98 ENTOMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF ONTARIO. 



Mr. Weed reported that sulphur and salt mixed were fed to stock in Mississippi for 

 ticks. Some thought it ineffective. But it was tried at the station and found to be a 

 complete remedy. It had been claimed that sulphur used during wet weather was in- 

 jurious, but this was tried and found not to be true. Sulphur has been supposed to cause 

 a decrease in the quantity of milk, but careful experiments at the Mississippi Station had 

 shown this to be untrue. The sulphur and salt should be kept in use constantly. Ticks, 

 he thought, infested by preference, animals in poor health, and the chief good done by 

 feeding sulphur and salt was keeping up the health of stock by destroying internal 

 parasites. 



Mr, Gillette inquired if the real bedbug ever occured in hen houses. A case occurred 

 in Iowa where bugs, which appeared to be the same as that found in dwellings, were 

 abundant. 



Mr, Howard remarked that Townsend, of New Mexico, had recently discovered an- 

 other species {Cimex inodora, Duge?) in henhouses. 



Mr. Osborn thought the character of the form occuring in henhouses might be con- 

 sidered either varietal or specific. 



In the paper by Mr. Weed on " Remedies for Insects Injurious to Cotton," the 

 author discussed the application of Paris green against the Cotton Worm by means of 

 bags at the extremities of a long pole carried by a " darkey " on a mule going at a brisk 

 trot between the rows. This he considered to be the most simple apparatus which he had 

 seen for distributing dry poisons. For the Boll Worm he considered the best application 

 to be the planting of a row of corn about every tenth row through the cotton field at such 

 a time that it will mature early in September. 



THE CHEESE OR MEAT SKIPPER, 

 ( Piophila casei) 



By Maey E. Murtfeldt, Kirk wood, Mo. 



In dealing with the insects detrimental to agriculture the entomologist encounters 

 no obstruction in the reluctance of the farmer to have his losse?i made known. With the 

 pessimism characteristic of the profession, the latter is inclined to exaggerate rather than 

 to make light of his difficulties and losses, and therefore gives the fullest publicity to any 

 agency from which he suffers : but in the investigation of the habits and economic rela- 

 tions of an insect injurious to manufactured products the case is very different. The 

 prudent manufacturer or merchant is very careful not to give to the public any fact which 

 might arouse suspicion concerning the quality or durability of his products or wa«es. In 

 the case of manufacturers such caution is especially necessary, as the tide of trade is so 

 easily turned, and there are so many rivals in the field eager to take advantage of the 

 smallest fact to the prejudice of a competitor. As an instance of this, one of our shoe 

 manufacturers in St. Louis found, some years ago, that his stock was being injured by the 

 Leather Beetle {Dermestes vulpim/s, Fabr). In his desire for a remedy he very appro- 

 priately applied to Dr. Riley, of Washington, who instituted an investigation as to the 

 nature of the depredator and the means for eliminating it, I had the honor to assist in 

 these studies, and I well remember the change of manner in the proprietor of the concern 

 between the first visits to his establishment and those made later. At first every facility 

 for observation was granted, and all questions fully and obligingly answered ; but subse- 

 quent visits were somewhat coldly received and very little information could be elicited, 

 and there was a general air of desiring to ignore the whole matter. This was explained 

 some time afterward, when a partner in a rival firm chanced to mention that his business 

 had profited considerably by the publication that So-and-So's shoes were " wormy ; " and 

 the latter declared that the attention which the " bug-hunters " had drawn to the matter 

 I' had damaged his trade to the extent of several thousand dollars." Such experiences 

 inculcate caution in mercantile circles, and through this the entomologist undoubtedly 

 loses many an interesting subject for study. Perhaps this might be amended if it was 

 understood that names would not be published without permission. 



