266 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL.84 



criticised German entomology by comj)arison when he should have 

 s])ecifically 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 i:)ersonally 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 191 3, api>eared an excellent large 

 volume on the animal enemies of- plants by Dr. Ludwig Reh. This 



