THE CANADIAN ENTOMOLOGIST. 125 



minutes by Prof. Lesley, and not full, while the copies of Mr. Phillips 

 neither agree with the originals nor with the published abstracts, while in 

 one case, as may be seen, he has changed Nov. 15, to Oct. 18. I can 

 readily understand how Prof. Lesley inadvertently used the term Hessian 

 Fly in abstracting from the minutes, if indeed he did so ; but it is more 

 difficult to explain Mr. Phillips's positive statement after Dr. Hagen's 

 specific questioning. Mr. Phillips was unable to explain to me how he 

 came to make the error, and just as unable to give me any definite reference 

 that will justify his very positive recollections of having seen the term 

 " Hessian Fly " eo nomine in pre-revolutionary literature. When the state- 

 ment of ocular evidence turns out to be so incorrect we cannot attach any 

 importance to his memory, even where so confidently asserted. 



With the final disposition of this strongest blow to the general belief that 

 has prevailed for a century among both husbandmen and entomologists, I 

 feel that we must not only accept the general verdict and tradition as 

 correct that the insect was introduced about the time of the revolution, 

 but that there is no very convincing or valid reason for rejecting the other 

 common belief that it was imported by the Hessian troops. The recorded 

 history of the period does not necessarily include all possible, or even 

 probable facts in relation to the limits of distribution of the insect in 

 Europe, or of the sources from which infested straw may have been derived 

 by the Hessians. 



In what I have said above I have spoken of the general belief and 

 arguments in favor of the introduction of the Hessian Fly to this country, 

 because I am quite aware that others besides Dr. Hagen have argued for 

 its indigenous nature ; but none of them have perused the question with 

 such single perseverance, and such bibliographical zeal and erudition. 

 He, in fact, deserves our thanks for having brought together so large a 

 body of bibliographical data, because I think it has been the means of 

 confirming not his own conclusions, but the opinion arrived at by Fitch 

 and others. 



While in London last autumn I took the trouble to look up and read 

 over the voluminous letters and reports, of which Dr. Hagen has published 

 a list, contained in " the proceedings of His Majesty's most Honorable 

 Council, and information respecting an insect supposed to infest the wheat 

 in the Territories of America." I was thus enabled to verify the accuracy 

 of the list furnished Dr. Hagen by Prof. Nichols. I was fortunate enough to 



