saint Matthews Church in Washington. I finished my work in Washington and started for the Southwest. I had work to do in Texas, and knew that if I entered New Orleans I could not go further into Texas to do the boll weevil work I had to do. So I went by way of St. Louis, and entered New Orleans from Texas. I have found some brief notes that I dictated on my: return to Washington, and feel sure that they are of sufficient interest to print. The City of New Orleans, when I entered it on the night of November 6, 1905, presented its usual appearance—the main streets thronged with people going to the theatre and the cafés full of diners. I was assured that this had been the case for some weeks previously, and that in fact there had been practically no WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 497 abnormal interruption of the city’s activities during the progress of the epidemic, except such as resulted from the taking off of certain trains from the railroads leaving the- city. I had been assured by letters from New Orleans experts as early as September 27 that mosquitoes had virtually been exterminated in the city, yet, after I registered at the St. Charles Hotel and went to the telegraph stand to send a despatch, two mosquitces buzzed about my ear and were rec- ognized as Culex pipiens. On retiring, I found that the room was screened with very perfect window screens, and there was a tight-fitting door-screen as well, outside the ordinary door. The porter stated that the hotel had been fumigated thoroughly in August and that no mosquitoes had been found in bedrooms since. Therefore I did not let down my mosquito bar, but was awakened in the middle ot the night by the buzzing and the bites of two or more mosquitoes. Burning Pyrethrum, I stupefied them, and found in the morning that they were Culex pipiens. During the three days in New Orleans I saw but one specimen of Stegomyia calopus, and that was in the office of the President of Tulane University on the morning of November 8, about Io o’clock. I readily recognized it as it flew before my face. I talked with Dr. H. A. Veazie, who reiterated all of the statements made to me in recent correspondence from him, and on the morning of the 8th I took part in the fumigation of a room containing about 1200 feet of space with the new Culicide, composed of equal parts of carbolic acid and camphor. The fumes are rather agreeable at first, but soon become so strong as to almost stifle one. Dr. J. H. White, in charge of the Public Health and Marine Hospital Service operations in New Orleans from August 12 to date, Dr. Rupert Blue, Doctor Richardson, and six or seven other assistant surgeons in the Service were present. A number of specimens of Culex pipiens were flying in the room; there were two boxes, each about a foot long, with gauze sides, containing a half dozen or more mosquitoes each; and a large tube of two inches diameter and possibly a foot and a half in length, the mouth of which was covered with mosquito bar, and which lay on its side on the mantel-piece, and contained several specimens of Culex pipiens. About six ounces of the mixture were volatilized by heat, and the room was kept closed, but without any effort to artificially stop cracks, for exactly one hour. On reentering and airing the room, all mosquitoes were found to be dead, and a cockroach was also found dead on the floor, having come up from between the cracks. The vapor is lighter than air, and the mosquitoes in the room, unnoticed on entrance, soon after fumiga- tion sought the lower air strata of the room, gradually descending toward the floor and towards the windows which were on one side of the room only. Sheets of manila paper had been spread before each window, and on these sheets, at the end of the hour, were all of the mosquitoes to be found in the room. No observations were made to determine whether the mosquitoes revived as happens with Pyrethrum fumigation. I took photographs of the house in which the first case of yellow fever was found in the early summer, and of the first emergency hospital, showing in both cases the method of sealing doors and windows with strips of paper pasted over the cracks; also of St. Philip Street, Chartres Street, and other similar streets in the Italian and French quarters, indicating the character of the residences and shops; also of the street gutters in many of which the water was flowing rather rapidly and in others remained stagnant. 498 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VoL. 84 I had several conversations with men who had served through the summer campaign, and made a few notes of facts which they told me, as follows: In late August or about the first of September, a committee was appointed by Doctor White, consisting of Prof. Rubert Boyce of the Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Dr. Quitman Kohnke, the Health Officer of New Orleans, Doctors Currie and Perkins of the Public Health and Marine-Hospital Service, and Dr. H. A. Veazie of New Orleans. This committee conducted numerous experiments, and it is hoped that a report will be published. Water closet tanks were found to be abundant breeding places of the yellow fever mosquito, and Doctor White suggests that it will be an easy matter to cover these tanks with wire gauze, and that such an arrangement should be enforced. They have been found to breed in the accumulation of water in the drain- traps of stationary washstands. The roof-gutters of New Orleans were especially noticed on a number of occasions, where they sagged, to contain large numbers of breeding mosquitoes. Another interesting place where they were found breeding was in the urns in the cemeteries. Doctor Richardson stated that at Laredo in 1903 they were found breeding in the lye barrels where ashes were mixed with water for the purpose of making lye. Doctor Richardson also noticed them in the same year in the holy-water fonts at Laredo. In New Orleans they were also noticed in the holy-water fonts. Here, however, they substituted wet sponges. It may be stated by the way that a man describing himself as a “ practical Catholic” has invented, in Boston, a covered holy-water font for the purpose of preventing the spread of disease. In New Orleans it is the custom to keep wine cool by placing it in the pools of water accumulating under the water tanks. In these pools the yellow fever mosquito was found to breed extensively. In some houses in the low quarter of the city water was found to accumulate under the houses in places where it could not well be reached. In these saturated solutions of copper sulphate were thrown with a hose as a spray, and proved reasonably efficacious. « THE PRACTICAL USE OF PREDATORY AND PARASITIC INSECTS From very early times, writers have pointed out that some insects feed upon others, and of course this was early a matter of common observation among farmers, gardeners, and fruit-growers. Enlight- ened gardeners, for example, very many years ago realized that the little black and red beetles known as ladybirds were their friends, and in early works on gardening it was advised that these little beetles be placed upon plants, such as rose bushes, that were infested by plant lice. The study of parasitic and predatory insects is old. Silvestri has pointed out that Aldrovandi in 1602 was the first to notice the exit of the larvae of Apanteles glomeratus from the common cabbage caterpillar, and that Vallisnieri (1661-1730) was apparently the first WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY HOWARD 499 to discover the real nature of this phenomenon and to realize the exis- tence of true parasitic insects. Réaumur and De Geer, those great stu- dents of the life histories of living insects, worked out the biology of a number of parasites ; and in the last quarter of the eighteenth century and the first half of the nineteenth many descriptive works on para- sites were published. An early significant suggestion was made by the German writer, G. L. Hartig, -who in 1827, in a paper giving instructions for the destruction of “ kienraupen,” recommended the construction of large rearing cages for parasitized caterpillars in order to rear the para- sites in large quantities to be liberated later. One of the first writers to call especial attention to the great value of parasitic insects to man was Ratzeburg, since he added to his great work on forest insects a large volume on the parasites of forest insects (Die Ichneumonen der Forstinsekten). While he thoroughly understood the part played by parasites in the control of forest in- sects, he did not believe that this control could be hastened by man. An early bit of practical work was done by Boisgiraud of France, who in 1840 collected numbers of the Carabid beetle, Calosoma syco- phanta, and placed them upon poplars along a road in Poitiers, where they destroyed the caterpillars of the gipsy moth. The same observer destroyed earwigs in his own garden by placing with them a preda- tory rove beetle (Staphylinus olens). The work of Rondani in Italy, a systematic writer on parasitic insects, was important, since it contained tables giving the host rela- tions of different species. His work was published between 1840 and 1860. Silvestri has called attention to the fact that, in the dispute which sprang up in Italy about 1868 as to the usefulness of insec- tivorous birds to agriculture, Dr. T. Bellenghi was referring to Ron- dani when he spoke in 1872 the prophetic words ‘‘ Entomological parasitism has a future, and in it more than in anything else Italian agriculture must put its faith.” Several authors between 1872 and 1882 made practical suggestions as to several ways of permitting the escape of parasitic insects before the destruction of their hosts, notably Riley in the case of the rascal leaf-crumpler (Mineola indigenella) ; the French writer, F. Decaux, in regard to the parasites of the apple bud weevil ; Comstock with the parasites of the imported cabbage worm; Riley with the bag-worm, and later Berlese and Silvestri in Italy and Marchal in France. Suggestions were made regarding the transfer of parasites from one part of a given country to another part of the same country, by LeBaron in 1872, Decaux in the same year, by Riley in 1870, and by 500 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VoL. 84 the writer in 1880; and an important experiment of this kind was car- ried on by Webster in 1906 with parasites of the Hessian fly in the United States. The transfer of beneficial insects from one country to another, however, while suggested by Asa Fitch with regard to the European parasites of the wheat midge as early as 1854, was not acted upon successfully with other parasites until much later. In 1873 Planchon, with the help of Riley, introduced into France an American predatory mite (Tyroglyphus phylloxerae) which feeds upon the grapevine Phylloxera in the United States. The mite is said to have become established in France, but has accomplished no appreciable results in the way of checking the famous grapevine pest. In 1874 attempts were made to send certain parasites of plant-lice from England to New Zealand, but without results of value, although Coccinella undecimpunctata is said to have become established. In 1883 Riley imported the Braconid, Apanteles glomeratus, into the United States from Europe where it is an important enemy of the imported cabbage worm. This species in course of time estab- lished itself in the United States and has proved to be a valuable help to truck growers. These experiments, however, were completely overshadowed by the remarkable success of the importation of Novius cardinalis, a Coccinellid beetle, or ladybird, from Australia into California in 1889. The orange and lemon groves of California had for some years been threatened with extinction by the injurious work of the fluted or cottony cushion scale (Icerya purchasi). This scale was known to have been imported accidentally from Australia or from New Zea- land. Entomologists and fruit-growers had become disheartened by the expense of treating the trees with competent washes. Riley had found that, although the Icerya occurred in Australia, it was not injurious over there ; whereas in New Zealand, where it also occurred, it was abundant and injurious. He concluded that Australia was the original home of the species and that it was held in check there by some parasite or natural enemy. In 1887 he received specimens of an Australian parasite—a Dipterous insect which was described by Williston as Lestophonus iceryae. Riley then wished at once to go to Australia and to secure abundant material of this Dipterous para- site and bring it to California. Congress, however, had recently added a provision to the bill making appropriations to the Department of Agriculture which forbids foreign travel on the part of employees of the Department. It is no secret that this provision was aimed at Professor Riley in order to stop his journeys to Europe at Govern- WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—-HOW ARD 501 ment expense. Riley, however, was not to be deterred by this fact, and he puzzled over the situation until he found a solution. It chanced that in the following year an international exposition was to be held at Melbourne, and Congress had appropriated money to the State Department to finance representation by the United States. Hon. Frank McCoppin, formerly postmaster of San Francisco, had been appointed head of the American commission to the exposition, and Riley interviewed the State Department and requested that one of his assistants be sent to Australia, at the expense of the exposition fund, for the purpose of securing the parasites. McCoppin, being a Californian, favored the scheme, but made the proviso that at the same time Riley should send another assistant to make a report on the agricultural features of the exposition. So Albert Koebele was sent to get the parasites, and F. M. Webster to make the report on agriculture. The results of Koebele’s work are now known everywhere. The story has become a classic in applied entomology and horticulture. He sent over the Lestophonus, which, however, did not prove a suc- cess; but he also found the famous little ladybird Novius cardinalis (then called Vedalia cardinalis), forwarded colonies to Los Angeles, where another Department of Agriculture assistant, D. W. Coquil- lett, had made preparations to receive and colonize the natural ene- mies of the scale. Between November 30, 1889, and January 24, 1890, Coquillett had received 139 of the little beetles in three send- ings—28 on November 30, 44 on December 29, and 57 on January 24. As early as April 12, Coquillett had begun sending out colonies, so rapidly did the species breed. By June 12, 11,000 specimens had been sent out to 208 orchardists, and by the end of the year the scale insect was practically no longer a factor to be considered in the culti- vation of oranges and lemons in California. The following season it practically disappeared, and since that time it has never been a factor in California horticulture. Once in a while it begins to increase in numbers at some point, but the Australian ladybirds are always kept breeding by the State Board of Horticulture, and such outbreaks are reduced speedily. The effect of this experiment on the horticultural world was ex- traordinary. It aroused great hope, especially in California, that the keynote to insect warfare had been sounded, and many of the leading men in the State were so enthusiastic that they advocated the instant stopping of all other kinds of warfare against insects. As we have elsewhere shown, the progress of economic entomology in Cali- 502 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 fornia was retarded for many years by the fact that so many people in power and so many growers dropped their faith in any other method. Novius cardinalis proved to be a very extraordinary insect in many ways. It was taken from California to New Zealand, and again, to Portugal, and South Africa, and Egypt, and the Hawaiian Islands, and Italy, and Syria, France, Uruguay, all points into which the fluted scale had been established; and everywhere the introduction met the same speedy and perfect success. It is interesting to note, however, that in one case, where it was sent with a supply of the fluted scales for food to Florida in the hope that it would feed upon other scale insects, the only effect of the introduction was to establish the fluted scales, which had been sent for food, in this new locality. This, however, had only a temporary effect, but it well illustrates the danger of careless introduction work. It is unfortunate that Riley did not get the credit he deserves in connection with this great experiment. The Californian, Mr. McCop- pin, insisted until his death that the glory belonged to him and to Koebele, and not to Riley. Many others have given the whole credit to Koebele, and in fact international work with parasites and preda- tors has been called, in certain German publications, the Koebele method. The truth of the matter is, however, that the idea was con- ceived by Riley ; that by logical reasoning and expert correspondence he identified Australia as the country to which to send for natural enemies ; that by his ingenuity and insistence he was able to exchange Webster’s services as agricultural reporter for the trip at Government expense by Koebele; and he was responsible for the selection of Koebele, a wonderful field man, for the important work he did so well. California went wild over this success. Koebele was sent again to Australia, and also to New Zealand and the Fiji Islands, still holding his post as an employee of the United States Department of Agricul- ture, but at the expense of the California State Board of Horticul- ture. In 1893 he resigned from the Federal Department and was employed by the State Board of Horticulture of California for still another trip to Australia and other Pacific islands. He sent home a large number of beneficial insects, nearly all of them, however, Coc- cinellids. Several of these species were established in California and are still living in different parts of the State, but the overwhelming success of the importation of Novius cardinalis was not repeated, except possibly in the case of Cryptolaemus montrousiert Muls., an insect which feeds upon mealy-bugs. This latter insect has proved WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 503 very successful in California for many years, and has been sent from that State to many different countries, in each case proving to be a great aid in mealy-bug control. Koebele left California in the early nineties, and was employed by the newly established Hawaiian Repub- lic for which he traveled extensively in Pacific and Oriental regions and found a number of valuable insects which were introduced with good effect into the islands. When Koebele left California the authorities of that State did not propose by any means to stop the work that he had begun for them. They must have realized that he was a very unusual observer and a remarkable collector and at the same time an entomologist of very broad knowledge. These considerations, however, did not seem to influence them in the appointment of his successor. Apparently they thought that the work could be done with equal effect by any man of sufficient energy and perseverance. Therefore they started George Compere, a man of considerable orchard experience but who was a virtual tyro in entomology, on various trips to various parts of the world in search of parasites of various insects. I have not a word to say against Compere’s honesty of purpose, skill as a traveler, ex- traordinary energy and great perseverance, but his lack of entomo- logical knowledge led him into many mistakes and demonstrated that work of this kind is extremely complicated and must be undertaken with the greatest care and only by the most skilled men. It is only by the barest chance that California escaped the introduction and establishment of more than one injurious insect and more than one secondary parasite through the wholesale sending of forms as car- ried on by Compere for some years. The State built an insectary at Sacramento, but for years no thoroughly competent entomologist was placed in charge of it. Surely one very injurious hyperparasite was liberated during this period, and probably more than one. Several times he sent home forms as parasites which proved not to be para- sites at all. Once he sent, with enthusiastic commendations, a para- site which he said came from the black scale but which later proved to be a parasite of a predatory Lepidopterous larva living under masses of the scale. Later for a time he was employed jointly by the colony of West Australia and the State of California, and it was some years before his influence in such matters dwindled. He then became an inspector at the port of San Francisco under the quarantine depart- ment of the State Department of Agriculture and did excellent work in that capacity. It is unfortunate that in his earlier work his energy and deyotion were not based upon a broad and accurate knowledge ef the creatures with which he was working. The extent and char- 504 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 acter of his early travelings justify Paul Marchal’s expression “ L’incroyable Cdyssey de Monsieur Compere.” Since those days, by degrees, the study of the natural enemies of imported insect pests has become a part of the program of every project based on imported pests in the United States as well as in many other countries. Work of this sort has been carried on since 1905, and on a very large scale, with the European and Japanese natural enemies of the gipsy moth and the brown-tail moth, and with a very considerable degree of success. Many species have been acclimatized in America and have undoubtedly been of great assis- tance in the control of these species and in the prevention of their spread. Similar efforts, also on a large scale, have been made in con- nection with the work against the Japanese beetle and the European corn borer. Laboratories have been established in Japan for the work against the first-named species, and in the south of France for the work against the corn borer. Many species have been carefully stud- ied and introduced, and several of them have become established, with results as yet not carefully estimated but which cannot fail to be of benefit. Some rather extraordinary things have been done with other para- sites. Hawaii had made great success of this kind of work, and it is safe to say that very great losses have been saved to the sugar cane industry over there by the importation of parasites of the sugar cane leaf-hopper and of one of the cane borers. Similar successes have been had with other insects in Hawaii. There, however, conditions are particulariy favorable. There is an equable, subtropical climate, without any great change of seasons. Introduced forms, both of animals and plants, take hold readily and flourish. Most of the pests have been introduced, and when their natural enemies are also intro- duced the latter flourish to a remarkable degree at the expense of the former. One of the most successful experiments of this nature, that may be said to have proved its value completely, was the introduction of a minute parasite, Prospaltella berlesei Howard, from the United States into Italy to destroy a noxious scale insect of the mulberry (Diaspis pentagona Targ.) which threatened the extinction of the white mulberry in Italy and therefore the extinction of silk culture in that country. From a single sending from Washington, Berlese and his assistants bred the original stock of these parasites which have since 1906 virtually accomplished the control of the scale. Aphelinus mali, another little Hymenopterous parasite, less than a millimeter in length, which lays its eggs upon the aboveground WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY TIOWARD 505 forms of the woolly root-louse of the apple, has been taken from the United States to France and distributed, either from the United States or from France, to England, Switzerland, Germany, Italy, New Zealand, Australia, South Africa, Uruguay, Argentina, and Chile, with somewhat varying results but on the whole admirable ones. In New Zealand and Australia especially, this species has spread rapidly and has controlled the injurious forms. And there are many other instances. A great mass of work has been done. Very many species have been tried out. Many importa- tions have been unsuccessful. Some of these have been unsuccessful because of faulty methods of one kind or another. Others again have been successful in spite of what we are coming to know are faulty methods. The whole subject of insect parasitism is being studied by a rapidly increasing number of well trained men. The early work of Fiske in his especial studies of the parasitism of the gipsy moth and the brown-tail moth, as displayed in Bulletin No. 91, new series, of the Bureau of Entomology, have been followed by the close and philo- sophical study of the phenomena of insect parasitism especially as relates to the parasites of the European corn borer by W. R. Thomp- son; and some of the men in Hawaii, notably Pemberton and Willard, have developed points of much practical importance. We are finding that the question is one which is infinitely more complicated than we had supposed 20 years ago, and that the early views of the Cali- fornians, based upor a single and very exceptional instance, were in fact nothing less than absurd. Especial studies must be made in every individual case, and these studies must be made by highly trained ex- perts. There are always many dangers to be studied and avoided ; and, while certain general principles hold, there are many facts connected with each individual species which must be understood. I do not waver in my unfailing belief in the basic value of the principle of biological control, but my outlook becomes more or less confused when I consider the complications. There can be no doubt, however, that the subject deserves the most careful study in every case, and there can be no doubt that many times great practical results may be reached by the importation of the parasites of accidentally imported injurious forms. In 1925 an important paper was published in Paris with the title “L’ Importation Pour les Besoins de l’Agriculture d’Insects Entomo- phages Etrangers.” It was written by Dr. B. Trouvelot, of the Station entomologique de Paris, and was published in the Revue de Zoologie agricole et appliquée, Nos. 6 and 7, 1925. In this paper the author has listed chronologically international efforts in parasite introduction, 33 506 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 and has given comments relative to their success or failure. I rather wish that it were possible here to follow out this plan to date. Trouvelot’s list was by no means complete for the period it covered, and since the date of its publication many new efforts have been made by many nations, and, as in the case of Aphelinus mali, the same para- site has been taken with success to many different countries and to many distinct life zones. Further, experience has shown that reports of success are frequently premature, while reports of failure are very often premature ; and there are recorded already cases where parasites have recovered 20 and even 23 or 24 years after introduction, all hope of success having in the meanwhile been abandoned. Many articles discussing various aspects of natural control have been published in recent years. Some of them look at the subject from an ecological standpoint, as in fact is very necessary, while W. R. Thompson actually goes into the mathematics of the subject. The simple, broad idea that the writer had when he began to bring parasites of the gipsy moth from Europe to America, that to reproduce in this country so far as possible the parasite complex that exists in Europe would be the desirable thing to do, and that to do it was simply to bring over in number the parasitized stages of the host insect, is now referred to condescendingly by recent workers as “ the old method,” but it is still being followed in the main in much of the big importation work that is going on. I think it will be well to publish here the chronological list as printed by Trouvelot. It is, put into English, as follows: TrouveLot’s List (1925) 1873 Introduction into France of Tyroglyphus phylloxerae Riley. American parasite of Phylloxera—No appreciable results. 1874 Introduction of Coccinella 11-punctata from England into New Zealand.— Acclimatized, but no results. 1883 Introduction of Apanteles glomeratus from Europe to America to fight cabbage worm.—Good result. 1889 Importation of Novius into California from Australia—Splendid result. Afterwards constantly successful in Italy, Portugal,. Florida, Cape Colony, Hawaii, Egypt, France, etc. 1891 Importatiom into America of European parasites of the Hessian fly.— One species recovered. 1892 Attempted introduction to California of Thalpochares cocciphaga, an Australian Lepidopterous parasite of wax scales——No result. 1892 to 1902. Trials of the same nature with the European Erastria scitula— No result. 1892 Attempted introduction into the United States of a Clerid (Thanasimus formicarius), European predator on the larvae of bark-beetles——The species not recovered. WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 507 1893 Introduction into California of Rhizobius ventralis from Australia to kill black scale—Good result. 1893 Introduction from Australia into California of Cryptolaemus montrou- siert for mealy-bugs.——Work repeated with equal success in France. 1896 Introduction from Ceylon to Hawaii of Coccinella repanda against sugar cane aphids; and of Chalcis obscurata from China against Omiodes blackbourni, a Lepidopteron attacking bananas and palms. 1899 Sending from Australia to Hawaii of numerous parasites against wax scales and sugar cane leaf-hopper.—Several of them were very impor- tant and established themselves. 1900. Importation into California from Cape of Good Hope of Scutellista cyanea against the wax scale—Appeared to be lost, but was found after 20 years. 1902. Introduction from China into the United States of Chilocorus against the San Jose scale—Good success. 1904 Importation from Spain into California of Calliephialtes messor, parasite of codling moth.—Successful but of doubtful value. 1905 Importation into Italy of different Coccinellids and Hymenopterous para- sites of the white scale of the mulberry from North America, South Africa and Japan.—Good result. 1905 Attempted acclimatization in America of European parasites, especially Tetrastichus xanthomelaenae, of the elm beetle—Species has not been recovered, 1907. Importation into Australia of South American parasites of the fruit-fly— No success. 1907. Attempted introduction into South Africa of American parasites of ticks. 1908 Attempted introduction into Algeria of a burrowing wasp (Monedula) capturing gadflies. 1910 Attempted acclimatization in Dutch East Indies of American parasites of different tobacco caterpillars, 19It Search in India for various parasites of Aleyrodes and their attempted introduction into Florida, 1913 Attempted introduction into France of American parasites of Polychrosis. Work STILL IN Process Importation into United States of the European and Asiatic parasites of the brown-tail moth. Introduction into Hawaii of parasites of fruit-flies. Importation into Europe of the North African and East African parasites of the olive fly. Acclimatization in different regions of Aphelinus mali. Introduction into America of the European parasites of the alfalfa weevil. Introduction into America of the European parasites of the European corn borer. Utilization in France of the California parasites of the potato tuber-moth. Search in Europe for the parasites of the pear leaf midge for sending to New Zealand. Importation into Italy of the East African parasites of Chrysomphalus minor. Search in Japan, Korea, China, India, and Russia for the parasites of the Japanese beetle, for the United States. 508 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS voL. 84 Importation into the United States of Mexican parasites of the bean weevil. Introduction into Mauritius of the Madagascar parasites of Oryctes living on sugar cane. Introduction into France of Doryphorophaga, a fly parasite of the Colorado potato beetle. Doctor Trouvelot, in the preparation of this list, had to examine many publications. He was fortunate, however, in having three papers that gave rather full summaries of work that had been done previously. Paul Marchal, for example, had published in the Annals of the National Agronomical Institute, Series 2, Volume 6, pp. 281 to 354 (1907), a very full paper entitled (translated) “ Utilization of Auxiliary Entomophagous Insects in the Struggle Against Insects ’ Injurious to Agriculture.” This large paper I translated in full, and the English text was published in the Popular Science Monthly, Volume 72, pp. 352 to 370 and 406 to 419, April and May, 1908. Another very full account that goes into much detail concerning the work that had been done on introduced parasites down to that time was published in the Bulletin of the Italian Agricultural Society, Volume 14, No. 8, April 30, 1909, by Prof. F. Silvestri. It was entitled ‘““ Remarks on the Present Condition of Agricultural Ento- mology in the United States of North America and What Italian Agriculture Can Learn.” This report, covering 65 closely printed pages, was done in large part into English in Hawaii and published in the August, 1909, number of the Hawaiian Forester and Agri- culturist, pp. 287 to 336. In the Yearbook of the United States Department of Agriculture for 1916 I published, on pages 273-288, an illustrated article entitled “The Practical Use of Insect Enemies of Injurious Insects,” in which I mentioned a number of experiments that had been carried out subsequent to the publication of the admirable summaries by Marchal and by Berlese. Many articles have been written in many languages on the general subject. It has, in fact, attracted universal attention. — In the following pages I will consider this question of parasite importation under the different countries (arranged alphabetically ) and, under each country, chronologically. Many things will necessarily be omitted, which is a pity, since every attempt, even the blatantly unsuccessful ones, should be listed if a thoroughly competent study of the whole subject is to be made. There are undoubtedly many of which there exists no printed record. It would be interesting if we could secure data concerning as many as possible of George Compere’s WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 509 importations into California, and also concerning his importations into Western Australia. It may be mentioned here that after Com- pere’s announced finding of fruit-fly parasites in Brazil and their importation into Australia, Lounsbury and Fuller, from South Africa, went to Brazil and failed to substantiate the published statements made by Compere. There are also other matters which cannot be mentioned in such a consideration as we shall be able to give the matter, but what follows is offered as a necessarily incomplete historical effort. ALGERIA The introduction of a predatory wasp into Algeria in 1908 is men- tioned in Doctor Trouvelot’s list ; but something more should be said about it, as it is really of a unique character. There was, and perhaps still is, a disease of the dromedary camels in Algeria, then the principal beasts of burden in that country. The Pasteur Institute of Paris, having a branch at Algiers, investigated the disease and found it to be caused by a Spirochaete. The brothers Sergent, in charge of the investigation, discovered that this Spirochaete was carried by certain gadflies. They further discovered that these gadflies were killed off by certain robber flies but that the robber flies were not active at the exact period when the gadflies were most abundant. At the advice of Dr. E. Roux, Director of the Pasteur Institute at Paris, Dr. E. Sergent consulted the Federal Bureau of Entomology at Washington. At Washington we immediately recalled the fact that in the southern United States there is a large wasp known down there to the people as “ the horse guard,” well known to be an active destroyer of gadflies. Dr. Wilmon Newell, then stationed at Shreveport, Louisiana, as an official of that State, was consulted. He found a place on the shore of the Gulf not far from New Orleans where this wasp (Monedula carolina) was nesting. Their burrows were dug up, and in the pupa stage they were placed in especially prepared buckets and put in charge of one of the stewards in the cold room of a steamer going directly from New Orleans to Havre. There they were met by agents of the Pasteur Institute and were carried directly to Algeria. Exact descrip- tions of the topography of the American breeding-places, together with photographs showing exposure and so on, were sent with the specimens. A similar locality was selected on the south coast of the Mediterranean, and subsequently some of the wasps issued; but, so far as has been reported, the species has never again been seen over there. The length of the journey from Havre to Algiers (almost 15 days actually) was probably too great for the survival of the majority 510 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL, 84 of the specimens. The ice was entirely melted on arrival at Mar- seilles, and the cocoons had become moist. The experiment has never been repeated, but it seems quite possible that it might be successfully carried out at any time. ANTIGUA A paper by A. Gallwey reported in 1929 that attempts had been made to control the moth borer of sugar cane in Antigua by Braco- nids, Ipobracon and Microdus, introduced from British Guiana, and begun in 1927. This material was probably originally found in Brit- ish Guiana by Harold E. Box. The results are reported to have been inconclusive. ARGENTINA Aside from the successful introduction and acclimatization of Aphelinus mali, the only other experiment of record was the introduc- tion from Italy of Prospaltella berlesei How. in 1913. It was reported in 1916 that 4,650 fruit-growers had applied for twigs carrying para- sitized scales and had received in all 530,000 twigs, making a total of 3,000,000 twigs distributed during three years. At the time of writ- ing it was considered that the parasite was sufficiently well es- tablished, and the distribution of parasitized twigs was about to be discontinued. AUSTRALIA Largely through Mr. George Compere while acting as Entomolo- gist for Western Australia, many parasites were introduced from California and from Hawaii, most of them parasites of scale insects ; and Doctor Tillyard sent to Australia colonies of Aphelinus mali, descendants of those he had secured for New Zealand from the United States. Several other importations have been urged, and at least one of them was tried without success. The sheep blow-fly, a great pest in Australia, was studied carefully by several writers in Australia, and seven of its native parasites were also carefully studied. These parasites, however, did not control the pest, and during April of 1925, according to W. B. Gurney and A. R. Woodhull (Bulletin 27, Department of Agriculture, New South Wales, May, 1926), a few parasites of the European blow-fly were reared from pupae sent from England. These parasites were Alysia manducator, and they did not attack the Australian maggots although they were tried with several species. I understand that later experiments have been made to introduce European enemies of blow-flies, and I remember with WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOW ARD Sit great distinctness encountering a vile odor in the garden of the Para- site Laboratory at Farnham Royal in 1927 and upon inquiry being told that it came from the dead body of a cat on which were feeding maggots from which it was expected to rear parasites for shipment to Australia. BRAZIL Novius cardinalis was imported into Sao Paulo, Brazil, from South Africa and later from Italy and Uruguay. According to Dr. C. H. T. Townsend, in 1921 it was firmly established and the Icerya was in the way of being exterminated. When Prospaltella berlesei was introduced into Uruguay in 1920, it was sent to Argentina the following year, and arrangements were also made to introduce it into Brazil; and in 1921 notice was given in Sao Paulo to the effect that the parasite was now obtainable by orchard growers suffering from Diaspis pentagona on their trees and that supplies could be obtained from the phytopathological ser- vice of the State. CANADA In 1913 J. D. Tothill, having been sent by the Canadian Government to study the parasites of the brown-tail moth being reared for the United States in Massachusetts, took puparia of Compsilura concin- nata from Massachusetts to two localities in New Brunswick, and also other parasites and the predacious beetle, Calosoma sycophanta. Not long after the United States Bureau of Entomology began to import parasites of the European corn borer, a parasite laboratory was established in lower Ontario; material was sent on from the United States parasite laboratories, and large numbers of several species of Ichneumonids and Tachinids of European origin were lib- erated in Ontario fields. As a rule Canada has been content to share with the United States parasites imported by the latter that affect introduced pests common to both countries. The United States, with more means, with more trained assistants, has been heretofore in better position to charge itself with the somewhat dangerous work. Of late, however, Canada has been training very good men, has more means than formerly and has become competent to do work of this kind, although a beautiful spirit of cooperation still exists in such work between the two countries. There was, however, one very interesting importation made by Canadian experts as early as 1911. Dr. C. Gordon Hewitt had found in England (in 1908) an important parasite (Mesolaius tenthredi- 512 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 nidis) of the larch sawfly (Nematus erichsonu). Hewitt came to Canada in September, 1909, to succeed the late James Fletcher, and finding that the larch sawfly was very injurious in Canada, he made arrangements to import parasitized cocoons from the English lake district into Canada. Cocoons were brought over in the spring of IgII and distributed in several localities in Quebec and Ontario, a small lot being also sent to the State Entomologist of Michigan. In 1912, Doctor Hewitt visiting England found a locality where the parasites were very abundant, and he had other supposedly parasitized cocoons brought over and distributed in Manitoba in two tamarack swamps in a forest reserve. In 1916 it transpired that the parasite had become satisfactorily established, and later reports by Mr. Norman Criddle of Manitoba have indicated that the parasite has been a very great success. CEYLON In 1918 there was a serious outbreak of Jcerya purchasi on Acacia in the Dimbula district in Ceylon. Novius cardinalis was received from South Africa, but on account of the length of the journey the beetles and larvae died, and the outbreak of the scale was suppressed by mechanical means. In 1920 J. C. Hutson reported that the Novius, after the failure of four consignments from South Africa, finally in 1920 took hold and bred rapidly with great success against the Icerya. CHILE Prospaltella berlesei was imported direct from the United States into Chile in 1914 and was as successful there against Diaspis lanata as it was in other South American countries. The Eucalyptus weevil (Gonipterus) was accidentally introduced into Chile at an unknown date. In 1928, C. A. Marelli, in an article published in the Revista Chilena Historia Natural, announced the importation of a Mymarid egg-parasite from South Africa to which place it had been introduced from Australia. DUTCH EAST INDIES We have elsewhere described the visit of L. P. de Bussy to the United States in 1911. His principal object in coming over was to secure parasites of Chloridea (Heliothis) obsoleta which was doing great damage to the tobacco plantations in Sumatra. In 1912 the first report on the work of the parasite was printed. Parasites were sent over in the eggs of the host insect in cold storage, and only a very small percentage failed to hatch. At the time of the first report in 1912 WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOW ARD 513 the parasite had passed through 16 generations and had multiplied in the open, During the same year a report was published by W. Roepke stating that the first attempts to get parasitized eggs from America in good condition failed, but that an intermediate breeding station was established in Holland. Moreover, the first lot from America gave out only male parasites ; later ones, however, produced females that were sent on to Sumatra. For some years I noticed no reports on the later results of this introduction. In 1918, however, J. E. A. den Doop published an article in the records of the Experiment Station at Deli, Sumatra, in which he stated that he had been investigating the subject under field conditions since 1916. He found the parasites existing in numbers and attacking the eggs of a large number of injurious moths. He concluded that 7. minutum could be used against Heliothis obsoleta and also perhaps against Plusia, but not against Prodenia, Phthori- maea, and Botys. In 1924, S. Leefmans reported the importation of parasites of the coffee berry borer from Uganda into the Dutch East Indies. One of these parasites was believed to be a Bethylid, Prorops nasuta. The question of native parasites had been studied years before by L. Zehntner. EGYPT Novius cardinalis was introduced into Egypt from the United ‘States in 1892. It was sent to Alexandria to feed on Icerya aegyptiacum. — Of recent years, Microbracon kirkpatricki was introduced from Kenya, where it is an efficient parasite of the pink bollworm, into Egypt, according to A. Alfieri writing in 1929. FIJI In 1913, F. P. Jepson, then Government Entomologist of Fiji, transported 5,000 Histerid beetles (Plaesius javanus) to Fiji from Java, as it was an important enemy of the banana weevil (Cosmopo- lities sorditus). Twelve hundred perished on the way, and 3,500 were distributed in lots of 500 on seven different plantations. I have not learned the subsequent history of this introduction. In 1913, the Tachinid fly, Ceromasia sphenophori, that had done excellent work against the sugar cane borer in Hawaii, was intro- duced into Fiji by J. F. Illingworth. A thousand parasitized grubs were carried over. It was found that only a strong colony could with- stand the losses caused in the field by predatory enemies, notably ants and spiders. 514 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 In 1926, J. D. Tothill reported concerning a Clerid beetle intro- duced into Fiji for the destruction of the Levuana caterpillar, and in this report especially spoke of a Tachinid, Ptychomyia remota, of which 300 adults were introduced in 1925 from Malaya. This report states that 32,621 flies had been reared and liberated in 38 colonies, and that the parasite was then spreading so rapidly that no further liberations appeared to be necessary. A rate of parasitism ranging from 75 to 90 per cent had been noted. This experiment turned out to be one of the most dramatically successful ones in the history of the work. In fact the Fiji entomologists have paid great attention to the possibilities of parasite introduction. This is quite proper, from the fact that the greatest successes in this work have been gained on islands. Aside from the introductions mentioned, Mr. H. W. Sim- monds brought in two species of Aphelinines from Tahiti in 1919 with moderate success. Mr. T. H. C. Taylor introduced a Clerid beetle for the Levuana caterpillar, which, however, did not prove suc- cessful. And there have been other introductions ; nothing, however, meeting with a success comparable to that of the Tachinid for the Levuana caterpillar, which was so striking that it deserves further mention. The so-called Levuana caterpillar is the larva of a Zygaenid moth (Levuana iridescens). It made its appearance in Fiji possibly as early as 1871, but it did not attract much attention until about the close of the World War. It fed upon the foliage of the cocoa palm and to some extent upon other palms. It was feared that it would spread over all the Pacific islands, destroying the coconut and bring- ing calamity to the natives. In the Malay States a somewhat related caterpillar (Artona catox- antha Hampson) also fed on coconuts. The entomologists in Malaya reared a Tachinid parasite from this caterpillar which was. described by Doctor Aldrich of the United States National Museum in 1925 as Ptychomyia remota. On the chance that this parasite would attack the Levuana caterpiliar, it was imported into Fiji as mentioned in a pre- vious paragraph. In 1928 Prof. T. D. A. Cockerell, of Colorado, visited Fiji, and in an article published in the journal Science for December 7, 1928, he speaks of this parasite and its introduction, in the following words: Results were apparent in about six months. The fly spread with great rapidity and in a short time the Levuana pest was practically a thing of the past. When I was in Suva I was shown the coconut palms with fresh green foliage ready to bear abundant fruit. I could only imagine from descriptions what they WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 515 looked like not long ago. ... As an example of successful biological control through cooperation among scientific men, the case of Levuana could hardly be excelled. FORMOSA In 1925, M. Ishida, Entomologist of the Sugar Experiment Station at Formosa, worked on parasites of the woolly sugar cane aphis (Oregma lanigera). ‘This scale insect is an important pest to cane in the Orient, especially in French Indo-China, and also in Formosa. Search for its natural enemies resulted in the importation of a Cocci- nellid, Coelophora biplagiata, from Formosa to Java, and of a Chalcid parasite, Encarsia flavoscutellum from Java into Formosa. ‘Two Coccinellids were also taken from Java to formosa. It seems that two attempts were made to take over the Encarsia, but failed, owing to the short life of the adults. A third was reported in 1926 by P. van Harreveld as being in course. Obviously the journey was too long, and a relay station was neces- sary. Ishida, writing again in March, 1929, in the Report of the Government Research Institute of Formosa, states that Hongkong was used as a relay station, and parasites were reared there from material received from Java and then relayed to Formosa and success- fully liberated in large numbers. FRANCE Practically all of the French attempts at introduction are mentioned in Doctor Trouvelot’s list. In 1910 Icerya spread from Italy into France, and the introduction of seven specimens of Novius from Portici to Cap Ferrat in the South of France rapidly resulted in the wiping out of the infestation. Wherever Icerya appeared thereafter in the South of France the Australian ladybird was used with equal effect. The importations of Habrobracon johannsem from California to help destroy the potato tuber-moth were first agitated in 1919, and these attempts have met with apparent success from time to time. For example, Trouvelot reported in 1924 that the success was considerable. But the parasite has apparently since died out, and further impor- tations are desirable. The introductions of Cryptolaemus montrousiert against mealy- bugs have been successful; but the 1921 importation of Hippodamia convergens, also from the United States, was apparently not success ful. The visit of Doctor Trouvelot to the United States in 1928 resulted in further attempts to introduce and establish Doryphorophaga, an 516 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 enemy of the Colorado potato beetle which appeared in western France after the World War. A long paper has just been published by Doctor Marchal giving a full account of the history of the Aphelinus mali introductions and giving an account of the insect’s biology in France and its status as an enemy of the woolly root-louse. It seems now to be a permanent resident in France. GREECE Novius cardinalis was introduced into Greece to prey upon Jcerya purchasi, and in March of 1928 A. Ayoutantis reported that it was then established in two centers near Athens. GUAM Numerous attempts have been made to bring in parasites of injurious insects into Guam by S. R. Vandenberg. Three of these introductions were very successful, namely Novius cardinalis for the cottony cushion scale, Cryptolaemus montrousiert for mealy-bugs, and the Tachinid, Ceromasia sphenophori, for the sugar cane beetle borer. An attempt was made to establish the Coccinellid, Lindorus lopanthae, but without success; and attempts made to establish Compericlla bifasciata from California on the red scale were also unsuccessful. HAWAII Some of the most extraordinarily successful work that has been done in the introduction of parasites and natural enemies has been carried on in the Hawaiian Islands. There is a list of these introduc- tions down to 1923 in an article by O. H. Swezey on pages 299 to 304 of the Proceedings of the Hawaiian Entomological Society, Volume 5. Supplementary to this list, Mr. Swezey published in the Journal of Economic Entomology, Volume 19, October, 1926, a paper entitled “Recent Introductions of Beneficial Insects into Hawaii,” pp. 715- 720. The number of these parasite introductions proving successful is astonishingly large. It has been pointed out repeatedly that the equable climate of the Hawaiian Archipelago and the fact that it is composed of islands makes success reasonably sure in experiments of this kind, or at all events these conditions offer much better chances for success than a continental region in a more northern or southern location. However, not all of these importations have been striking successes. The Hawaiian work has been written up a number of times by other investigators, but it has never been better done than by WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD Sz. Dr. A. D. Imms, of Harpenden, England, who visited the islands in 1925 and who published an account of his observations in the Annals of Applied Biology for August, 1926 (pp. 202-423). This paper is presented in a masterly way, and should be read. He ends with a summary which may well be printed here: 1. Insect pests in the Hawaiian Islands are, with few exceptions, immigrant species from other countries. Their control by biological methods dates from 1890, when A. Koebele introduced Novius cardinalis for repressing the cottony cushion scale, Jcerya purchasi, and the experiment was completely successful. 2. The sugar cane leaf-hopper, Perkinsiella saccharicida, has been suppressed by the combined activities of several imported species of Chalcid egg-parasites, followed by the introduction of the predaceous Capsid, Cyrtorhinus mundulus, from Fiji and Queensland. 3. Satisfactory control of the sugar cane borer, Rhabocnemis obscura has been achieved in most infested areas by the Tachinid Ceromasia sphenophori, introduced from New Guinea. In certain districts, under bad climatic conditions, outbreaks still occur and efforts are being made to meet the situation by intro- ducing other beneficial insects. 4. Efficient control of the beetle, Anomala orientalis has been obtained by the introduction of the wasp, Scolia manilae from the Philippines. This pest has not since increased to its former destructive proportions. 5. The Avocado mealy-bug, Pseudococcus nipae, accords one of the most recent examples of biological control. Since the importation of the Chalcid parasite Pseudaphycus utilis from Mexico in 1922 this pest has been difficult to find in many districts. 6. The indigenous Pyralid leaf-rollers, Omiodes accepta and O. blackburni, are no longer pests of serious consequence. They are controlled by several enemies, chief among them being the Braconid, Macrodyctium omiodivorum and the Chalcid, Chalcis obscurata; both parasites were originally obtained’ from Japan. 7. Satisfactory repression of the Mediterranean fruit-fly, Ceratitis capitata, has yet to be achieved. The importation of parasites from Africa and Australia has markedly decreased the infestation, but their efficiency appears to be partly neutralized by the species competing against one another and supra-parasitism is prevalent. 8. The Australian fern weevil, Syagrius fulvitarsis, no longer occasions damage to tree ferns to its former extent. The recent introduction of the Braconid [schiogonus syagrii from Australia has brought about this result. 9. Early introductions of the various Coccinellidae, more particularly of Cryptolaemus montrousieri and Coelophora inaequalis, resulted in the complete subjugation of certain coccids and aphides. 10. Promising results are being obtained against army worms and cutworms by the recent introduction of the Chalcid Euplectrus platyhypenae from Mexico. The breeding and liberation of this parasite are still being carried out. It. Control of wireworms and the horn fly has not, so far, met with success. * Ok Ok It seems that more than 90 different species of beneficial insects have been successfully introduced into Hawaii from other countries. 518 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 Mr. O. H. Swezey published a complete list in 1925. Of course these go species by no means comprise all that have been introduced experi- mentally into the islands. As Doctor Imms points out, the far greater number of species have failed to become established. A complete list is not available, but many are recorded. It is not fair, however, to report these as failures. Doctor Imms treats this question very well in the following words: “ In judging the success or failure of these experiments it should be pointed out that the’ objective is to” bring about a reduction in the numbers of the pest concerned. If, for example, introductions are attempted with ro different species of parasites and only two species succeed in establishing themselves and these two are effective in restraining the host, the experiment is to be regarded as successful. It is wide of the mark to say that there were eight ‘ failures.’ It is probable that a large proportion of the eight could have been established with continued experiment, but it was not deemed worth while to do so, since the desired end had been met by the establishment of two. Also, by our experience in this country, it is altogether likely that many of the species not considered as having been established will turn up one of these days. We have known and recorded instances in this country where this has happened even after 20 years. Before leaving the subject I wish to call especial attention to the fact that the Japanese rice borer, Chilo simplex, was first observed in Hawaii in the autumn of 1927. It was probably introduced from Japan in rice straw used as packing for merchandise. Attempts have been made to introduce the natural enemies of this insect from Japan, and the following species have been liberated: Phanurus beneficiens Zehnt., Trichogramma japonicum Ashm., Amyosoma chilonis Vier., and Apanteles sp. It is especially to be hoped: that these parasites will take hold, since the United States is threatened by the same pest. Rice straw packing frequently arrives at Pacific ports with active liv- ing larvae of the Chilo. The objects packed are frequently very cheap affairs intended for the ten-cent stores, and they are therefore sent all over the country. Is this Chilo already breeding in United States territory? I fear so. ITALY Prospaltella berleset How. was sent to Berlese in Italy from the United States Bureau of Entomology in Washington in 1908. In 1913 Berlese reported its absolute success, its wonderful spread and de- struction of the mulberry scale. In the meantime Silvestri had been introducing into Italy a number of Coccinellids. In 1913 he reported WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 519 that he had introduced Rhizobius lophanthae, R. ventralis, and Orcus chalybaeus. These are all Australian species that Koebele had sent to California, and Silvestri introduced them into Italy to prey upon Chrysomphalus scales. He also introduced the ladybird Hippodanua convergens from the United States as an enemy of plant-lice. Silvestri had at that time been on a trip for the Hawaiian Govern- ment, and in Africa he had found Galesus silvestrii Kief. and Dirhinus giffardu Silv. and had introduced them into Hawaii against the fruit- fly. He also introduced both species into Italy for the same purpose and found that they bred in the olive fly. In 1914 Silvestri went to Eritrae to collect parasites of the olive fly. He found that this fly is subject to natural control in Eritrae and that insects are an important factor. He found several species of Braconids and Ichneumonids, and a number of them were brought back to Italy. In 1916 Berlese and Paoli reported upon and described Prospal- tella lounsburyi, a native of Madeira, sent to them by Prof. C. P. Lounsbury, which attacks Chrysomphalus dictyospernu. (In 1920 Paoli and Masi showed me this parasite at Genoa and indicated the characters separating it from my P. berlesci. I think it a sound species. ) In 1917 an agreement was made between the Italian Ministry of the Colonies and the Italian National Society of Olive Growers whereby a collection of Opius concolor, an important parasite of the olive fly, was made in Tripoli. Some of these were sent to Silvestri’s laboratory at Portici for breeding, and over 3,000 individuals were released in the winter of 1917-18. I am sure that the indefatigable Silvestri has made other importa- tions of beneficial insects into Italy, but I have seen no record of them. JAPAN I have seen no account in English of the appearance of Icerya in Japan before 1911. In the Bulletin of Plant Pathology and Injurious Insects of the Department of Agriculture and Commerce at Tokyo for November 25, 1917, is an unsigned article stating that Icerya appeared in the prefecture of Shizuoka in 1911. The ladybird Novius was soon introduced and was carefully studied. The success of the importation was marked. The anonymous author makes the state- ment that the Novius also fed upon Jcerya seychellarum and Mono- phlebus corpulenta in Japan. This is interesting, since the famous Australian ladybird is usually said to be monophagic. 520 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 In 1925 and again in 1926 attempts were made to acclimatize Aphelinus mali in Japan. The first one failed, and it is altogether likely that the second one failed as well. This attempt was made by Professor Kota Monzen of the Imperial College of Agriculture and Forestry at Morioka. Under Formosa, we have referred to the attempt by Ishida to introduce Encarsia flavoscutellum and his eventual success. Scutellista cyanea, originally brought from South Africa to destroy the black scale was introduced much later from California into Japan where it attacked Lecanium and also two species of wax scales; but attempts to establish it on Ceroplastes on Citrus in the field proved unsuccessful. JAVA In 1918 Cryptolaemus montrousieri was introduced by P. van der Goot from Hawaii into Java to combat the coffee mealy-bug (Pseu- dococcus virgatus). The insect bred in Java for two years, but did not increase at all rapidly. In 1925 J. Gandrup reported that it had become established throughout eastern Java but that its practical value had not been tested, as climatic conditions had prevented any outbreak of the pest. MALAYA In 1922 the coffee growers of Java alarmed at the ravages of the coffee berry beetle (Stephanoderes hampet), raised a fund and sent J. den Doop to Uganda to search for parasites. He remained in Uganda during 1923 and 1924 and discovered two parasites, namely Heterospilus coffeicola Schmied. (a Braconid) and Prorops nasuta Waterst. (a Bethyllid). On attempting importation in Java, he failed with the Braconid but succeeded with the Bethyllid. However, although the species was established, it did not check the pest as hoped, and further trials were discontinued. MALTA Icerya purchast broke out in Malta in the spring of 1913. Novius cardinalis was introduced, and the spread was checked almost imme- diately. MAURITIUS Doctor Trouvelot, in his list, mentions the introduction of Mada- gascar Scoliid wasps to parasitize the beetle borer of sugar cane. D'Emery de Charmoy was sent from Mauritius to South Africa and WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 521 remained there from November, 1913, to February, 1914, studying insects. He attempted to introduce Novius from South Africa inte Mauritius, but failed. He also attempted to introduce a Hymenop- terous parasite of a cutworm, but failed. He also tried to introduce certain Scoliid wasps from Barbados, but apparently failed. In 1915 he reported a further attempt to introduce the Barbadian wasp (Tiphia parallela) and mentioned the fact that inquiries were being made in Madagascar where two promising species of Tiphia were reported. In 1917 he introduced one of these wasps, Scolia orycto- phaga, and assured its persistence by the presence of certain flower- ing plants upon the nectar of which the wasps fed. Four other species ef Scoliid wasps were introduced from Madagascar, according to this report of 1917. In 1927, de Charmoy in his report stated that, although the total area of sugar cane infested by Lachnosterna smithi was about 41,000 acres, only 2,500 acres were actually damaged. Control measures, particularly the introduction of the parasite Tiphia parallela, were responsible. I believe that the Madagascar wasps were equally suc- cessful against the Oryctes. NEW ZEALAND In his “ History of the Introduction of Beneficial Insects into New Zealand” read at the Pan-Pacific Scientific Congress at Melbourne in 1923, R. J. Tillyard shows that a Mantis, Orthodera ministralis, was introduced accidentally some time previous to 1860; and that an Australian Ichneumon fly, Lissopimpla semipunctata, was also acci- dentally introduced. He lists the other, purposeful, importations of ladybirds from Australia and California. For example, Doctor Miller calls my especial attention to the fact that the Eucalyptus scale, Eriococcus coriaceus, a native of Australia, became in 1900 a serious pest of Eucalyptus trees growing in New Zealand but was soon controlled after the ladybird, Rhizobius ventralis, was imported from Australia by Kirk and liberated in New Zealand. Tillyard also men- tions the fact that the European parasite, Calliephialtes messor, of the codling moth, that had been introduced into California by Com- pere from Spain, was introduced into New Zealand in 1906. Doctor Miller tells me that this importation eventually proved to be a flat failure. According to Tillyard, Entedon epigonus and Platygaster minutus were in 1893 introduced from England against the Hessian fly. He mentions also the introduction of Aphelinus mali from the United States and the great success that it had in New Zealand. An interesting little Chalcidid parasite, Habrolepis dalmani, was several 34 22 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 1 times introduced from the United States by Tillyard, with the help of the United States Bureau of Entomology, to destroy the golden- oak scale, an insect that was doing great damage in New Zealand. Several attempts to establish this species failed, but I am now in- formed by Doctor Miller that the parasite has assumed complete con- trol of the scale. This success is largely due to the work of Mr. E. S. Gourley, of Doctor Miller’s staff. One of the European parasites of the European earwig has also been introduced from England. Grass- grub parasites have been imported from Australia. In 1926 Tillyard published another paper on the same subject, with no additional facts. D. Miller, in the New Zealand Journal of Agriculture, June 21, 1926, reports on the finding by R. C. Fisher and J. G. Myers of two parasites of the pear midge (Perrisia pyri) in the South of France— the one a species of Platygaster and the other a species of Inostemma. Colonies were sent to New Zealand in 1925, and the parasites emerged in December and January. The Platygaster bid fair to become estab- lished. Later in the same year Doctor Miller published the statement that the Platygaster sp. referred to above is Misocyclops marchali. The parasite seems to have come out well, 66 per cent being females. J. Muggeridge reported in 1929 that, although this insect survived two or three winters, it had not exercised the degree of control that had been hoped for, even in the orchard where the main liberation took place. In 1926 and 1927 New Zealand imported three consignments of larvae of Lachnosterna parasitized by the Tachinid, Microphthalma michiganensis, from Canada. In 1927, Doctor Miller reported the direct sending from Australia to New Zealand of a consignment of the eggs of the Eucalyptus wee- vil parasitized by the same Mymarid* that was later imported from Australia into South Africa and also into Argentina. Doctor Miller tells me that in the 1929-30 season it became established and has the weevil under control. Quite recently the little Hymenopterous parasite, Alysia mandu- cator, has been imported for use against the so-called “ wool maggots ” and is giving promising results. Doctor Miller tells me that during the 1929-30 season this parasite has been found breeding naturally in the field. Described by Ch. Ferriére, Bulletin of Entomological Research, London, Vol. 21, Part 1, March, 1930, pp. 38-39, as Anaphoides gonipteri n. sp. WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY HOWARD 523 THE PHILIPPINES In 1928 L. B. Uichanco published the statement that the Javanese parasite (Encarsia flavoscutellum) of the woolly aphis (Oregma lani- gera), that had been introduced from Java into Formosa, was later introduced from Java into the Philippines. Aside from this introduction from another country, most interesting work has been done with presumably native parasites by Dr. W. Dwight Pierce in the Island of Negros, but this is described rather fully in our section on the Philippines in an earlier part of this book. PORTO RICO In 1917 E. G. Smyth made a study of the possible enemies of the white grubs injuring sugar cane on the island. He listed 15 North American insects parasitic upon Lachnosterna, and urged their intro- duction into Porto Rico. In the Journal of the Department of Agri- culture of Porto Rico for January, 1922, G. N. Wolcott reports on insect parasite introduction into Porto Rico. An attempt was made to introduce Tiphia inornata from the United States. All attempts failed. There was a similar failure with Elis collaris. Tiphia parallela was introduced from Barbados, but did not breed. Cr'ptolaemus montrousiert was introduced, and easily became established ; but there was a failure with an undetermined Tachinid from Illinois. Later, Mr. Harold E. Box, working for the Central Aguirre Sugar Company, attempted for several years to find and introduce suitable parasites of sugar cane insects. Mr. Wolcott’s attempts at the estab- lishment of such parasites from the mainland of North America having failed, Mr. Box visited the Guianas and Venezuela and col- lected a number of parasites that were introduced into Porto Rico. QUEENSLAND In 1921 or 1922 a predacious Histerid beetle (Plaesius javanus) was introduced from Java into Queensland to prey upon the banana beetle borer. Three years later (Queensland Agricultural Journal, December 1, 1925) Mr. J. L. Froggatt, writing of this insect, stated that there was at that time no evidence that it would become estab- lished in Queensland. SOUTH AFRICA Professor Lounsbury of South Africa was impressed by the impor- tance of the introduction of natural enemies of injurious species, and in 1905 went to Brazil with Claude Fuller in an effort to secure 524 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 natural enemies of the fruit-fly that George Compere had found there and had introduced into Western Australia. The expedition was a failure, as no effective enemies were found. Professor Lounsbury interested himself very much in these impor- tation questions. In his report for 1908 he mentions an attempt to introduce the Calliephialtes parasite of the codling moth from Spain ; and also mentions the fact that he was trying to import a parasite of the red scale from West Australia, but he does not mention the name of the parasite. Also in that year he attempted to introduce a parasite of ticks from Texas, Hunterellus hookeri How., but the issuing para- sites ignored the Cape of Good Hope ticks that were offered to them. In his report for 1909 he referred again to the Spanish parasite of the codling moth and once more to the same tick parasite. In a circular published in 1917 (Local Series No. 24) Lounsbury refers to the damage done by Phoracantha semtpunctata, known as the firewood beetle, to Eucalyptus logs probably introduced into South Africa from Australia in newly cut railway sleepers. He stated that in its native country this beetle has important parasitic enemies not occurring in South Africa, and adds, “ and attempts cannot be made to introduce them until shipping facilities become normal.” In 1920 Aphelinus mali was sent to South Africa by Mr. A. E. Lundie, then studying at Cornell University. There have been variable results in different parts of the country, some apparently very good. In his report for 1922 it appears that parasites of the codling moth had been introduced from America and established in South Africa, but no further information was given. In 1924 it was reported that attempts to establish three Italian parasites of the codling moth in South Africa failed. Neither Calli- ephialtes, Pimpla, nor an egg-parasite of the genus Ascogaster proved of any practical value. In 1926 the Mymarid parasite of the Eucalyptus snout-beetle was brought over from Australia early in the year, became established during the summer, and succeeded in over-wintering in all parts of the country where introduced. During the summer of 1927-28 these parasites were liberated throughout the infested area in the Transvaal, Orange Free State; and Natal. SPAIN In 1923, as reported by M. Aullo, Schedius kuvanae How., an egg- parasite of the gipsy moth, was imported from the United States into Spain. WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 525 In 1923 also the Agricultural Department of Catalonia, Spain, introduced Opius concolor from Tripoli for use against the olive fly. Eight thousand two hundred and twenty individuals of the parasite were received and liberated. In the same year Novius cardinalis was also introduced to check Icerya. In 1926 R. Garcia y Mercet discussed the parasites of the red scale that had been imported into Spain from Menton, France, and from Chiavari, Italy—all Aphelinines, originally received in Italy from Madeira and in France from the United States. In 1926 or 1927, Cryptolaemus montrousieri was introduced from Menton at the Phytopathological Station at Valencia, Spain. In 1928 it was reported to have become established and to have already done good work. SWITZERLAND In 1923, Aphelinus mali was introduced from Germany into Switzerland. Icerya purchasi made its appearance in 1924 on Acacia and Citrus at Tessin. Novius cardinalis was imported from Menton, France, with its usual success. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA The United States Bureau of Entomology.—The early efforts of the United States in this direction have for the most part been indi- cated in Doctor Trouvelot’s list, but something additional may be said. The early importation of Novius cardinalis from Australia was a Federal matter. The credit must belong to Professor Riley who con- ceived the idea, conducted the preliminary correspondence, and selected from the paid employees of the Department, Albert Koebele to make the trip, and D. W. Coquillett to receive and care for the material in southern California. Koebele made a second trip a year or so later, at the expense of the State of California, but still retaining his position in the Federal Bureau, and imported several other Cocci- nellids, notably Cryptolaemus montrousiert which has proved to be such a great success in many parts of the world against mealy-bugs. He also sent over Orcus chalybeus and O. australasiae to prey upon the red scale and also upon the black scale, but neither of these species seems to have maintained itself in California. Another of the instances listed by Doctor Trouvelot should be mentioned a little more fully: Dr. R. S. Woglum was sent to India in 1910 to search for a parasite of the so-called white fly of the 520 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 orange, very destructive in California. After extended search he sent the Coccinellid Cryptognatha flavescens from Saharanpur, but they died in transit. Later he found an internal parasite at the same place and at Lahore. This species was described by the writer as Prospaltella lahorensis. Small infested orange trees were placed in Wardian cases and sent to Florida. Eight adults and several pupae survived the journey, but they arrived at the wrong time of the year and perished, the white flies being then in the dormant pupal condition. It was upon this trip that Doctor Woglum debarked at Gibraltar and went up to Valencia, Spain, to demonstrate to the Spanish agricul- tural engineers the proper way to fumigate Citrus trees for scale insects. The introduction from France of the egg-parasite of the European elm leaf beetle, which was begun in 1905, has been repeated several times since then, but the species has not taken hold in the United States. It apparently existed through a whole year at Melrose High- lands, but eventually died out. There is a bare possibility that it may have persisted in some one of the numerous places in which it was liberated, but it has not been found. An especially favorable place was found several years ago on a badly infested clump of European elms on the estate of Admiral Taylor of the United States Navy at Gordonsville, Virginia. It was hoped that at this place the parasites would take hold, but there has been no observable result as yet, and the fine old trees, I am told, are in their last stages. In 1924 a Dipterous parasite (Hrynnia nitida) was introduced from the South of France with the aid of W. R. Thompson, then stationed at Auch. Specimens sent to Washington were liberated on Admiral Taylor’s place, but the species has not been recovered. The very large-scale experiments made by the Bureau in the intro- duction of many parasites and predators of the gipsy moth and the brown-tail moth from Europe as well as from Japan were fully described in 1911 in Bulletin 91, and need be given no space here. Shorter bulletins have been published from time to time giving accounts of the progress of individual imported species, and Technical Bulletin 86 of the United States Department of Agriculture, pub- lished in August, 1929, gives a full account by A. F. Burgess and S. S. Crossman of the status of the many importations down to that date. Two other large-scale attempts to import natural enemies of in- jurious insects of extreme importance have been made by the Bureau, one the bringing in from Europe and from the Orient of the parasites of the European corn borer. The progress of this attempt has been WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 527 displayed in various publications of the Bureau of Entomology. The other large-scale attempt has been to bring over from Japan, China, and India the natural enemies of the so-called Japanese beetle, and the progress of this effort has also been shown in various publications of the Bureau. One especially interesting feature of this work, although it was a failure, was the shipment of 900 eggs of Ithone fusca, a Neuropteroid insect, sent by Dr. R. J. Tillyard from New Zealand. This shipment was received December 3, 1921. This insect, in its larval state, preys upon soil-inhabiting grubs, and Doctor Till- yard has written a very striking account of its swarming at certain times in Australia. These eggs were held over in the spring of 1922 in cold storage. A number hatched, but the larvae all died before reaching the second instar. I am informed that it is planned to send an expert to Australia in the autumn of 1930 to search for desirable enemies of white grubs and this species will be among those sent to this country if possible. An attempt about which little has been published down to the pres- ent time is that of bringing over from Europe two Tachinid flies, Digonichaeta setipennis and Rhacodineura antiqua, both parasites of the European earwig. Puparia of these flies have been collected in the south of England and the south of France, and quantities of living earwigs of which a certain proportion were probably parasitized by these insects have been sent to Portland, Oregon, and placed in specially prepared insectaries under the charge of Mr. H. C. Atwell, a State official. They have not bred freely in confinement, and although many have been liberated no striking results have been reached as yet. One of the rather large projects of the Bureau of Entomology was the introduction from Europe of parasites of the alfalfa weevil. A summary of these attempts was published as Circular No. 301 of the United States Department of Agriculture, April, 1924. The author was T. R. Chamberlin, who spent the summer of 1923 in Europe making an especial study of these parasites. Even before the great war, however, several species had been introduced through the efforts of W. F. Fiske and W. R. Thompson who were sent in IgII-12 to Italy and the South of France for the purpose. Only one of these species (Bathyplectes curculionis Thoms.) at that time established itself in Utah and has since multiplied and spread at the expense of the weevil to a very considerable extent. In 1919 an attempt was made by Mr. T. E. Holloway, an agent of the Bureau, to introduce a Tachinid fly, Euzenilliopsis diatraeae, from Cuba into Louisiana to destroy the sugar cane borer. This expedition was sent at the expense of the Louisiana planters. 528 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS voL. 84 In 1923, E. G. Smyth was sent to Mexico to search for parasites of the Mexican bean beetle. He found an effective Tachinid parasite, Paradexodes epilachnae, and sent 2,000 living puparia. An attempt was made to hold these insects over at Birmingham, Alabama, and to colonize them. This effort was not successful. California——We have elsewhere told of the unfortunate situation that resulted from the overwhelming success of the importation of Novius cardinalis into California. For years after that time a very large element of the fruit-growers and farmers were greatly inclined to rely upon natural enemies, and much work on the part of unskilled agents of the State was wasted and large sums spent in traveling were likewise wasted. Many profitless introductions were made, and sev- eral that were very unwise and most unfortunate. Only one of these unwise importations, however, turned out to be rather disastrous, namely Quaylea whittiert, which proved to be a secondary and de- stroyed useful parasites of the black scale; but it is a mere matter of luck that great harm was not done by others. One of the last greatly advertised importations was the introduction from Spain into California in 1904 by George Compere of an Ichneumonid para- site known as Calliephialtes messor Grav. The most glowing prophe- cies were made, and the statement was repeated again and again that no more spraying for codling moth would be necessary ; but, although the species was reared successfully in confinement in the insectary, it failed to take hold in the orchards and so far as is known never did any good. The next year the law of August 5, 1905, was passed, and this law enabled the Department of Agriculture to prevent such im- portations as the State had been making; and the work of the State in this direction would have been stopped by order of the Secretary of Agriculture had it not been for the fact that just at that time Prof. A. J. Cook was made Director of Horticulture for the State and appointed Harry Scott Smith, a trained entomologist who had been working in the Parasite Laboratory of the United States Bureau of Entomology in Massachusetts, to take charge of the parasite work for the State. Mr. Smith, on taking this position, was made an official collabora- tor of the United States Department of Agriculture, and therefore in a way his subsequent efforts in this direction may be said to have been in cooperation with the Federal Government, or at least to have been tacitly authorized by the Federal Government. The subsequent efforts of the State of California in this direction have been written about by Mr. Smith and have been published from time to time. For example, in the Monthly Bulletin of the California WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 529 Commissioner of Horticulture for December, 1915, he lists the bene- ficial insects imported during the period in which he was connected with the State Insectary. Later Mr. Smith was appointed a professor in the University of California and was sent to Riverside where he has since worked at the great Citrus Experiment Station. He went himself to the Orient in 1912 and 1913. He has reported on a number of interesting introductions. In 1913 he reported Scymnus bipuncta- tus from the Philippines. In 1914 he reported upon the importation of black-scale parasites from South Africa. Eleven species of unde- termined parasites were said to have been reared from this material, two of them in considerable numbers. Two of the primary parasites issued from a young scale before the eggs were laid, and were ex- pected to become valuable supplements to two of the other parasites of the older scales, both of which attack them after the eggs are laid. In 1914 the State of California maintained a laboratory at Palermo, Sicily, in charge of H. L. Viereck. He sent over mealy-bugs and {rom these were reared Paraleptomastix abnormis, Girault. Breed- ing proceeded rapidly, and before many months large colonies were placed in the orchards of southern California. H. S. Smith reported in 1917 that the parasite was thriving and increasing rapidly in all the field colonies. He thought that it would become of great economic value. One interesting thing about this parasite is its apparent resis- tance to fumigation. In 1916 Mr. Smith reported the very recent introduction of two Coccinellids from Japan—Chilocorus similis which feeds upon Coc- cids, and Ptychanatis oxyridis which feeds voraciously upon all plant- lice. In the same year he reported that Ootetrastichus beatus had been received from Hawaii for use against the sugar beet leaf-hopper in California. Also in 1916 it was reported by Mr. Smith and H. Compere that the fly, Lestophonus iceryae, introduced by Koebele at the same time as Novius cardinalis, in the lapse of years increased very slowly until at the time of writing, in some places, especially on Acacias, it has been a more important factor in the control of Icerya than the lady- bird. The same men in 1920 wrote about the establishment of Aphycus lounsburyi in southern California. It had been liberated in September, tg1g, from material received from South Africa. In 1923, Mr. Smith imported into southern California the South African Coccinellid Scymnus binaevatus to feed upon mealy-bugs. Several previous unsuccessful attempts had been made with this beetle. 530 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 In 1924 Harold Compere reported on the rearing, from Japanese material, of four primary parasites of the so-called Citricola scale. Coccophagus modestus, introduced from South Africa into Cali- fornia as a primary parasite of the black scale, is considered in South Africa to be one of the most effective enemies of this scale. Accord- ing to Smith and Compere, in a bulletin published in 1926, its estab- lishment in southern California was successful. Mr. Harold Compere went to Australia in 1928. Among other important material, he brought back Coccophagus gurneyi, a species that in New South Wales is parasitic on four different species of mealy-bugs. It was brought to California by Mr. Compere in the hope that it would attack the so-called citrophilus mealy-bug. Writ- ing to me on March 10, 1930, Professor Smith used the following words: “ Coccophagus gurneyi 1s a wonder. It looks now as though the citrophilus mealy-bug is doomed. Many groves have been com- pletely cleaned up of the mealy-bug, and the dead carcasses with exit holes are found by the millions on the trees. I think we are about to witness another very successful case of biological control.” URUGUAY When the Defensa Agricola was created in 1911 there had been much damage for some years to peach trees by Diaspis pentagona. Ing. Roberto Sundberg immediately investigated the question of its natural enemies. He visited the United States and Italy in 1912, and branches carrying parasitized scales were sent to him in Uruguay both from the United States and from Italy. With careful handling and prompt distribution, the parasite (Prospaltella berlesei, How.) was speedily acclimatized, and at the present time the scale is virtually held in check. The peach orchards, which were practically ruined, recovered in a short time, and Uruguay produces a large crop and is in the way of exporting peaches. Through the Defensa Agricola, the same parasite was sent to Argentina. In 1915 Icerya purchasi was discovered in Uruguay. Colonies of Novius cardinalis were sent from Portugal, but without success. In 1919 a technical man was sent to Europe and secured a colony of the Novius at the Insectorium at Menton, France. He personally car- ried this shipment back to Uruguay, but only five adult beetles sur- vived the journey, From these individuals, however, in the course of two months thousands of adults were reared and widely distributed, so that within a year the infestation was practically under control. The Defensa Agricola sent colonies of the Novius to Sao Paulo, Brazil, and to Argentina. WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—-HOW ARD 531 In 1920 Aphelinus mali was sent from the United States to Uru- guay, and the insect was speedily reared and acclimatized and holds the woolly root-louse of the apple in check. Colonies of this para- site were sent from Uruguay to Argentina, Chile, England, Italy, and Germany. WORK IN ENGLAND FOR THE BRITISH COLONIES We have elsewhere referred to the founding of the Parasite Lab- oratory of the Imperial Bureau of Entomology at Farnham Royal, England. This Bureau, supported largely by the Empire Marketing Board, was established for the purpose of breeding parasites that might be useful to the different British colonies or dominions, Dr. S. A. Neave was the first Director of the Laboratory, but was later succeeded by Dr. W. R, Thompson, for a number of years in charge of the United States Bureau of Entomology laboratory at Hyéres, France. An article entitled ‘“ Breeding of Beneficial Parasites”? was pub- lished in the journal Science February 8, 1929, which gave an account of the work of the Parasite Laboratory of the Imperial Bureau of Entomology. It was stated that parasites of the pine Tortrix, the greenhouse white fly, and of the Coccid, Lecanium coryli, had been sent to Canada; Rhyssa persuasoria, a parasite of Sirex, to New Zea- land ; three species of parasites of the pear slug to New Zealand and Australia; a parasite of the woolly apple aphis to India and Kenya, and parasites of the earwig to New Zealand and Canada. THE USE OF INDIGENOUS PARASITES: DR. THOMPSON’S PAPER ON BIOLOGICAL CONTROL Except for its earlier paragraphs, this present chapter has dealt almost entirely with international introductions of useful insects. Little, in fact, has been done of comparatively recent years in the transfer of parasites from a point where they are abundant to points where they are scarce or absent in the same country or in the same general area. Nothing has been said, moreover, about the intensive breeding of parasites in enormous numbers for practical use in the same general locality. Reference has been made many times to the old European gar- deners’ practice of collecting ladybirds (Coccinellidae) and placing them on plants subject to attack from aphids. And the suggestion was made by many early authors that the parasitized larvae or pupae of certain injurious insects be kept to allow the parasites to escape. 532 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 The Californians for some years carried on spectacular work with Coccinellids collected by the hundreds of thousands during their rest- ing period in the mountains and that were carried down into the valleys of the southern part of the State to destroy plant-lice in the large melon fields. S. J. Hunter in Kansas tried once to breed up aphid parasites to control the grain aphis when it supposedly invaded Kansas wheat fields from the South. And F. M. Webster, while working for the United States Bureau of Entomology, had parasitized puparia of the Hessian fly collected in Pennsylvania and exposed in infested fields in Maryland with encouraging results. The parasite (Polygnotus hiemalis) apparently established itself immediately to good effect in the Maryland field. Under W. D. Hunter, parasitized boll weevils were carried successfully from Waco, Texas, to Dallas, Texas, and from Texas into Louisiana, with the result that the mor- tality of the weevil was increased in both localities to which the para- sites had been taken. It is surprising that more of this work was not done at an earlier date. The writer well remembers that in 1896, when practically all the shade trees in the District of Columbia were damaged by larvae of the white-marked tussock moth, there developed an enormous number of parasites in the northwest quarter of the city which in the other sections were scarce or entirely lacking. It would have been easy to supply the suffering sections with an abundance of parasites from the northwest section. The emergency passed, however, without action of this kind, and, although the damage to the trees lasted a season longer in the quarters lacking parasites, other factors com- bined to lessen the injury during the following years. At all events, the damage ceased. The men in the tropical research laboratories in Cuba have noticed that the sugar cane borer is sometimes held down to some extent by its parasites in certain restricted regions while miles away parasites are lacking. Transfers in bulk of parasites are plainly indicated. As Lam writing this Dr. W. Dwight Pierce, who has been employed for a year or more by two of the great sugar companies: on the Island of Negros, has visited Washington. He has told me some very inter- esting facts about the transfer of parasites in the sugar cane fields from particular points where they abound to other points in the same general area. He has in this way a number of times increased very greatly the percentage of parasitism of the prevalent sugar cane borers. His reports when published will undoubtedly be of great interest. Another rather extraordinary example of successful transfer of indigenous parasites is apparently just being brought about at Halsey, WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 533 Nebraska, on an experimental reforestation area in the sand hill country. The reforestation is in the Nebraska National Forest, and the work is being done by the United States Forest Service. With the coniferous trees used in this experiment, an eastern injurious insect, one of the so-called tip-moths (/thyacionia frustrana), was accidentally introduced and flourished to such an extent as to threaten the death of all the young trees. In the East an Ichneumonid parasite (Campoplex frustranae) was known, and colonies of this parasite were taken from East Falls Church, Virginia, to Halsey, Nebraska, and liberated in the infested area. Doctor Craighead, in charge of the forest insect work of the United States Bureau of Entomology, reported in the summer of 1929 that in the areas where the parasite was first liberated parasitism had increased to as much as 80 per cent and the percentage of destroyed tips had decreased from 90 per cent to less than 30 per cent; a definite improvement in the appearance of the trees was discernible, and there was promise that the parasite would be the solution of the very difficult problem. Later information confirms that promise. The expert in charge of the work, to whom much credit should be given, is Mr. Lynn G. Baumhofer of the Forest Insects Section of the Bureau of Entomology. The trees planted on the area were largely Austrian, Scotch, and yellow pine. The extraordinary work that has been done in several parts of the world with Trichogramma minutum, an egg-parasite of a large number of injurious insects, has attracted great attention of late years. The mass breeding of this useful parasite has been carried to an extreme in southern California by Mr. Stanley Flanders who has simplified and economized the work by using one of the common meal moths as a breeding stock, the resulting parasites being distributed to walnut growers to parasitize the eggs of the codling moth. Moreover, Mr. E. R. Speyer, who has been studying the greenhouse white fly in England for several years, has reared one of its parasites (Encarsia formosa) on a very large scale for distribution to greenhouses in the early part of the season at a time when fumigation would injure the younger plants. This sort of work, verging upon the actual domestication of bene- ficial forms, is undoubtedly important and will assume more im- portance as time goes on. This whole question of the practical use of parasites and predatory insects is considered by Dr. W. R. Thompson in a just-published paper entitled “The Principles of Biological Control”? (The Annals of Applied Biology, May, 1930, Vol. 17, No. 2, pp. 306 to 338). Doctor Thompson has been working upon problems of this nature for 534 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VoL. 84 many years. A Canadian by birth and education, he joined the force of the United States Bureau of Entomology and was engaged in parasite work at the Gipsy Moth Laboratory in Massachusetts. He afterwards went to Europe among those who first searched for the parasites of the alfalfa weevil, a European insect that had been intro- duced accidentally into the Utah fields. After the World War, for some years he had charge of the European end of the work carried on by the Bureau of Entomology in the study and importation into the United States of the European enemies of Pyrausta nubilalis, the well known European corn borer. Later, as we have elsewhere pointed out, he took charge of the important Parasite Laboratory of the Imperial Bureau of Entomology at Farnham Royal. All this time he has been studying these questions of natural control, and this last work of his is authoritative and suggestive to a very great degree. He is one of the early and foremost users of mathematics as applied to biological problems, and in this last paper the whole question is studied more or less from its mathematical end. His summary, covered in 11 points, seems perfectly sound, although, having a non-mathematical mind, I have reached my conclusions in a somewhat different way. Those especially interested should by all means consult this paper, and it will be unnecessary here to quote even the rather long conclusions. Doctor Thompson’s No. 11, however, will serve very well to close this chapter : Generally speaking, no one species of parasite or predator is likely to bring the host under control over the whole of the infested area. To produce this result, the introduction of additional species will usually be necessary, while in many cases, their efforts must be aided by the methods of agricultural, chemical, or mechanical control. IMPORTATION OF THE INSECT ENEMIES OF WEEDS It has happened a number of times that when intentionally or acci- dentally imported plants have become weeds suggestions have been made that their natural enemies be introduced from their original homes. Such suggestions have been made not only in this country but in others. I remember that many years ago when the Russian thistle was spreading rapidly in the northwestern United States the United States Department of Agriculture was called upon for assis- tance in importing insect enemies of the plant from Russia. Knowing, however, that a number of the insect enemies of thistles affect culti- vated plants, I advised against any such attempt, and none was made. The case was quite different, however, when certain cacti of the genus Opuntia escaped from cultivation in Australia and overran WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 535 large acres of valuable grazing land. It seems unlikely that any of the insect enemies of Opuntia would attack cultivated crops of any value; and therefore the Australians were quite justified in their large-scale attempts to import into Australia and establish there the insect enemies and diseases of the plants of this genus. A Prickly-Pear Board was established in Queensland, and Prof. T. Harvey Johnston and Mr. Henry Tryon were sent on a world hunt. They visited Washington in 1913, and were advised to go to Texas and consult with W. D. Hunter, F. C. Pratt, and J. D. Mitchell of the United States Bureau of Entomology, who had been studying cactus enemies for some time. Eventually a laboratory for the Prickly-Pear Board was established at Uvalde, Texas, and many important insects were sent over. Cactus-feeding insects were also sent in from other parts of the world. Certain species have become established and have proved very effective, destroying the injurious plants over large tracts of land. Hawau, suffering from the increase of the Lantana weed, sent agents to several countries to seek for the insect enemies of this weed. A fly affecting the seed was found and introduced and multiplied to such an extent that the Lantana pest was greatly reduced. This Lantana seed fly was introduced from Hawaii into Fiji prior to 1916 and was reported in that year by F. P. Jepson to have become so thoroughly established that it was not possible to find Lantana within several miles of Suva that did not display evidence of attack by this insect. Similarly the same fly was introduced into Queensland from Hawaii, as announced in the Queensland Agricultural Journal for April, 1917. Australia is not the only part of the world to introduce enemies of Opuntia. G. Pettit, in the Proceedings of the French Academy of Agriculture in 1929, announced the successful introduction of Dac- tylopius coccus into Madagascar to destroy Opuntia vulgaris. He made the statement that in one large tract of 25,000 acres the cactus was completely destroyed in eight months. In the review, no state- ment is made as to the place from which the Dactylopius was imported. The destruction of Opuntia on the Island of Mauritius by the different imported insects has also been tried. Dr. R. J. Tillyard for several years before leaving New Zealand for Australia interested himself in the importation of insect enemies of the blackberry, blackberry plants having gone wild over large sections of land and having become a great pest. Doctor Tillyard, 536 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS voL. 84 in putting through his idea about introducing the natural enemies of the plant, met with considerable opposition, since the insect enemies of blackberries would also destroy other and more useful Rosaceous plants ; but his scientific reputation is so sound that he was entrusted by American and European entomologists with insects for intro- duction. In the same way the insect enemies of ragwort, gorse, and piripiri have been introduced into New Zealand. Dr. David Miller reported in 1929 that in three cases the work was still in its preliminary stages, but that, in the case of ragwort, field liberations of the cinnabar moth (Tyria jacobaeae) imported from England had already been made. GROWTH OF APPRECIATION OF ECONOMIC ENTOMOLOGY BY OTHER SCIENTIFIC WORKERS At first thought it would seem that wide-spread popular apprecia- tion and popular support would be all that economic entomology would need. But there is something else, and that is appreciation on the part of workers in what is known as pure science. And the lack of such appreciation was keenly felt by the earlier economic ento- mologists. It is difficult in these days to realize the attitude of museum men and university men towards the workers in agricultural ento- mology even when the former were entomologists themselves. Per- haps they did not realize it to the full themselves, but those of us who were trying to help the farmer in his insect problems felt as though we were classed as outsiders—as farmers ourselves. And most of us realize how the old-fashioned farmer is thought of, even today, in scientific circles. : I think it likely that this attitude of scientific men has persisted even longer in Europe than in this country, although we must remem- ber that in Italy Antonio Berlese and Filippo Silvestri were early elected members of the Academia dei Lincei, the most exclusive of the Italian scientific organizations ; and that in France Paul Marchal nearly 30 years ago became a member of the Académie des Sciences and thus of the Insitut de France. Other instances are not lack- ing, as view the esteem in which Porchinsky and Cholodkovsky were held in Russia. But all of these men did work aside from its economic applications that brought them this esteem and these honors. As late as 1902, on my first visit to the National Hungarian Museum, I asked Kertész and Mocsary about Jablonowski and they replied that he was not a scientific man, he was a farmer, and that I would find him over in WIIOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD Bi) old Pesth. This was only one of many instances and was quite what I might have expected from my general experience. As appreciation began to come from outside these circles, how- ever, the eyes of the pure scientists began to be opened, not at first to the merits of the scientific work being done by the economic ento- mologists, but to the fact that they were getting support for their work and that, therefore, if they expected financial support for their own labors they must study the situation more than they had before. A little instance of this was shown me on an early visit to Spain. The Director of the Natural History Museum in Madrid, himself a famous entomologist, Ignacio Bolivar, told me that he had arranged to have one of his aids go to Budapest to study Diptera with Kertész and another one to Germany to study parasitic Hymenoptera with Schmiedeknecht, and that his object was that, since these men could then be in position to identify the parasites of injurious insects, he could secure from his Government more appropriations for the Museum. In this country and England, while, as we have pointed out, any aspect of entomological work was for very many years considered trivial, there were men here and there who for one reason or another came to command the respect of their scientific colleagues either for their remarkable work with insects or in spite of that fact. Thus, Sir John Lubbock (afterwards Lord Avebury) was early elected to the Royal Society and was a man who commanded great respect from his scientific colleagues. He was President of the British Association for the Advancement of Science in 1881. In the United States, John L. LeConte, S. H. Scudder, and A. S. Packard were elected members of the National Academy of Sciences, an organization which may be compared in a way to the Royal Society of England, the Académie des Sciences of Paris, and the Academia dei Lincei of Rome— LeConte as an incorporator, Scudder in 1877, and Packard in 1872. LeConte, by the way, was President of the great American Associa- tion for the Advancement of Science in 1874. These were decided recognitions on the part of scientific men of individual entomologists, but none of them were interested in economic entomology at the time when these honors came to them, although it is true that Packard subsequently wrote concerning the injurious insects of Massachusetts, became a member of the United States Entomological Commission and wrote a large volume on forest insects. Appreciation of economic entomology and economic entomologists, although very slow in coming, appears now to be increasing rapidly. Although for many years I had been Secretary of the American Asso- 35 538 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VoL. 84 ciation for the Advancement of Science, my first realization of this fact came to me at the Second International Congress of Entomology in Oxford in 1912. Economic entomology was only one of a number of sections of the Congress, and I had been made President of the first session of this section. In view of the fact that the attendance at the Congress was composed largely of morphologists and tax- onomists, I had supposed that the section on economic entomology would be poorly attended, and was therefore suprised and gratified on entering the room to find that nearly every seat was taken. It was thus plainly shown that the admirable scientific work done by the economists during the preceding few years had brought about a change of sentiment and a real interest in the applications of the science. The Third International Congress of Entomology was to have been held in 1915, at Vienna, but the World War came on in 1914 and all thought of international congresses was lost for nearly 10 years. There is no doubt that the war showed in many directions the use- fulness of the economic entomologist. A knowledge of medical ento- mology naturally played a great role, as it always does where masses of men are brought together for any purpose. But perhaps it was especially in the loss of food supplies through insects that entomology was most insistently brought into view. The necessity of bringing together enormous quantities of stored food supplies facilitated greatly the multiplication of insects that live in such products, while the extreme necessity for the production of food by agriculture made the loss through the work of insects on growing crops a matter of enormous importance. Many of these things are brought together in an article entitled “ Entomology and the War” published in the Scientific Monthly for February, 1919. It was during the war, it may be stated incidentally, that the Federal Bureau of Entomology began its system of record- ing closely the increase of crop pests all over the country. At the close of the war there was a period of several years during which the deep animosities which had been engendered remained too strong for rapprochement to be thought of between even the scientific men of the opposing nations. In fact, I believe it was not until 1923 when English, French, Belgian, Italian, and American workers in ento- mology first met in international conference with German, Austrian, Hungarian and other nationalists of recently established countries formerly under the dominion of the Central Powers. This meeting occurred at Wageningen, Holland, and brought together both applied entomologists and phytopathologists, and the object of the conference WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOW ARD 539 economic. The idea originated in Holland, and was wholly practical it is fair to suppose that the inciting idea was suggested by the pro- mulgation of Order No. 37 of the Federal Horticultural Board of the United States Department of Agriculture, which seemed to weigh especially against the bulb-growers of Holland. The selection of the present writer as Honorary President of this international conference was probably thought to be a diplomatic move. The office was accepted with pleasure, although as a matter of fact I had no official connection with the Federal Horticultural Board and no official influence over its actions. It was interesting to study the German, Austrian, and Hungarian delegates as they came together with (especially) the French and the English. It was obvious that they did not know how they were going to be received and they were studying the situation—feeling out the atmosphere. It was as though their antennae were stretched out feeling for invisible waves. They were treated, however, with the most perfect courtesy, and the tone of the whole conference was cordial and unruffled. The conference itself was a significant one in the history of plant protection, although it had no especial bearing upon the point we are trying to show in this chapter, which is the growth and esteem among the workers in pure science for the workers in applied entomology. sy 1925 the Third International Congress of Entomology was arranged and was held at Zurich. There men from many countries, interested in all phases of entomology, met in number and carried on a meeting which lasted for six days. There had surely been a change since the Oxford meeting. Very many economic entomologists were present. The meetings of the Section of Economic Entomology were largely attended. Two of the principal speakers at general sessions of the whole Congress were economic entomologists, and the writer had the honor of presiding over the first of these general sessions after the opening session which of course was conducted by the President of the Congress, Prof. A. v. Schulthess of Switzerland. Again, two years later, the Tenth International Congress of Zoology was held at Budapest—the first since 1912 at Monaco. Obvious inter- national differences were absent from this meeting. Germans, French, English, Poles, Belgians, Austrians, Hungarians, Czechs, Jugoslavs, Italians, Rumanians, and Americans met in a spirit of perfect fra- ternity. Two of the best attended and most attractive general talks were given by economic entomologists, and the Section of Economic Zoology was not only popular but all of the papers presented before this section referred to entomology. 540 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 To return to our own country: After the election of S. H. Scudder to the National Academy of Sciences in 1877, no entomologist gained this honor in more than 30 years, and when finally another one was elected he was not a worker in applied entomology although connected with the Bussey Institution of Harvard which was established as an agricultural research institution. I refer to Dr. W. M. Wheeler. The first strictly economic entomologist to be elected was the writer, in 1916* and I have a suspicion that, if it had been thoroughly under- stood by the members of the Academy that he was so pronouncedly utilitarian in his work and his views, he might have failed. It is quite possible that his efforts in the organization of science, as long evi- denced by his permanent-secretaryship of the American Association for the Advancement of Science had more influence in bringing about the election than anything he had done in the field of agricultural or medical entomology. Two years later Prof. S. A. Forbes was elected to the Academy, and here again | fear that possibly he was elected in spite of his work in economic entomology rather than because of it. Two years later again, the writer was made President of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the second entomologist to whom this honor had come in the 70-odd years of the history of the organization. However, in spite of doubts as to real reasons, it may be concluded safely that there has been a great change and that an economic entomologist can hold up his head among the workers in so-called pure science. As a matter of fact, the results achieved by the workers in pure science in many fields are sure to be utilized sooner or later in the warfare against injurious insects. The final paragraph of an eloquent address made by E. Roubaud of the Pasteur Institute in concluding his term as President of the Entomological Society of France (1927) contains the following (translated ) : In concluding, I have another wish to express, namely that of seeing our Society show its activity more and more to the outside world, to impress the world especially by the services it renders. It no longer suffices that we should work in the serene peace of our laboratories; we must open a window on the side of life. The role of insects in human existence appears greater day by day. In an epoch like ours, essentially practical and utilitarian, we can no longer neglect this point of view. Will it not be possible to establish here a sort of information office about useful or injurious insects and the ways of destroying ‘The first economic entomologist to be made an honorary member of the Entomological Society of France was the writer (1905) and he was also the first man of this class to be made honorary fellow of the Entomological Society of London (1916). WHOLE VOL, APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 541 them—by means of public lectures or conferences to arouse the interest of the public with regard to the work of the Society? It seems to me that this will be worth while and that we will wish to discuss it at our leisure. * * * With a vivid realization of the probable extent of insect damage at the present time and with a nightmarish conception of possibilities in the future, I have, especially during the past 10 years, used every good opportunity to stress the facts as I see them, either in writing or in rather infrequent talks before audiences of different kinds. These audiences have often been either not interested in insects at all or they have seen in them curious creatures to be classed with the birds and wild flowers as convenient objects in nature study. To such people the old-fashioned idea of the entomologist as rather a trifler is still apt to hold, but, since every one must be educated, | have always made the effort to combat the old idea even with people who will apparently be of little use in the serious warfare that already exists and is constantly growing more serious. Since women exert much influence in the life of the world, I have not considered it inappropriate to point out that entomologists are not always to be ignored, even socially. I have pointed out, for example, that very many high-placed people have interested themselves in the collection of insects. One of the late grand dukes of Russia, King Boris of Bulgaria, the late Lord Walsingham of England, the present Lord Rothschild, the late Baron Osten-Sacken of Russia and Ger- many, and very many others are included among the persons who not only have taken great delight in amassing collections of insects, but have given certain groups serious study and have contributed greatly to the true science of entomology. Baron Osten-Sacken and Lord Walsingham were perhaps the most conspicuous examples of the latter group. Aside from European nobility, many wealthy persons have been entomologists ; and the great work done by such amateurs of means as the Oberthtirs of France and Dr. William Barnes and Mr. B. Preston Clark of the United States is abundantly recognized. It seems strange with all this that none of these titled or wealthy persons have interested themselves especially in applied entomology. I fail to remember any one of either of those classes who has con- tributed toward the public welfare by studying insects from the eco- nomic point of view, except possibly Miss Eleanor A. Ormerod of England who, although not a person of very great wealth, carried on investigations for years at her own expense and published very many pamphlets, also at her own expense, for free distribution to the farming classes. In the United States, where the greatest advances JV ¢ 54.2 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 have been made and where the economic situation has been longest appreciated, | know of no wealthy person who has taken up the serious study. Harris and Fitch were poor men; Walsh made a modest competence before he was able to devote his few remaining years to ardent study and vigorous writing. All the others have been poor men, although, fortunately, to a mere handful has come in later life, from some source or another, money enough to carry on in good shape and to leave something to their families. COMPARATIVE AMOUNT OF PUBLICATION BY DIFFERENT. COUNTRIES Here once more the invaluable “ Review of Applied Entomology ” comes to our aid. I have made no attempt to estimate the number of publications on the subject of medical entomology. It has been very great, and practically every country in the world has contributed. In agricultural entomology, a few facts as to publication may be of interest. In a broad way we may assume that the country which has published the most has taken the liveliest interest in the subject and probably has the greater number of workers. In 1916 the Review of Applied Entomology published a tabulation of the abstracts published in the first three volumes of the Review. The numbers ran as follows: 1913, 1,037; 1914, 1,494; 1915, 1,773. In each year the number cf publications issued in the United States was considerably larger than in any other country, and in 1915 comprised about one-third of the whole number, with Russia second, Great Britain third, Canada fourth, France fifth, Australasia sixth, and Italy seventh. The detailed list is readily available and is pub- lished on page 1 of Volume 4 of the Review. During the period from the close of 1915 to‘September, 1929, there were reviewed 23,430 papers. I have been interested in analyzing this list with the assistance of my friend and colleague, Mr. W. F. Tastet, and the main results will not be uninteresting. It will perhaps hardly be worth while to include the names of countries of which less than 100 papers have been reviewed, but with the others the list runs as follows : Wnitedi@Stateseccacev as eee 7,311 (of these, 2,115 were published by the Federal Government, 4,383 by officials of the State Experiment Stations, and 813 by others). Germany nen soci oarerie eer 2,02¢ Brance soa ene ee ee ee 1,804 RUSS Iai cee eee Cree crien 1,886 WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 543 Gara ate errno ear Say sis cniere! 0 do wong miss isn arte toha citer hircisvrs se cata 1,011 PNUIStHalliluesesbote ersateeccle cies operas) reve eis 904 Mtallivaereeret Mesias Gl cencicisiecs ovasole wie 699 DD UtChesaAStEMIdTESe tate secre ore «oe oe 513 A pammers creer tosis esse isk re sie severe 302 FS teczill rar vehtaeter tact reras staokeisie sai: si 384 SOU three titel CAN masloyeia icine setioyem sione yee 353 Flawarttunccecieierers SEM eS, etc an ahe ak: 315 INEM EIN Uae eae cre cei er tiie ccctee ae 219 Spanner eee tec eso neck 199 Switzer amedayereis cnetereis. e104 erseeiereie 177 Fy Oayi10 tae Mee eee toysia Wnt cie eis, oo 152 Swed enmaryer terse eri saiawisictce eis Ys 140 Pnilip pines! pecieitrcrsa sce creie weeks = 136 INiewseZcalandkea fern acct oh erc cscs 135 ROTGtOmRACO Mee sry eel eeetle tsare 128 Czechoslovakia) A. so) 40-5. 026s s0e 121 ENTISER IAN Rie re kn IG Crea onions 112 Among those of less than a hundred, Belgium, Chile, Cuba, Fiji, Mexico, Poland, Rhodesia, Scotland, Guiana, Denmark, and British East Africa are recorded with more than 50 each. I imagine that this statement gives as fair an idea of the relative activities of the different countries as could easily be shown. Of course, the real value of the different publications varies very greatly. Some are long and.most important; others are short and relatively unimportant. But each one is useful. Possibly the Imperial Bureau of Entomology, in publishing its very competent Review, has done the greatest single service to applied entomology that can be thought of by the present writer. GONCLUSION: THE OUTEOOK The harm done by insects to the human race appears to have been increasing with growing rapidity for very many years. The realiza- tion of this fact has come to us only in comparatively recent times. And still more recently have we come to realize that we ourselves have created the conditions that have brought this about. But it seems that we have at last awakened to the danger and that good minds in rapidly increasing number are looking at most of our insect problems in an understanding way. The insect problem as a whole, however, has an almost infinite number of aspects, and to bring the insects under control as we have done with most other forms of life will need the cooperative work of very many fine minds of all the advanced na- tions in the years that are coming. It will not be the insects that will 544 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84 bring about mass starvation of the human race, for, if we do not invent new food, we will at least learn how to grow our old plant foods in such a way as not to encourage insect multiplication. And the time will surely come when we will have conquered the insect menace, when we will have discovered means of holding them in check—so much so that notable loss from their work will have ceased except where ignorance or carelessness prevails. A facetious friend, to whom I was saying something like this. the other day, said “ Yes, I expect to live to see legislation creating insect reserves, or preserves.” This satirical remark did not dampen my enthusiasm, since I have great faith in human intelligence in spite of our many stupid, blundering ways. In fact, I countered by telling my friend of the talk by N. C. Rothschild before the Second Inter- national Congress of Entomology at Oxford in 1912. Mr. Roths- child explained the steps that had been taken in Great Britain to create reserves where the indigenous fauna and flora might flourish unmolested, and dwelt upon the vanishing insects in famous collecting spots. He was followed in the discussion by his brother Walter (now Lord Rothschild), by the Rev. F. D. Morice of England, by E. Olivier of France, C. Kerremans of Belgium, Y. Sjostedt of Sweden, F, Wichgraf, P. Speiser, and H. J. Kolbe of Germany, and the writer—all speaking of nature-preserve movements in their own countries or of instances where civilization had ruined favorite col- lecting places. As a matter of fact, although we are prone to dwell at length upon the enormous opportunities that civilization has given insects, it has nevertheless reduced their opportunities in many instances. For example, the settling of the northwestern part of the United States and the bringing of very large areas under cultivation have resulted in the practical disappearance of the so-called Rocky Mountain locust, or ‘‘ Colorado grasshopper”? (Melanoplus spretus). Again, the so- called seventeen-year locust, or periodical Cicada (Cicada septen- decim.) is lessening in number. Larvae hatching from eggs deposited in a given year and entering the soil, when ready to emerge as adults 17 years later, have sometimes found that an entire city has grown up during their long preparatory stages, and are unable to repro- duce. But these instances are all too few, and on the whole, as we have so often said, civilization has been upsetting the balance decidedly in favor of the increase of injurious insects. In spite of my optimism as to the ultimate results, I do not under- estimate the difficulties. In fact, during the past 10 years or more I have dwelt as forcibly as possible and upon all possible occasions on WHOLE VOL. APPLIED ENTOMOLOGY—HOWARD 545 the very great danger that confronts humanity. Yes, we have the great advantage of intelligence, but we must use that intelligence in this direction. I have urged my colleagues who can speak and write forcefully, and my journalist friends who know just how to present things to the public, to push the movement. I do not think we have done too much of this; I think we should keep it up. The same face- tious friend tells me, “ You are as bad as a roadside advertisement ; you make me tired.” But I am used to him; he would make me tired too if he had not said it with a twinkle in his eye which showed that really he quite agrees with me. The intelligence of the human race, if brought to bear, will conquer the insect menace. au eeu eT a 42" Bret hak j Ao A rae 2 etre JA aii? 1 , , * cS Ri are Prk "eg | a SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL] 7845 Pi 4 Townend Glover (1813-1883) Asa Fitch (1809-1878 ) William Dandridge Peck (1763-1822) Thomas Say (1787-1834) Thaddeus William Harris (1795-1856) utwW bo SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOLE 84;,PL- 32 1. Benjamin Dann Walsh (1808-1869) 2. Charles Valentine Riley (1843-1805 ) 3. Alpheus Spring Packard (1839-1905 ) t. Cyrus Thomas (1825-1910) 5. William LeBaron (1814-1876) SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84, PL. 3 Samuel Stehmann Haldeman (1812-1880 ) Francis Gregory Sanborn (1838-1884 ) Simon Snyder Rathvon (1812-1801 ) Thomas Meehan (1826-1901 ) Samuel Hubbard Scudder (1837-19011) mW bh SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84, PL. 4 t. Hermann August Hagen (1817-1893 ) 2. John Henry Comstock (1840 ) Henry Shimer (1828-1805 ) 4. Albert John Cook (1842-1916) 5. Joseph Albert Lintner (1822-1808 ) 3: |. SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. *84,, RL. 5 Pa ote. it) thn 4 to Edmond Ruffin (1704-1865 ) Andrew Samuel Fuller (1828-1896) Mrs. Mary Lua Adelia (Davis) Allen Treat (1835——) 4. Miss Mary Esther Murtfeldt (1848-1013) 5. John Lawrence LeConte (1825-1883) Ww SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84, PL. 6 1. George Hazen French (1841 ) 2. Daniel William Coquillett (1856-1011) 3. Joseph Duncan Putnam (1855-1881 ) 4. Miss Emily Adella Smith (Mrs. Pigeon) 5. Augustus Radcliffe Grote (1841-1903) SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOI. 84, PLE. 7 1. Charles Henry Fernald (1838-1921 ) Lawrence Bruner (1850-——) Stephen Alfred Forbes (1844-1930) 3 4. Herbert Osborn (1856 =\ s. Francis Huntington Snow (1840-1908 ) SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOUT 84, 1b 6S j=, 1. Francis Marion Webster (1849-1916) 2. Mark Vernon Slingerland (1864-1900 ) 3. John Bernard Smith (1858-1912) 4 4. Wilton Everett Britton (1868 ) Henry Torsey Fernald (1866——) SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84, PL. 9 t. Henry Guernsey Hubbard (1850-1899) 2. Otto Lugger (1844-1001 ) 3. Ephraim Porter Felt (1868——) 4. Harrison Garman (1858——) 5. Clarence Preston Gillette (1859——) SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84, PL. 10 1. Theodor Pergande (1840-1916) Albert Koebele (1852-1924) Charles Lester Marlatt (1863- ) Frank Hurlbut Chittenden (1858-1928) Eugen Amandus Schwarz (1844-1928) iit. GW W SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOLE. 84, PLs 11 ” 3 rR Re se: 1. Andrew Delmar Hopkins (1857) 2. Altus Lacey Quaintance (1870—— ) 3. Walter David Hunter (1875-1025 ) 4. Everett Franklin Phillips (1878——) 5. Albert Franklin Burgess (1873——) VOUT s+ eee. te SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS 1. Charles James Stewart Bethune (1838 ) 2. James Fletcher (1852-1908 ) 3. Arthur Gibson (1875——) 4. Charles Gordon Hewitt (1885-1920) 5. William Saunders (1835-1914) SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS 4+ 5 1. Sam Macias Valdez. 2. Julho Riquelme Inda 3. Alfonso L. Herrera (1868———) 4. Alfredo Duges (1827-1910) 5. Alfons Ernst Alexius Michael Dampf (1884—— ) SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOLE 84, PE, 14 1. Maria Sibyllfa Merian, “Frau J. A. Graff” (1647-1717) 2. August Johann Roesel von Rosenhof (1705-1759) 3. Francesco Redi (1626-1698 ) 1. Johannes Goedart (1620-1668) 5. Antonio Vallisnieri (1661-1730) SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. ‘84, PL. 15 1. Johann Wilhelm Meigen (1764-1845 ) Charles DeGeer (1720-1778) 2 3. René Antoine Ferchault de Réaumur (1683-1757) 4. Pierre André Latreille (1762-1833) 5. Johann Christian Fabricius (1745-1808 ) VOERS4 bE io SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS 1. Johann Leonard Frisch (1666-1743) », Pieter Lyonnet (1707-1789) Jan Swammerdam (1637-10807 ) Pierre Francois Marie Auguste Dejean (1780-1845) 3: | r* . -* 5. William Kirby (1759-1850) SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84, PL. 17 1. Eleanor Anne Ormerod (1828-1901 ) 2. Frederick Vincent Theobald (1868-1930) 3. John Obadiah Westwood (1805-1893 ) 4. John Curtis (1791-1862) 5. Alexander Henry Haliday (1806-1870) SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84, PL. 18 1. John Claude Fortescue Fryer (1886 ) 2. Frederick Muir 3. Sir Guy Anstruther Knox Marshall (1871—— ) 4. Cecil Warburton 5. Augustus Daniel _Imms (1880——) SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84, PL. 19 . Valéry Mayet (1839-1909) . Julius Emile Planchon (1823-1888) . Paul Marchal (1862 ) . Jean Baptiste Alphonse Boisduval (1799-1879) . Paul Vayssiére (1889 ) mB WNH VOL. 84, PL. 20 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS CS a J * SS a” ¥ = pus 1. Antonio Villa (——1885) >, Achille Costa (1823-1808 ) Camillo Rondani (1807-1879 ) Adolfo Targioni-Tozzetti (1823-1902) 5. Achille Costa ( 1823-1898 ) 3: 4. SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84, PL. 21 + . Giovanni Passerini (1816-1893) Antonio Berlese (1863-1927 Filippo Silvestri (1873 ) Gustavo Leonardi (1866-1018) . Giacomo del Guercio (1863——) Mew ND SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOE. 8477PE. 22 . Vincent Kollar (1797-1860) ) . Ludwig Reh (1867 Karl Escherich (1871 ) . Julius Theodor Christian Ratzeburg (1807-1871) . Ernst Ludwig Taschenberg (1818-1808) mm BW bw SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84, PL. 23 Karl Sajo Geza Horvath (1847——) Josef Jablonowski (1863 ) . Jan Ritzema-Bos (1850-1928) August Langhoffer (1861 ) mnpWwWN HR SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84, PL. 24 1. Frederick Wilhelm August Meinert (1833-1912) 2. Sven Lampa (1839-1914) 3. Sofie Rostrup (Jacobsen) (1857——) 4. Matthias Thomsen (1896——) Jorgen Matthias Christian Schiodte (1815-1884 ) SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOUS 84 PL. 4 Wilhelm Moritza Sch6yen (1844-1018) Ivar Tragardh (1878——_) Karl Lindemann (1844-1929) Nicholas Alexandr Cholodkowsky (1858-10921 ) Josef Aloizievich Porchinski (1848-10916) mMeRWN SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84, PL. 26 _ } 4 Michael Rimsky-Korsakov (1873) Wladimir Petr Pospeloy (1872) N. V. Kurdiumoy (1882-10917 ) Ivan Nik. Filipjev (1889——) Nicolai Nicolaevitsch Bogdanov-Katjkov mt & Wb = SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84, PL. 27 Frantisek Antonin Nicker] Ottakar Nicker] Heinrich Uzel (1868——) Franz Klapalek (1863-1919) J. Borcea 6. Wilhelm K. Knechtel (188 9—— ) SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84, PL. 28 is f% p ~ ’ ff 4 5 1. Ryszard Bledowsky (1886 ) 2. Julius Komarek (18092 ) 3. Zygmunt Atanazy Mokrzecki (1865——) 4. Stepan Soudek (1880 ) 5. Frantisek Rambousek (1886——) SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOEs 84-7 hee 29) Enzio Rafael Reuter (1867 ) Maximilian Rudolph Standfuss (1854-1017 ) Henri Faés (1878——_) Anton v. Schulthess-Rechberg (1855 Unio Saalas (1882 ) Otto Schneider-Orelli (1880—— ) ) NW fs w Noe SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84, PL. 30 5 1. Ignacio Bolivar de Urratia (1850-——) Candido Bolivar y Pieltain (1897——) Leandro Navarro y Perez Demetrio Delgardo de Torres Manuel Aullé y Costilla mit WN SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84, PL. 31 Anthero Frederico de Seabra (1876) ) Shinkai Inokichi Kuwana (1871 Shonen Matsumura (1872 ) Yasushi Nawa (1857 ) Chujiro Sasaki (1857——) acer SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOLE. (84,7 PL: 32 1. Harold Maxwell Lefroy (1877-1925) Charles Pugsley Lounsbury (1872——) Charu Chandra Ghosh (1884——) Claude Fuller (1872-1928) . Thomas Bainbrigge Fletcher oho N SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84; PL. 33 1. Jacobus Christian Faure (1891——) 2. Peter MacOwen (1830-1909) 3. Louis Péringuey ( 1924) 4. Archibald H. Ritchie 5. Thomas James Anderson SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84, PL. 34 1. Lewis H. Gough Gilbert Storey (1891-1922) 3. Fred Shaw 4. Edward Ballard (1888——) 5. E. W. Adair Carrington Bonsor Williams (1889——) SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS i. Mohammed Kamal Bey (1893—— ) 2. Hassan C. Efflatoun Bey (1893——) Naguib Eff. Iscander (1891-1928) 4. Walter Wilson Froggatt (1858——) s. Charles French (1843——) VOL. 84; PE.. 35 VOL. 84, PL. 36 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS 1. Robin John Tillyard (1881——) 2. Edward H. Thompson 3. Robert Veitch 4. Henry Tryon s. Harry Hargreaves (1893—— ) SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84, PL. 37 . Thomas Broun (1838-19019) . William Miles Maskell (1840-1808) . Frederick Wollaston Hutton (1836-1903) . David Miller (18900 ey Cabratt ) mMBWN He SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84, PL. 38 1. Louis Philibert le Cosquino de Bussy (1879—— ) 2. Karal Willem Dammerman (1885—— ) 3. Pieter Van der Goot 4. Walter Karl Johann Roepke (1882——) 5. Jacob Christiaan Koningsberger ( 1867——) SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOE.) 84, PL. 39 To Robert © lesb erkinsy (1666—— ) 2. Otto Herman Swezey (1869—— ) 3. Edward Macfarlane Ehrhorn (1862—— ) 4. Walter M. Giffard 5. David Timmins Fullaway (1880—— ) SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84, PL. 40 1. Henry Arthur Ballou (1872 ) Frederick William Urich (1870 ) George Norton Wolcott (1889—— ) G. E. Bodkin Delos Lewis Van Dine (1878=—) npwh SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84, PE. 41 1. Juan Brethes (1871-10928) Hermann Conrad Burmeister (1807-1892) Carlos Moreira (1869——) Manuel Jesus Rivera Frederico Guillermo Carlos Berg (1843-10902) ARWN SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS 1. Edwyn C. Reed (1841-1911) 2. Gregorio Bondar (1881- ) 3 Je We V. Boas 4. Francisco Campos R. (1878——) 5. Carlos Emilio Porter (1870——) SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84, PL. 43 Frederic Webster Goding (1858-——) Charles Henry Tyler Townsend (1863——) Patricio G. Cardin Stephen Cole Bruner (1891——) Roberto Sundberg Cg a SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84, PL. 44 1. Sir Patrick Manson (1844-1922) 2. Sir Ronald Ross (1857——) 3. Sir Andrew Balfour (1873——) 4. Sir Arthur Everett Shipley (1861-1927 ) 5. Prof. George Henry Falkiner Nuttall (1862——) SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84, (PL. 45 Dr. Albert Freeman Africanus King (1841-1914) Dr. Walter Reed (1851-1902) Dr. James Carroll (1854-1907 ) Dr. Aristides Agramonte (1868—— ) Dr. Jesse William Lazear (1866-1900 ) mbBwWN SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84, PL. 46 1. Dr. Joseph Hill White (1859 ) 2. Dr. Henry Rose Carter (1852-1925 3. Dr. Theobald Smith (1859 ) }. General William Crawford Gorgas (1854-1920) Dr. Howard Taylor Ricketts (1871-1910) 5 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84, PL.. 47 Sir Rubert William Boyce (1864-19011 ) Prof Robert Newstead (1859——) Dr. John William Watson Stephens (1865——) Lieut. Col. Alfred William Alcock (1859——) Dr. Malcolm Evan MacGregor (1889——) nb Wb VOL. 84, PL. 48 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS 1. Dr. Emile Brumpt (1877 ) 2. Dr. Alphonse Laveran (1845-1922) 3. Dr. Edmond Sergent (1876- ) Prof. Raphael Anatole Emile Blanchard (1857-1919) Dr. Etienne Roubaud = SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 84, PL. 49 Prof. Giovanni Battista Grassi (1854-1025 ) Dr. Angelo Celli (1857-1914) Dr. Carlos John Finlay (1833-1015) Dr. Juan Guiteras (1852-10925 ) Teed SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOE S84, (PES 50 1. Dr. Erich Christian Wilhelm Martini (1880 ) 2. Dr. Albrecht Hase (1882 ) 3. Dr. Charles Nicolle j. Dr. C. Bonne and Mrs. C. Bonne-Wepster SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOEW 84 RES 5a és yoy a 1. Dr. Oswaldo Goncalves Cruz (1872-1917) 2. Adolfo Lutz (1855——) 3. Dr. Arturo Neiva (1880——) 4. Dr. Emil August Goeldi (1859-1917) 5. Dr. Angelo da Costa Lima (1887——) oa) ope : t . a r ¢ ie ie INDEX TO INDIVIDUALS x Adair, BE. W., 368; Pl. 34 Adams, Professor (of Middlebury), 74 Adelung, N., 208 Adrianov, Paul I., 301, 305 Affleck, Thomas, 147 Agassiz, Louis, 345, 424 Agramonte, A., 466; Pl. 45 Ahearn, George P., 405 Ahlberg, O., 2092 Alcock, A. W., 484; Pl. 47 Aldrich, [J. M.], 514 Alexander, W. B., 390 Alféri A., 360, 513 Allan, W., 376 Altum, Bernard, 260 Alwood, W. B., 100 Alzate, Father Antonio, 194 Amerling, Karel Slavoj, 310 Amyot, GC. J. B.;. 348 Anderson, Dr. E. H., 147 Anderson, T. J., 225, 3703 El 33 Andres, Adolf, 360 Andrews, E. A., 352 Andrianov, A. P., 306 Angelini, Bernardino, 250 Anson, R. R., 415 Appel, O., 268, 283 Arango, Oscar, 453, 454, 455 Arens, P., 360 Arribalzaga, E. Lynch, 422 Arroniz, C., 330 Ascarate y Fernandez, D. Castildo, 328 Ashmead, W. H., 106, 340, 345, 404 Atia, Rizk, 369 Atkinson, E. T., 348 Atwell, H. C., 527 Audant, Andre, 461 Audouin, J. V., 234 Aullo y Costilla, Manuel, 524, 530; Pl. 30 Aurivillius, Christopher, 291, 292, 294 Austen, E. E., 484, 487 Autran, Eugenio, 421. Autuori, M., 429 Averin, 301 Ayoutantis, A., 516 B Babcock, K. W., 278 Back, E. A., 161, 410 Baeckmann, J. I., 304 Baer, G. A., 404 Bailey, Harry L., 179 Bain, F. O., 224 Baird, A. B., 224 Baird, W. H. W., 377 Bairstow, S. D., 371 Baker, Carl F., 21, 70, 188, 180, 357, 406, 423, 455 Bako, G., 277 Balbiani, 213 Balfour, Sir Andrew, 484; PI. 44 Ball, E. D., 108, 114 Ballard, E., 350, 352, 360, 371, 302; Pl. 34 Ballou, Charles H., 443, 457 Ballou, H. A., 226, 447, 449, 450, 451; Pl. 40 Bancroft, J., 387 Banks, C. S., 404, 405 Banks, Nathan, 100, 112 Baranov, N., 319 Barber, C. A., 447, 450 Barber, Herbert S., 445 Barber, M. A., 493 Barbey, A., 326 Bardales, Manuel A., 445 Bargagli, P., 250 Barlow, J. G., 92 Barnard, Dr. W. S., 80, 90 Barnes, James, 445 Barnes, William, 541 Barnette, G., 390 Barreda, L. de la, 195, 196, 197 Barreto, Braulio T., 454 Barrett, O. W., 459, 462 547 548 Barthe, E. A., 462 Barton, Doctor, 9 Bastianelli, 468, 480, 491 Bates, H. W., 423, 444 Bates, Marston, 446 Baudys, E., 311 Baumhofer, Lynn iG 533 Bazille, Gaston, 214 Beauperthuy, Louis D., 465 Beck, A., 290 Beckwith, Prof. M. L., t10 Bedford, G. H. A., 374 Bedford, H: W.., 378 Beeson, C. F. C., 351 Begeman, H., 360 Bellenghi, T., 499 Benlloch, M., 330 Bengtsson, Simon, 293 Bennett, H., 226 Bentley, G. M., 149 Benton, Frank, IoI, 162, 163 Berg, Carlos, 421, 430; Pl. 41 Berger, E. W., 149 Bergman, Arvid, 293 Bergman, T., 290 Berlese, A., 251, 252, 253, 254, 255, 256, 258, 259, 499, 504, 518, 519; Pl. 21 Berro, J. M., 330 Berry, Paul A., 456 Bertoni, A. de Winkelried, 431 Bessey, C. E., 25, 26, 73 Bethune, C. J. S., 110, 183, 184 (foot- note), 221; Pl 12 Betram, G. F., 281 Betrem, J. G., 360 Bezzi, M., 427 Bickis, J., 308 Bignami, 468, 480, 491 Billings, John S., 480 Bird, Henry, 22 Bishara, Ibrahim, 369, 370, 371 Bishopp, F. C., 477 Bjerkander, Clas, 290 Blanchard, Emile, 201, 236, 237, 433 Blanchard, Everard E., 423, 420, 422, 423 Blanchard, Raphaél, 134, 485; Pl. 48 Blanco, Gabriel, 195 Blattny, C., 311, 312 Bledowski, R., 315, 317, 318; Pl. 28 INDEX Blue, Rupert, 497 Blunck, H., 268 Boas, J. EX V:;.278, 2793 Pl. 42 Bodenheimer, F. S., 209, 210, 363 Bodkin, G. E., 226, 362, 363, 441, 451; Pl. 40 Bogdanoy-Katjkov, N. N., 304, 305, 308; Pl. 26 Boheman, C. H., 124 Boisduval, J. B. A. D., 206, 208, 235, 230), 237 7 E119 Boisgiraud, 499 Boldyrev, 304 Bolivar, Ignacio, 328, 329, 404, 537; Pie3o Bolivar y Pieltain, C., 329, 330; Pl. 30 Bonansea, Dr. Silvio J., 195 Bondar, Gregorio, 428; Pl. 42 Bonne, C., 440, 441, 490, 491; Pl. 50 Bonne-Wepster, Mrs. C., 440, 441, 490, 401; Pl.'50 Bonnet, 202 Borcea, J.,°320, 321,322) Pl 27 Borden, A. P., 126 (foot-note) Boris, King of Bulgaria, 541 Borne, F. Puga, 435 Borodin, D. N. 301, 302, 303 Borras, Gilberto, 431 Borries, H., 278 Bos, J. Ritzema, 280, 281, 282, 283; Pie23 Bouche, P. F., 208, 261, 290 Bouresch, Iv., 322, 323 Bovien, Prosper, 280 Bouvier, E. L., 208, 209, 241 Bovell, J. R., 450 Box, Harold E., 442, 460, 510, 523 Boyce, Rubert, 482, 483, 498; Pl. 47 Brackett, G. E., 20 Bradley, J. Chester, 77 Bragina, Anna, 319 3rain, Charles K., 374, 475 Bramanis, L., 309 Bramson, K. L., 299 Branner, John C., 98, 423 Bredo, M., 289 Bremi-Wolf, J. J., 324 Bréthes, Juan, 354, 422, 430; Pl. 41 Brick, 260 Brittain, W. H., 224 INDEX Britton, W. E., 108, 114; Pl. 8 Brocchi, Professor, 239 Bromley, S. W., 455 Brosius, Fred. C., 158 Broun, Thomas, 401; Pl. 37 Brown, Rev. Robert, 404 Bruch) ©..9437 Brugiroux, A., 242 Brumpt, E., 486; Pl. 48 Bruner, Lawrence, 75, 92, 102, 103, 114, ATO. A2T. Pl, 7 Bruner S.C) 452) 454, 455,457; Pl: 43 Bryk, Felix, 289 Buckle, Philip, 226, 231 Buffon, 234 Bugnion, C., 327 Bugnion, Ed., 245 Buniva, Michael F., 249 Burgess, A. F., 18, 114, 119, 168, 170, 520) Pll rr Burgess, Edward, 105 Burmeister, Hermann, 410, 422, 430; PARAL Burnett, W. I., 13, 148 Burns, A. N., 391 Burrill, T. J., 25, 26, 73 Busck, August, 413 Bushnell, H. S., 357 Buzacott, J. H., 301 Buxton, P. A., 362, 416 G Cabell ero jn 13 Caccini, A., 487 Camacho, S., 437 Cameron, M., 351 Cameron, W. P. L., 378 Camboué, Rev. Paul, 243 Campbell, A. R., 481, 405 Campbell, P. J., 110 Campos) Re Hs 432; 433) Ply 42 Candéze, 404 Canela, PP) 4., 422 Canto, Clodomiro Perez, 435 CapersG. Weir Caporal, J. B., 280, 281 Caracciolo, H., 447 Cardin, Patricio, 453, 454, 456; Pl. 43 Carlier, Alb., 286 549 Carnegie, Andrew, 223, 224, 22 Carpenter, George H., 227, 231, 232, 233 Carroll, James, 133, 174, 233, 466, 481, 482, 496; Pl. 45 Carruthers, Sir Joseph, 411 Carson, 352 Garter Hii.203 Carter, Henry R., 481; Pl. 46 Carter, Col. Landon, 11 Casagrandi, O., 4904 Casey, Thomas, L., 205 Castellano, Jose C., 422 Celli, A., 483, 487, 491, 492, 493, 494, 495, 496; Pl. 49 Chamberlain, Joseph, 471 Chamberlin, T. R., 527 Chambers, E. L., 179 Chambers, V. T., 104 Champion, H. G., 224 Champney, Miss Mary G., 80 Chandler, A. C., 175 Chapman, J. W., 408 Chapman, Royal N., 60, 182 Chapuis, F., 404 Chittenden, Frank H., 08, A7o Ele tO Cholodkovsky, Nicholas A., 292, 295, 296, 300, 303, 307, 530; Pl. 25 Chorley, J. K., 376 Chrzanowski, A., 317 Clark, B. Preston, 541 Clarke.) 387. Clausen, C. P., 242, 330, 342, 344, 347; 456 Claypole, E. W., 25, 26 Cleare, L. D., 441, 451 Clemente, F. Gomez, 330 Clerck, 202 Coad) BY Rs 130; 131, 193; 2197; Coates, B. H., 12 Cockerell, T. D. A., 16, 17, 416, 427, 447, 514 Cockayne, A. H., 400 Colcord, Mabel, 112 Coleman, L. C., 352 Colerus, J., 210 Collinge, Walter E., 222, 230 Compere, George, 384, 397, 398, 503, 509, 510, 524, 528 167, 399, 550 Compere, Harold, 529, 530 Comstock, Anna B. (Mrs. J. H. Com- stock), 57, 58, 60, 61, 87 Comstock, J. Hi..20, 41,45. 55% 57.0 61, 70, 71, 72, 73, 75, 64, 80, 87, 88, 89, 95, 102, 103, II0, 119, 124, 161, 172, 180, 251, 499; Pl. 4 Conde, O., 3090 Conradi, A. F., 148 Conradt, Leopold, 195, 196 Constantineanu, M., 321 Cook, :A..J,- 20,21, 22. 64, 65, 70,273: 75, OF, 03" 102; LOO}, 155, 162) 528: Pl. 4 Cook, Mel. T., 452, 453 Cook, O. F., 445 Cooke, Mathew, 152, 153 Cooley, R. A., 109, 114 Cooper, Elwood, 154, 155, 156, 399 Coquillett, D. W., 14, 92, 90, 100, 153, 469, 487, 501, 525; Pl. 6 Corbett, George H., 224, 357, 361, 362 Cordley, A. B., 100 Cornu, 213 Corporaal, J. D., 360 Cort [of Johns Hopkins], 482 Cory, E. N., 149 Costa, Achille, 250; Pl. 20 Costa, O. G., 249 Cosyins, José, 445 Cotes. \G.3348;) 340 Cotterel, iG: 'S:,, 226,378 Cotton, R. T., 457 (foot-note), 459 Cowland, J. W., 378 Craighead, F. €.,.533 Cramer, .280 Craw, Alexander, 157, 409, 410 Crawford, D. L., 70 Crawford, Frazer S., 909, 392, 393 Crespo, M. A., 462 Cresson, E. T., 51, 66, 88. Criddle, Norman, 512 Cromer (Lord Cromer), 226, 375 Crossman, S. S., 459, 526. Crotch; Gai. 61 Cruz, Oswaldo, 425, 489; Pl. 51 Culberson, Charles A. (Governor of Texas), 126 Cunningham, H. S., 440 Curran, C. H., 448, 460 INDEX Currie, Donald H., 408 Currie, G. A., 390 Curtis, John, 44, 207, 218, 219, 220, 232, 27Te ele Cushman, R. A., 406 Cuthbertson, A., 376 Cuvier, 234 D Dabney, Dr. C. W., 126 Da Costa Lima, A., 427, 428, 489 (foot- note) ; Pl. 51 Dahlbom, 290 d’Almeida, Romualdo Ferreira, 429 d’Almeida, Verissimo, 331, 332 Da Matta, A. A., 437 Dammerman, K. W., 284, 356, 357, 359; Pl. 38 Dampf, Dr. Alfons, 193, 194, 195, 196, LOZ See lers Danysz, J., 239 Darling, R. C., 378 Dartiguenave, Marcel, 461 Dash; J. S:, 450 Da Silva, Armando, 331 Dass, Harnam, 350 Daumec, Auguste, 461 Davidson, James, 395 Davis, J. J., 109 Dean, George A., 74 (foot-note), 109, 114 De Azevedo Marques, L. A., 429 De ‘Bussy, 2 P2845 63545) 3550350: 360, 512; Pl. 38 Decaux, F., 499 De Charmoy, D. d’Emmerez, 378, 520, 521 Decoppet, M., 326 De Elera, Casto, 404 DeGeer, Charles, 202, 499; Pl. 15 De Herrera, Antonio, 458 Dejean, Count P. F. M. A., 205, 206, 234; Pl. 16 Delassus, M., 242 Del Canizo, J., 330 Delfin, Federico Teobaldo, 435 Del Guercio, G., 251, 252, 253, 259; Pl. 21 De Meijere, J. C. U., 281 De Mora, 330 INDEX Dens oops Je Be Ay, 300, 513, 520 De Niceville, Lionel, 340 De Oviedo, Gonzalo Fernandez, 458 Dekyee, CH; 125 MerSeabray A... 332, 334; Pl. 33 De Selys-Longchamps, M. E., 284, 286, 404 De Stefani, P., 258 De Torres, D. D., 329, 330, Pl. 30 Devereaux, W. L., 104 De Wilde, A., 285 Diaz, A. Cabrera, 330 Dimmock, George, 104 Dixey, F. A., 210 Doane, R. W., 158, 175, 481 Dobrodejev, A. I., 304 Dodd, Alan P., 226, 389, 390, 3901 Dodge, Charles Richards, 24, 35, 41, 42, 84 d’ Oliveira, Paulino, 331 Doubleday, Edward, 34 Dove, W. E., 477 Dow, R. P., 35 (foot-note) Dozier, H. L., 459, 461 Dry, F. W., 224 Dryenowski, A. K., 322, 323 Dryer, i i; 225 Du Bochage, Barbosa, 331 Dubois, Alfonse, 285 Ducasse, Emanuel, 461 Dugés, Alfredo, 191, 195; Pl. 13 Du Monceau, Henri Louis Duhamel, 234 Dupont, R. R., 379 Duport, L., 242 Dusmet y Alonso, D. José Maria, 327, 328 Dwinelle, C. H., 104 Dyar, H. G., 441, 472, 473, 484, 489 Dzunkovski, Eugen, 319 E Eagerton, H. C., 453 Eckstein, Doctor, 260 Edwards, F. W., 484 Edwards, Henry, 62, 68, 104 Edwards, William Henry, 379, 423, 449 Efflatoun, H. C., 367, 368, 360, 371; Pl. 35 Eggers, H., 429 on qn — Ehrhorn, E. M., 308, 410; Pl. 39 Eichhoff, W. J., 207, 260 Eide, F. C., 278 Emelianov, I. V., 175, 266, 301, 304 Esaki, T., 341, 347 Escalara, 330 Escherich, Karl, 60, 110, 175, 225, 260, 264, 265, 266, 207, 268, 269, 327; Bin22 Escher-Zollikofer, 324, 325 Essig, E. O1,°70;, 100,153, 158 Estrada, Ernesto Sanchez, 455, 457 F Fabricius, J. C., 202, 204, 348, 400; Pl. 15 Faes, Hi., 325, 3203 Ply 20 Fairchild, David, 284 Fallen, 202 Fatio, 327 Faure, J. C., 196, 374; Pl. 33 Fawcett, W., 449 Felt, E. Porter, 48, 60, 107, 108, 112, iA 77 nel. Ferdinand, King of Bulgaria, 205 Fermi, C., 494 Fernald, C. H., 27, 73, 75, 88, 102, 106; TAN DION W72372)> bl ee7, Fernald, Mrs. C. H., 116 Fernald, Henry T., 27, 108, 114, 263; Pl. 8 Ferriére, Ch., 522 (foot-note) Ferris, G. F., 158 Feytaud, Prof. J., 241 Ficalbi, E., 494 Figueroa, C. S., 437 Figueroa, J., 442 Filipjev, I. N., 304, 305, 306; Pl. 26 Finlay, Carlos, 470, 488, 490; Pl. 49 Fintescu, G. N., 321, 322 Fisher, R. C., 522 Fiske, W. F., 18, 255, 290, 505, 527 Fitch, Asa, 2, 10, 12, 23, 43 to 50, 70, 172, 177, 180, 212, 219, 500, 547; Pl. 1 Flanders, Stanley, 302, 533 Fleischer, Ant., 311 Fletcher, James, 29, 94, 100, 110, 113, 114, 183, 184, 185, 186, 187, 221, 372, 2 ele 552 Fletcher, Robert, 480 Fletcher, T. Bainbrigge, 350, 351, 352; P32 Flippance, F.; 362 Foerster, J. A., 203 Foeéx, G., 238, 283 Fonscolombe, J. A., 236 Forbes,S. Ac, 14; 28)73,°75,7102, 107. 108, I10, 114, 540; Pl. 7 Forbes, William T. M., 460 Forbush, E. H., 119 Ford, Dr. Norma, 188 Fortunati, G., 404 Foster, Ed., 150 Fox-Wilson, G., 229 Franceschini, F., 251 Franchetti, L., 494 Franssen, C., 359 Frappa, C., 243 Freeborn, S. B., 158 Freer, Paul C., 404 French, Charles, 386, 387, 303; Pl. 35 French, Charles, Jr., 387 French, George H., 14, 28, 102, 104; Pl6 French, G. Talbot, 179 Frey-Gessner, E., 325 Friederich, Karl, 175, 268, 269, 270 274, 360 Friederichs, F., 416 Frisch, Johann Leonhard, 202; PI. 16 Froggatt, John L., 397, 523 Froggatt, Walter W., 225, 384, 387, 390, 396, 307; Pl. 35 Fryer, J. C. F., 228, 220; Pl. 18 Fuessly, J. P., 324 Fukuhara, 339 (foot-note) Fullaway, D. T., 400, 413, 416; Pl. 39 Fuller, Andrew S., 22; Pl. 5 Fuller, Claude W., 373, 374, 306, 308, 500, 523; Pl. 32 Fulmek, L., 274 Fulmek, R., 356, 360 Fyles, Rev. T. W., 184 G Gable, G. H., 333 Gailits, L., 300 Gailwey, A., 510 ’ INDEX Galloway, B. T., 135, 159 Gandara, Guillermo, 195 Gandrup, J., 520 Gardner, J, ‘Co M., 22453355 Gardner, T. R., 347 Garman, Harrison, 76, 104, 109, 114, 148; Pl. 9 Garthside, Stanley, 226 Gater, B. A. R., 361, 415 Gaumont, L., 240 Gay, Claudio, 433, 434 Gaylord, Willis, 12 Gehin, Jo) Bi 235 Gennadius, P., 336 Geoffroy, 202 Georgieff, I., 322, 323 Germain, Filiberto, 435 Gervais, P., 433 Ghesquiére, J., 287, 289 Ghosh, ‘C..C., 350, 352; PI. 32 Giacomo, V., 430 Giard, Alfred, 420 (foot-note) Gibson, Arthur, 113, 114, 185, 186, 187, 189; Pl. 12 Giffard, Walter M., 411; Pl. 39 Giles, George M., 472 Gillette; ‘C.. P:; 75, 104, 110) 114) Plo Girard, C. F., 430 Girard, M. M., 238 Girardi, A., 442 Girardi, J., 430 Girault, A. A., 302, 390, 301 Glover, Townend, 10, 13, 15, 35 to 42, 55; 74) 03, 64, 85, 180; Pl. 1 Goding, F. W., 104, 430, 432; Pl. 43 Godman and Salvin, 194, 195, 444 Goedart, Johann, 202, 280; Pl. 14 Goeldi, E. A., 325, 327, 425, 489; Pl. 51 Golding, F. D., 377 Gorgas, W. C., 469, 478, 481; Pl. 46 Gorham, D. B., 13, 147 ° Gorzaczkowski, W., 318 Gosling, Ambrose, 449 Gossard, H. A., 114 Gough, L. H., 368, 370;' Pl. 34 Goureau, Col. C. C., 236 Gourley, E. S., 522 Gowdey, C. C., 226, 376, 448, 451 Gradojavie, M., 318 Graham (In Syria), 466 INDEX Graham-Smith, G. S., 475 Grandi, Guido, 257 Grasby, W. C., 304 Grassi, Battista, 255, 468, 470, 480, 483, 487, 491, 492, 403, 494, 495, 496; PI. 49 Gray, Dr. Asa, 34 Green, R., I1 Greene, E. Ernest, 349, 353 Grossmann, W., 304 Grosvenor, G. H., 224, 227 Grote, A. R., 24, 34, 51, 66, 68, 148; Pl. 6 Grube, F., 404 Guérin-Méneville, F. E., 235 Guéry, Ernest, 461 Guilding, Rev. Landsdown, 450 Guimares, J. S., 420 Guiteras, Juan, 192, 488, 489, 490; PI. 49 Gundlach, Juan (Johann), 452, 458 Gunn, D., 374 Guppy, P. L., 447 Gurney, W. B., 397, 510 H Hackett, L. W., 494 Hagen, H. A., 22, 60, 61 to 63, 1725207, 2508 bli Haldeman S.-S:, 12, 15; el 3 Haliday; As E207; 231.3. PIl 17 Hall, Maurice C., 478 Hail), Wi J., 360, 370; 376 Hambleton, E. J., 429 Hambleton, J. I., 163 Hamilton, H. De Courcy, 446 Hamilton, John, 105 Hamlin, J. C., 390 Hamlyn-Harris, R., 392, 451 Hancock, G. Ee R., 377 Hardenberg, C. P., 373 Hardy, G. H., 301 Hargitt, Prof. C. W., 109 Hargreaves, Ernest, 224, 360, 378 Hargreaves, H., 226, 376; Pl. 36 Harned, R. W., 100, 114, 149, 150, 151 Harris, Moses, 203 Harris, Thaddeus William, 10, 11, 24, 30 to 35, 38, 44, 45, 70, 72, 172, 179, KAS Eat 2, 73; Harris, W. V., 377 Hart, Je He450 Hart, Reginald, 453, 454, 457 Hartig, G. L., 270, 499 Harukawa, C., 342, 343, 346 Harvey, F. L., 110 Hase, A., 268, 488; Pl. so Hashimoto, 340 Hator1, J.5.347. Havas, 215 layes, W. P.,.77 Hayne, 493 Haywood, Dr. J. K., 144, 145, 146 Hazelhoff, 3590 Headlee, T. J., 108, 114, 335 Hedlund, J. T., 203 Heer, Oswald, 325, 327 Hegetschweiler, J. J., 327 Hegh, E., 287 Heinrich, C., 446 Helmsing, I. W., 391, 392 Hempel, Adolph, 427, 429 Henneguey, F., 242 Henry, G. M., 353 Henschel, Gustav A. O., 264 Herce, P., 330 Hergula, B., 319 Herms, W. B., 109, 114, 158, 175, 482 Herrera, Ay Tor, 103) ro5sel 13 lernrick. Crit Herrick, Glenn W., 60, 114 Hewitt, C. Gordon, 113, 114, 185, 186, LOPLAZ SoTL, 512) bls 12 Heymons, R., 287 Higginson, Col. Thomas Wentworth, 34 Hall @2 Gs 244 Hill, G. F., 300 Hill; G: Sa Je, 183 Hind, HY, 44, 182 Hinds, W. E., 108, 127, 131, 148, 302, 439, 440 Hitchcock, L. F., 226 Hoffmeister, A. W., 25, 26 Holdaway, F. G., 226 Holloway, T. E., 527 Holman-Hunt, C. B., 361 Holmgren, A. E., 290, 201 554 Hood, C. E., 459 Hooker, C. W., 459 Hooker, W. A., 107, 108 Hopkins, A. D., 76, 114, 160, 168, 160; Pian. Hopkins, G. E., 416 Hopkins, G. H. E., 377 Hopkins, I., 401, 402 Hori, 345 Horn, George H., 125 Horn, Walther, 19, 60, 96, 208, 210, 205, 266, 303 Horne, W. T., 452, 453 Horvath, Geza, 216, 274, 275, 287; Pl. 23 Houser, J. S., 453, 454 How, Wang, 412 Howard, C. W., 333 Howlet, F. M., 350 Hozawa, S., 347 Hubbard, H. G., 21, 25, 26, 61, 65, 94, 95;-1025 Pll.9 Huergo, José M., 422 Hukkinen, Y., 324 Hulst, G. D., 106 Humphreys, J. T., 106, 177 Hunger, 359 Hunter, S.J.;.532 Funter, Wi. D.) 114) 127, T30) 131,132) 148, 140, 161, 168, 160, 170, 193, 107, 355, 388, 476, 532, 535; Pl. 11 Husain, Mohammed Afzal, 350, 352 Hutson, J.-C. 353; 451, 453, 512 Hutton,-F. W., 400, 401; Pl. 37 Hyslop, J. A., 40 Ibarra, E., 330 Iches, L., 422 lingworth, J. F., 391, 513 Iltschew, D., 322, 323 Imms, A. D., 226, 227, 228, 220, 231, 351, 517, 518; Pl. 18 Inda, J. Riquelme, 195, 197; Pl. 13 Ingram, A. E., 136 Ingram, Alexander, 374 Inigo (Fray Abbad), 458 Inomata, S., 341, 347 Ioakimov, D., 322, 323 INDEX Isaac, John, 398 Isaakides, C., 334, 335 Iscander, Naguib, 360, 370, 371; Pl. 35 Ishida, M., 357, 515, 520 Ishikawa, C., 339, 347 Ishimori, N., 346 Itah, S., 347 Itié, G., 107 Ito, Hirowo, 347 Ito, K., 341 Ito, T., 346 Ivantcheff (of Bulgaria), 487 Izquierdo, Vicente, 435 ij Jablonowski, J., 216, 275, 276, 277, 536; Plle23 Jack, H. W., 361 Jacky Rea W376 Jacobsen, Georg, 208 James, H. C., 376 Jardine, Nigel K., 353 Jarvis, Edmund, 3091 Jarvis, H., 390 ary, S.G. 231 Jatzenkovskij, E. V., 302 Jeannel, R., 321 Jemmett, Charles W., 451 Jensen, H., 360 Jepson, FP. P., 220;-353) 41g, .41ay srg: 535 Johannsen, O. A., 175 John, O., 309 Johnson, W. G., 19 Johnston, H. B., 378 Johnston, J. R., 455, 456, 457 Johnston, T. Harvey, 226, 388, 390, 535 Jones, Charles R., 405 Jones, T. H., 450 Jones, Judge W. J., 147 Jordan, David Starr, 57, 60, 71 Jordan, Karl, 226 Joseph, Claude, 435 Judeich, J. F., 260 K Kadocsa, G., 277 Kalshoven, L. G. E., 356, 359 Kaltenbach, J. H., 262 INDEX 555 Kamal, Mohd., 360, 371; Pl. 35 Kannan, K. Kunhi, 352 Karny, H. H., 356, 350 Kawamura, R., 347 Keen, F. P., 440 Keith, Sir Arthur, 3 Keler; Ss 355, 316 Keller, 327 Kellogg, Vernon L., 50, 60, 171 Kemner, N. A., 289, 290, 202, 359 Kerremans, C., 544 Kershaw, A. L., 387 Kershaw, J. C., 447 Kertész, K., 275, 320, 536, 537 Kincaid, Trevor, 320, 346 Kinel, J., 318 King, A. F. A., 480; Pl. 45 Kongs CBR. 353 King, Hi. H., 378 Share Ne easy King, W. V., 477, 482, 493 Kinoshita, S., 341 Kirby and Spence, 201, 202, 211 Kirby, William, 45, 202; Pl. 16 Kirk, T. W., 400, 521 Kirkaldy, G. W.,.409 Kirkland, A. H., 114, 119 Kirkpatrick, T. W., 360, 370, 376 Kisliuk, Max (Jr.), 423 Kitajima, E., 347 Kitisato, 347 Klapalek, Frant., 310; Pl. 27 Kligler, Israel J., 363 Knab, F., 472, 473, 480 Knetchtel, W., 320, 321; Pl. 27 Knight, Paul, 73, 74 Knowles, C. H., 414 Kobus, J. D., 356, 359 Koebele, Albert, 98, 90, 154, 384, 303, 409, 410, 423, 424, 501, 502, 503, 517, 519, 525, 529; Pl. 10 Kohnke, Quitman, 408 Koidzumi, M., 346 Kolbe, H. J., 544 KollarsiVi, 207, 203, 270; 271, 272° Pl 22 Komarek, J., 310, 312; Pl. 28 Koningsberger, C. J. J., 358; Pl. 38 Koppen, Theodore, 205, 206 Kosacevic, Z., 319 Kotinsky, Jacob, 298, 303 Kozikowski, A., 317 Krafften, A. F., 209 Krainska, Mrs. M., 317 Krassilstschik, Isaack, 296, 2097, 301, 320 Krasucki, A., 315, 316 Krug, Leopoldo, 458 Kruger, 350 Ikrumbhaar, 475 Kuchenius, P. E., 357 Kulagin, Nikolas, 298, 209 Kunckel d’Herculais, J., 420, 421 Kunstler, Gustav Adolf, 273 Kuntze; Ri 317 Kurdiumov, N. V., 200, 300, 301, 303; P26 Kusnezov, N. T., 298, 307 Kuwana, S.: Ii, 341, 343; 345, 346+ Pl: 31 Kuwayama, S., 341, 343 IE Lacepéde, B. G. E. de la V., 204 Lahille, Fernando, 423 Laliman, Leopold, 214 Lambert, S. M., 478 Lamborn, W. A., 377 Lameere, A., 284 Lampa, Sven, 291, 292; Pl. 24 Langhofter, A., 318, 319; Pl. 23 Lankester, E. Ray, 471 Larabee, J. H., 162 Lataste, F., 435 Latiére, H., 241 atrellle PAA. 202) 20417 Pleas Laveran, A., 480, 487, 491; Pl. 48 Lavergne, Gaston, 435 Lazear, Jesse W., 133, 174, 466, 470, 481, 496; Pl. 45 Lea, Arthur M., 386, 304, 307, 415 Meany Gy Bi377 LeBaron, William, 12, 64, 70, 172, 499, Pie2 Lecaillon, Prof. A., 242 LeCocq, Carlos, 331, 332 Ve e] Le€onte; John L., 10; 25, 148, 537; Bis Ledru, Andres Pedro, 458 LeDuc, William G., 42, 85, 86 556 Leefmans, S., 356, 359, 513 Lefroy, H. Maxwell, 226, 228, 220, 349, 447; Pl. 32 Lehman, A., 349 Leiby, R. W., 178, 244 Leidy, Joseph, 105 Eelong By E135 Leonard, M. D., 450 Leonardi, Gustav, 249, 252, 253, 258; Plier Lepiney, J. de, 242 LePrince, J.-A., 460, 481 Lesne, M. P., 333 Liceaga, Eduardo, 192, 490 Lichtenstein, J., 214, 239 Lick, James, 120, 124 Liddle, George, 64 Lieftinck, 359 Light, S. S., 353 Lincke, A., 317 Lindeman, K. E:, 206, 307; Pi. 25 Linnaeus, C., 209, 290 Linnaniemi, Walter M., 324 Linter, J. A; 23; 24, 45; 102), 110) E14, W775 Ela Lasto,, Jk 324 Fizer’y Trelles, C. A.\ 421; 422) 4397 Lleras A., Federico, 443 Lloyd 5 (377 Lockwood, Samuel, 22, 105 Loew, C. A., 261 Loftin,, WG; 457 Lopez, A., 442 Lopez, Alonzo W., 409 Loudon, Jane and Mary, 271 Lounsbury, C. P., 226, 372, 373, 374, 398, 500, 519, 523, 524; Pl. 32 Lovendahl, E. A., 278 Low, C. Carmichael, 480 Lowe, Frederick D., 398, 399 Lubbock, Sir John, 205, 537 Lugger, Otto, 75, 85, 96, 97, 106, 110; Pl. 9 Lumbao, S., 404 Lunardoni, Prof. Agostino, 249, 259 Lundblad, O., 292 Lundie, A. E., 224, 524 Lutz, Adolfo, 425, 467, 489; Pl. 51 Lyell, George, 387 INDEX Lyman, H. H., tro Lyonet, P., 201, 202, 280; Pl. 16 M MacCallum, W. G., 481 MacDougal, R. Stewart, 227, 230, 231, B/g OTL MacGregor, Malcolm E., 224, 483, 484: Pl. 47 Macias, Carlos, 195 Mackie, D. B., 158, 405, 406 | Macleay, William, 384 MacOwan Ps 372-)bieess Macquart, J., 235 Madariaga, A., 106, 197 Major, Joshua, 217 Maki, M., 344 Malenotti, E., 258 Malkoff, 323 Mally, C. W., 373 Mally, F. W., 100 Mann, B. Pickman, 89, 90, 424 Mann, J., 390 Mansfield-Aders, W., 378 Manson, Sir Patrick, 132, 466, 479 (foot-note) ; Pl. 44 Marchal, E., 285 Marchal, Paul, 225, 230, 240, 241, 242, 243 to 248, 283, 334, 449, 504, 508, 516, 536; Pl. 19 Marelli, C. A., 512 Maria, H. Apolinar, 442 Marlatt, C. L., 21, 94 to 98, 114, 120, 124, 126 (foot-note), 137, 138, 139, 160, 167, 170, 254, 255, 345, 346 (foot- note), 468; Pl. 10 Marshall, Guy A. K., 5, 361, 376; PI. 18 Martelli, G., 258 Marten, John, 14 : Martini, Erich, 467, 487; Pl. 50 Martynov, A. B., 305 Marx, George, 85, 86, 87 Masi, L., 519 Maskell, W. M., 400, 401, 403; Pl. 37 Mason, A. C., 410 Mason, C. W., 224 Massee, A. M., 229 Massini, P. C., 422 INDEX Matheson, Robert E., 232 Matheson, Robert, 482 Matsumoto, S., 341 Matsumura, S., 339, 340, 341, 342, 340; Piet Matthieu, E., 362 Mavromoustakis, G. A., 336 Maximilien, Fritz, 461 Mayné, R., 283, 287, 288, 289 Mayor, A. G., 19 Mayr, G., 294 McAllister, J. W., 51, 66 McCallan, Claude W., 447, 449 McCarthy, Gerald, 135 McCoppin, Frank, 154, 501, 502 McDonald, R. C., 179 McDugal, W. A., 391 McHardy, J. M., 377 : McLain, Nelson W., 101, 162 Mease, James, 9 Medani, Wad, 378 Meehan, Thomas, 15; Pl. 3 Megid El Mistikawi, Abdul, 360 Meigen, Johann Wilhelm, 202, 203, 204, 468; Pls Meinert, Frederik, 278; Pl. 24 Meistinger, K., 274 _ Melander, A. L., 77 Mellor, J. E. M., 360, 370 Menor, Juan Gomez, 462 Menzel, R., 360 Mercet, R. Garcia, 330, 525 Merino, Gonzalo, 406, 407 Merrian, Sibilla, 202, 440; Pl. 14 Merrill, G. B., 450 Mesa, Ruiz, 457 Mesnil, F., 486 Metcalf, ©; 155-77 Metschnikoff, E., 206, 290, 487 Meyer, N. F., 304 Mialltee cof eC. 223 Middleton, Miss Nettie, 14 Miller, David, 226, 400, 401, 403, 521, 522, 536; Pl. 37 Miller, N. C. E., 362 Mina-Palumbo, Francisco, 250 Minkiewicz, S,. 314, 316 Minot, C. S., 105 Mirtoff, J. A., 301 597 Mitchell, J. D., 388, 535 Mitsukuri, Kakichi, 330, 340, 345, 346 (foot-note) Miyake, T:, 330, 343 Miyijima, M., 346 Mjoberg, Eric, 203 Mocsary, Alexander, 275, 536 Mohnike, O., 404 Mokrzecki, Zygmunt Atanazy, 206, 207, 301, 307, 314, 315, 317, 318, 319, Boss Pike 2o Molestino O., Ernesto, 433 Molina, E., 422 Molino, J., 430 Montandon, A. L., 320 Montealegre, Abraham, 435 Monzen, Kota, 339 (foot-note), 341, 347, 520 Moore, Frederic, 348 Moore, H. W. B., 441, 442, 451 Moore, J. D., 459 Moore, W., 373 Mordvilko, A. K., 298, 304, 307 Moreira, Carlos, 426, 427; Pl. 41 Morgan, H. A., 75, 100, 114 Morgan, J. H., 149 Morgan, W. L., 397 Morice, Rev. F. D., 544 Morland, D., 226 Morrill, A. W., 198 Morris, Sir Daniel, 447 Morris, H. M., 335, 336 Morris, J. G., 15, 74 Morris, K. R. S., 378 Morris, Miss Margaretta H., 12 Morrison, W. K., 451 Morse, E. S., 345 Morstatt, H., 2690 Morwood, R. B., 390 Moutia, A., 379 Moznette, G. F., 423 Mudge, B. F., 74 Muesebeck, C. F. W., 278 Muggeridge, J., 522 Muir, Frederick, 400, 410, 414; Pl. 18 Muller, Adonis, 461 Miller, K., 267 Mundell, R. C., 390 Mungomery, R. W., 391 558 Munro, J. W., 228 Murayama, J., 342 Murillo, Ernesto, 443 Murillo, Luis Maria, 442 Murray, Andrew, 217, 222, 230 Murtfeldt, Mary E., 25, 92, 102; Pl. 5 Musson, Charles T., 396 Myer-Duer, R., 325 Myers, J. G., 226, 448, 522 N Naidenoff, V., 323 Nagano, K., 343 Nakayama, S., 341 Nasunov, 307 Naudé, T. J., 374 Navarro, Leandro, 329, 330; Pl. 30 Navas, Longino, 328 Nawa, U., 342, 343 Nawa;, Y.,.341,343) 345: Blatt Neal, J. G., 92 Neave; ‘SAA 5..228., 370 531 Needham, J. G., 77 Negri, 487, 493 Neiva, Arturo, 425, 428, 467, 489; PI. 51 Nel, Evan, 360 Neraz, Anselmo, 105 Neruki, K., 340 Newell, Wilmon, 108, 114, 131 (foot- note), 148, 151, 486, 500 Newman, L. J., 399 Newstead, Robert, 467, 484; Pl. 47 Nicholas, H. F., 390 Nichols, H. M., 386 Nicholson, A. J., 226 Nickerl, Franz A., 309; Pl. 27 Nickerl, Ottokar, 309; PI. 27 Nicolaou, John Hadji, 335 Nicolet, H., 433 Nicolle, Charles, Pl. 50 Niezabytowski, J., 315 Nikolsky, V. V., 305 Nilsson-Ehle, H., 203 Nitsche, H., 260 Noel, Alphonse, 461 Noguchi, Hideyo, 480 Nonell, J., 330 Nordlinger, Hermann, 261 Nott, Josiah, 465 INDEX Novak, P., 319 Nowell, W., 451 Nowicki, S., 314, 316 Nozawa, 340 Nozu, R., 341 Nunez, A., 196 Nuslin, Otto, 260 Nuttall, G. H. F., 468; Pl. 44 O Obarski, J., 317 Obenberger, J., 311, 312 Oberthur, René and Charles, 541 Ogilvie, L., 449 Ogloblin, A. A., 312 Okajima, G., 341, 346 Okamoto, H., 342, 344 O’Kane, W. C., 108, 114, 178 Oldendorff, E., 410 Olivier, A. G., 202 Olivier, E., 544 Olliff, A. Sidney, 393, 395 Omori, J., 346 Ono, Ranzan, 339 (foot-note), 340 Operman, Prof. Dr., 319 Orenstein, A. J., 481 Ormerod, Edward, 221 Ormerod, Eleanor A., 221, 232, 236, 371, 372, 375;2393, 541; PL» 17 Ormerod, Georgina, 221 Osborn, Herbert, 29, 61, 75, 92, 110, DEA Pe Osborn, H. S., 409, 460 Oshanin, V. T., 208, 303 Oshima, M., 346 Osten Sacken, Baron C. R., 61, 404, 541 Otanes, Faustino Q., 407, 400 Ozols, E., 308, 300 Pp Packard, A. S;. Jr. 34,,00) 016 ane: 55, 03, 70; Si, 82; 83)03)) 102-105; 169, 172, 177, 207, 473, 537; Pl! 2 Paczoski, I. K., 302 Pagden, H. T., 362 Paillot, A., 241 Paine, R. W., 416 Palmer, Dr. Edward, 124, 125 INDEX Paoli, G., 255, 258, 519 Parfentiev, I. A., 305 Parrotteee) Jc) 108,114 Passerini, Carlo, 248 Passerini, Giovanni, 248; Pl. 21 Patch, Miss Edith M., 108 Patterson, J. T., 244 Patterson, W. H., 378 Patton, W. H:, 83 Reck=-\VWerbry Gt 30.725) bl. 1 Peluffo, Agustin Trujillo, 430, 431 Pemberton, C. E., 505 Pendlebury, H. M., 361 Penzig, O., 95 Pergande, Theodor, 57, 85, 86, 87, 88, 90, 96, 293; Pl. 10 Peringuey, Louis, 372; Pl. 33 Perkins, F. A., 391 Perkins, G. H., 106 Perkins: Rk. (©... 400) 410, 411+ Pl 30 Perkins, Wiliam M., 408 Pescott, R. M. T., 387 (foot-note) Petkoff, P., 323 Pettit, G., 535 Pettit, R. H., 60, 109 Peyron, John, 293 Phares, Dir? Ie. 147 Philippi, F., 434 Philippi, R. A., 434 Phillips, E. F.160; 163, 450; Pl. 11 Picard, F., 239 Pierce, W. Dwight, 127, 131, 133, 175, 407, 523, 532 Pinto, Cesar, 490 (foot-note) Pizarro, Man. Tellez, 195 Pla, Sebastian, 453 Planchon, J. E., 212, 214, 215, 238, 500; Piro Plank, H. K., 433, 457 Plotnikoff, 301 Poe, Clarence, 129, 130 Poey, Felipe, 452 Pomeroy, A. W. J., 378 Ponniah, D., 362 Pope, James, 440 ' Popenoe, C. H., 478 Popenoe, E. A., 74 (foot-note), 75, 97, 103, 106 Popovic, 319 Popovici-Baznosanu, 320 559 Poppe, J. B., 440 Porchet, F., 325 Porchinsky, J., 296, 297, 208,299, 302, 303, 304, 307, 536; Pl. 25 Porter, Carlos E., 435, 436, 437; Pl. 42 Poskin, J., 285, 286, 288 Pospelov, Waldemar, 296, 297, 200, 302, 2049 (P1526 Potts, WEL; 377. Poulton, E. B., 17 Poutiers, Raymond, 240, 241 Powell, Major J. W., 73 Pradier, Gen. E. E., 205, 206 Pratt, F. C., 388, 460, 535 Pratt. He C...3601. Arps eles 7 Priesner, H., 369 Pruter, J... 316, 307 Puig y Nattino, Juan, 430 Putnam, J. Duncan, 28; Pl. 6 Q Quaintance, A. L., 60, 114, 146, 158, 160, 168, 169, 170; Pl. 11 Quanjer, H. M., 281 Quelch, John J., 441, 442, 451 Quinn, George, 304 R Rabaud, J., 211 Raciecka, Miss M., 317 Radetezky, A. F., 302 Ramachandra Rao, Y., 350 Ramakrishna Ayyar, T. V., 350, 352 Rambousek, F. G., 311, 312; Pl. 28 Ramirez, Dr. José, 105 Ramirez, Dr. Roman, 195, 196, 107 Rangel, Amado F., 105 Rathvon; S:)S2. 15, 16; 106); Ply 3 Ratzeburg, J. T. C., 207, 259, 260, 290, 499; Pl. 22 Ravn, K., 279 Ray, John, 202 Réaumur, R. A. F. de, 201, 202, 211, 499; Pl. 15 Redi, Francesco, Pl. 14 Reed, Carlos S., 422 Reed, E. Baynes, 110 Reed, Edwyn C., 422, 434; Pl. 42 560 Reed, Walter, 133, 174, 466, 470, 481, 482, 496; Pl. 45 Reginbart, 404 Regnier, Robert, 240 Reh, Ludwig, 264, 265, 266, 267, 268; Blige Rennie, James, 201 Reuter, Enzio R., 324; Pl. 29 Reyne, 359 Ribaga, J., 253 Ricci P. 250 Richards, P."B., 361 Richardson, Thomas F., 497, 408 Ricketts, H. T.;'174;, Pl. 46 Riley, ©. Vi; .04) 17, 10,20, 239525 Sao) 41, 44, 45, 50, 51, 53 to 57, 64, 67, 68;.70, 71, 74, 79;.80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 97, 98, 99, 104,109, 114, 125, 161, 172, 177, 180, 213, 214, 219, 221, 238, 303, 480, 499, 500, 501, 502, 525; Pl. 2 Riley, W. A., 60, 77, 175, 482 Rimsky-Korsakov, M. N., 303, 304, 305, 307, 308; Pl. 26 Ritchie, A. H., 224, 377, 448; Pl. 33 Rivas, Ing. E. Coppel, 197 Rivera, Manuel J., 435, 436; Pl. 41 Robert, Eugene, 235 Roberts, F. H., 390 Roberts, J. I., 376 Robin, J., 243 Robinson, D. H., 231 Robledo, Ing. Francisco Garcia, 197 Rodenwald, 3590 Rodovalho, B. de Toledo, 428 Rodriguez, M. G., 390 Roelofs, 404 Roepke, W., 281, 356, 358, 359, 360, 301, 5125 Plas Roerig, 299 Rogers, D. M., 119 Roig, M. Sanchez, 456, 457. Rolander, D., 290 Rolfs, P. H., 420 Romanoff, Nicholas, 205 Rondani, Camillo, 248, 499; Pl. 20 Rorer, J. B., 433 Rosenfeld, A. H., 423 INDEX Ross, Ronald, 132, 133, 466, 471, 479, 480, 482, 483, 491, 492; Pl. 44 Rostrup, Emil, 279 Rostrup, Sofie, 279; Pl. 24 Rothschild, N. C., 544 Rothschild, Walter, 541,°544 Roubaud, Etienne, 486, 493, 540; Pl. 48 Rowe, L. S., 445 Rozsypal, J., 311 Ruffin, Edmond, 12, 147; Pl. 5 Ruggles, A. G., 114 Rumsey, W. E., 179 Ruskov, M. D., 322, 323 Russo, Giuseppe, 462 Rust, E. W., 423 Ruszkowski, J., 315, 316 Rutgers, A. E., 357 Rutherford, Andrew, 224, 353 Ruttledge, W., 378 S Saalas, Unio, 324; Pl. 29 Sacharov, N. L., 302 Saint-Fargeau, A. L. de, 202 Sajo, Karl, 275; Pl. 23 Salas, Jorge Garcia, 445 Sallé, A., 125 Sambon, Dr. L., 83 (foot-note) Sanborn, F. G., 13, 38, 45, 84; Pl. 3 Sanchez, M., 330 Sanders, J. G., 114 Sanderson, E. D., 114, 144, 145 Santos, Matoso, 331 Saracomenos, D., 336 Sarnavaka, R., 319 (foot-note) Sasaki, €,, 340, 342, 346:5Pl: 31 Saunders, William, 105, 110, 184; PI. 12 Saussure, H. de, 458 Say, Thomas, 11, 74, 468; Pl. 1 Scaramuzza, L. C., 457 Schaus, William, 443, 445, 460 Schellenberg, R., 324 Schenk, E., 429 Schenkting, S., 208 Schilling, Heinrich, 264 Schiddte, J. C., 278; Pl. 24 Schlupp, W. F., 226 Schmidberger, Joseph, 271, 272 INDEX Schmidt, Ferd. Jos., 261 Schmidt-Goebel, H. M., 273 Schmiedeknecht, H., 320, 537 Schneider-Orelli, O., 326, 327; Pl. 20 Schoevers, T. A., 281, 283 Schoutenden, H., 287, 280 Schoyen, T. H., 294, 205 Schoyen, W. M., 2094, 295; Pl. 25 Schreiner, J. F., 302, 303 Schiiffner, 359 Schulze, Willie, 405 Schurman, G. B., 431 Schuurmans Stekhoven, J. H., Jr., 3590 Schwartz, Martin, 267 Schwarz, E. A.,-57, 61,83, 85, 86, 80, O45, 05, 100, 124, 1255) 126, 131, 100; 4453 PE 10 Scopoli, 202 Scudder, S. H., 18, 19, 34, 93, 537, 540; Pies Sein, F., Jr., 459 Seitner, M., 274 Semenov, 307 Semper, Carl, 404 Sepp, 280 Sergent Brothers, 242, 486, 500 Sergent, E., 509; Pl. 48 Servais, 285 Serville, 348 Severin, G., 286, 287, 288 Severin, H. P., 158 Seydel, 280 Sfarcic, 319 Shaffer, J. G., 270 Sharobim, Wadie, 3690 Sharp, David, 217 Shaw, Fred, 368, Pl. 34 Sheehy, E. J., 233 Sherman, Franklin, 108, 114, 148 Shevyrew, T., 2906, 299, 303 Shibata, B., 341 Shimer, Henry, 20; Pl. 4 Shipley, Sir Arthur, 484, 485; Pl. 44 Shiraki, T., 341, 342, 343, 344, 345, 340, 347 Shroff, Ko Ds 352 Signoret, 212 Silantjew, A. A., 303 561 Silvestri, Filippo, 18, 244, 249, 251, 252, 253, 254, 255, 256, 257, 258, 495, 408, 499, 508, 518, 519, 536; Pl. 21 Simic, 319 Simm, K., 315 (Zimm), 316 Simmonds, Hubert W., 414, 415, 416, 514 Simmonds, J. H., 390, 301 Simmons, Perez, 234 Simpson, C. B., 373 Sison, Pedro L., 407 Sitowski, L., 315, 317 Sjostedt, Yngve, 291, 292, 203, 544 Skinner, H. Martin, 451 Slingerland, M. V., 59, 103, 114, 372; PI. 8 Sloan, Sir Hans, 203 Sinees, C2377 Smirnow, D. A., 303 Smith and Abbot, 10 Smith and Kilborn, 132 Smith, Emily A., 28, 102; Pl. 6 Smith, Harry S. 21,103), Too), 155, 158, 528, 520, 530 Smith, Herbert H., 423 Smith, John B., 75, 104, 107, 109, 114, TAT EIS Smith, L., 462 Smith, Loren B., 188 Smith, Roger C., 73, 74, 77, 461 Smith, Sidney I., 60 Smith, Theobald, 174, 466, 480; Pl. 46 Smith, Thomas, 9 Smyth, E. G., 440, 450, 523, 528 Snow, Hall, 104) Pi Sokolov, N. N., 304 Solier, A., 433 Soliman El Zoheiry, Mohd., 360, 371 Solomides, Z. I., 336 Sopotsko, D. A., 303 Sorauer, Dr. Paul, 267 Soudek, Stepan, 310, 311, 312; Pl. 28 Southall, John, 210 Speiser, P., 544 Spence, W., 202 (foot-note) Spessivtseff, P., 292, 206 Speyer, E. R., 224, 353, 533 Spinola, M., 433 Ssilantjew, A., 206 562 INDEX Stackelberg, 304 Stal, €., 404 Stahl, Augustin, 458 Stahl, C. F., 457 Standfuss, M., 325; Pl. 29 Stanton, W. A., 404 Staudinger, O., 404 Stebbing, E. P., 340, 350 Steer, W., 229 Stelle, J Parish, 23/147, Stellwag, F., 268 Stengl, P. L., 404 Stephens, J. F., 218 Stephens, J. W. W., 484; Pl. 47 Stewart, Dra J. 29 Stiles, C. W., 481 Stone, Alfred, 129 Storey, G., 368, 370; Pl. 34 Strancek, F., 311, 312 Strawaniskt) Ke 314, 305; 307; 318 Strickland, Edgar H., 224 Stromer, M., 290 Stumpf, Karl, 320 Suffrian, E., 124 Sule, Karl, 311 Sullivan, Lily, 68, 97, 469 Sundberg, Roberto, 430, 530; Pl. 43 Suster, P35, 321, (322 Swammerdam, Jan, 202, 280; Pl. 16 Swederus, N. S., 400 Swellengrebel, A. H., 3590 Swezey, O. H., 400, 410, 516, 518; PI. 39 Swinhoe, Charles, 348 Swynnerton, C. F. M., 377 Symes, C. B., 376 i Ratu (OF Bs G:439 Takahashi, S., 341, 344 Targioni-Tozzetti, Adolfo, 250, 251, 252, 254, 259; Pl. 20 Tarochewsky, 296 Taschenberg, E. L., 262, 263; Pl. 22 Taylor, A. R., 390 Taylor, A. W., 377 Taylor, Charlotte, 29 Taylor, ©. Hee. vars Taylor, T.. A. Gs416;5514 Tellez, Oliverio, 195, 196 Temperley, Margaret E., 392 Tepper, 1G, O25302304 Thayer, W. S., 470 Theobald, F. V., 222, 223, 227, 230, 471, 473; Pl. 17 Thomas, Cyrus, 14, 15, 28, 55, 81, 83, 86, 99, 102; Pl. 2 Thomas, Gates, 132 Thompson, Edward H., 383, 385, 386; P36 Thompson, E. P., 109, 110 Thompson, W. R., 188, 228, 505, 506, 526, 527, 531, 533, 534 Thomsen, Mathias, 279, 280; Pl. 24 Thomson, C. G., 293,204 Thornton, Thomas, 447 Thorpe, W. H., 226 Tian-Shansky, 307 Tillet, Mathieu, 234 Tillyard, R. J., 226, 383, 390, 400, 401, 403, 510, 521, 522, 526, 535; Pl: 36 Tiraboschi, 487, 494 Toki, A., 347 Torres, A. F. M., 420 Torro, Rafael A., 443 Tothill, J.D: 10; 415, 511, 514 Tower, W. V., 459 Townsend, C. H. T., 100, 125, 126, 131, 132, 340, 404, 437, 438, 439, 440, 443, 447, 448, 511; Pl. 43 Trabut, L., 242 Tracy, S. M., 106 Tragardh, Ivar, 292, 294; Pl. 25 Trausmueller, 319 Treat, Mary, 22, 23; Pls Trelease, William, 58, 88, 180 Trimble, Isaac P., 19 Trouvelot, B., 240, 241, 505, 508, 515, 520, 525 Trouvelot, Leopold, 115 Troitsky, N. N., 302, 304 True, A. C., 176 (foot-note) Triffer, J., 315 Trybom, Filip, 293 Tryon, Henry, 226, 387, 388, 389, 535; Pie36 Tschorbadjieff, P. 322, 323 [ Chorbadzhiey], — a a ee el, INDEX Tucker, R. W. E., 450 Tullgren, A., 292 Turina, 319 U Wehida, T., 342 Uhler, P. R., 41, 45, 458 Uichanco, Leopoldo B., 407, 400, 523 Ulke, Henry, -125 Urbahns, T. D., 158 Uribe, Luis Zea, 443 Urich, F. W., 226, 447, 450, Pl. 40 Uvarov, B. P., 196, 301, 302, 305 Welle 310 Ble 27 V Vaillant (Marechal), 236 Valdez, Sam. Macias, 193; Pl. 13 Valéry Mayet, A., 212, 215, 238, 2390; Pl. 19 . Vallisnieri, A., 202, 498; Pl. 14 Van Bruyssel, E. J., 201 Van Burgst, C. A. L. Smits, 281 Vandenberg, S. R., 416, 516 Van der Brug, 359 Van der Goot, P., 281, 284, 356, 359, 360,520; E138 Van der Meer Mohr, C. J., 360 Van der Merve, C. P., 373, 374 Van der Vecht, 359 Van der Weele, H. W., 359 Van Deventer, W., 359 Van Dine, D. L., 409, 412, 457, 459, 477, 481; Pl. 40 Van Doop, J. E. A., 356 Van Dyke, E. C., 158 Van Emelen, D. Amaro, 429 Manvitall iG. Jey. 357, 359 Van Harreveld, P., 515 Van Heurn, W. C., 356, 359 Van Hoove, 283 Van Leeuwen, 359 Van Leeuwenhoek, A., 280 Van Poeteren, N., 281 Van Zwaluwenburg, R. H., 1908, 459 Vappula, N., 324 Vassiljew, E. M., 303 Vayssiére, P., 240, 241, 247; Pl. 19 Veazie, H. A., 497, 498 563 Veitch, Robert, 226, 390, 3901, 414, 415; Pl. 36 Velez C., Aureliano, 443 Verrill, A. E., 19, 60 Vieira, Lopes, 331 Viereck, H. L., 529 Villa, Antonio, 248, 249; Pl. 20 Villada, Manuel, 195 Vincens, F., 243 Vivarelli, L., 257 Vizioli, J., 429 Von Frauenfeld, Georg Ritter, 273 Von Frisch, J. L., 270 Von Thring, Herman, 424, 427 Von Thring, Rudolfo, 424, 425, 429 Von Magenburg, C., 209 Von Rosenhof, Roesel, 202; Pl. 14 Von Schulthess, A., 324, 325, 539; Pl. 29 Von Wattenwyl, K. Brunner, 325 Voute, 359 Voyle, Joseph, 105 Vrydagh, Jean, 289 Vukasovic, P., 319 W Wachtl, Fritz A., 274 Wagener, J., 318 Wahl, B., 274 Wahl Gav, 267 Wahl, R. O., 224 Walch, E. W., 3590, 491 Walker, E. M., 188 Walker, Francis, 232 Walker, Philip, ror, 161 Wall, W. B., 398 Wallace, Alfred Russell, 423 Wallace, Robert, 222 Walsh Bi) 13h 05 30) 450ton 536555 56, 63, 66, 67, 70; 142) 143,172) 177, 270) 542) Pls 2 Walsingham, Thomas, Lord, 205, 395, 541 Warburton, Cecil, 222; Pl. 18 Ward, H. B., 102, 481 Wardle, R. A., 231 Washburn, F. L., 114 Watase, S., 339, 346 (foot-note) Waterhouse, C. O., 395 564 Watson, F. E., 460 Watts, Sir Francis, 450 Webb, J. L., 405 Webster, F. M., 9 (foot-note), 10 (foot-note), 25, 26, 92, 99, 102, II0, 114,535, 155; 160) 168) 372, 384. Sor, 502.532. b 1s Weddell, J. A., 390 Weed, C. M., 106, 109 Weiss, H. B.; 19 Westwood, J. O., 17, 212, 217, 220, 271 ; ey, Weyenbergh, H., 419, 421 Wheeler, W. M., 211, 530 White, G. F., 477 White, J. H., 431, 481, 483, 496, 408; Pl. 46 Whitehead, Charles, 220, 221, 232 Whitfield, F. G. S., 378 Whitman, J. S. (foot-note) 74 Wichgraf, F., 544 Wickson, Prof. E. J., 110 Wiedemann, C. R. W., 202, 469 Wier, D. B., 2 Wilbrink (Cheribon), Miss, 359 Wilder, Burt G., 70, 71 Wiley, H. W., 144 Wilke, S., 268 Wilkin, Simeon, 218 Wilkinson, D. S., 336 Willard, H. F., 410, 505 Willaume, F., 241 Wille, Johannes, 440 Willet, Prof. J..E., 147 Williams, C. B., 224, 227, 231, 369, 370, 371, 377, 392, 448; Pl. 34 Williams, F. X., 409 INDEX Williston, S. W., 500 Willoughby and Cassidy, 477 Wilson, C. E., 462 Wilson, Erasmus, 387 Woglum, R. S., 329, 525, 526 Wolcott, G. N., 438, 439, 440, 458, 459, 400 (foot-note) 461, 462, 523; Pl. 40 Wood, James G., 201 Woodhull, A. R., 510 Wood-Mason, James, 348 Woodward, J. S., 64 Woodworth, C. W., 110, 158, 398, 407 Worsham, E. L., 149 Woynich-Sianozecki, 315 Wurth, 360 We Yagi iN 347 Yano, S.,. 341, 342 Ybarra, Roberto A., 444 Yokoyama, H., 341 York, Warrington, 484 Yoshida, K., 341 Yuasa, H., 341; 343 Zz Zacher, Friederich, 268, 269 Zavrel, J., 311 Zehntner, L., 284, 354, 356, 350, 513 Zenker, Ji. C.; 261 Zetek, James, 444 Zimmerman, 358 Zirnits, J., 308 Zolk, K., 308 Zweigelt, F., 274 7 y r a — a yas ee a a it a it sie c ean ‘ Tiana bog 7 a 7 i : : re ve - — | * y | 7 a , ; 7 7 ; ; : * : , . I | ‘ a . J ‘ j icy nee cu J 7% ¥ 2 f ) ee |} té ia y ¥ oag eh . in 5 wee Att Gee NG A ROSEY & i} \ Ni A re h ashe rd ih 720 a aoa Pee en See ee Oe Ne ey ee nea