( xlvi ) 



recorded ; and that Col. G. Morgan (who wrote most intelligently 

 about it at the time) claimed, in his letter of August 26th, 1788, 

 to Sir John Temple, to have given it the name of ' Hessian Fly.' 

 The consensus of opinion on the other side of the Atlantic 

 had been with Fitch, who followed contemporary conviction 

 at the time of the insect's first injury, and held that it had 

 been imported into America by the Hessian troops ; Balthazar 

 Wagner, however, in an admirable paper (1861) argued that 

 it could not have been imported by the Hessians, his reasons 

 being that, as had been long previously shown, it was not 

 known to occur in Hesse, and that the historic evidence as to 

 the times of departure and arrival of the troops taken together 

 with the life-history of the insect rendered such importation 

 highly improbable, or, as he puts it, out of the question. Hagen 

 (1880 and 1885), following Wagner, used the same facts and 

 arguments, and added some further historic data ; but, with 

 more bibliographic zeal than biologic acumen, he went farther, 

 and claimed that it was never imported, but was indigenous to 

 America. 



Prof. Eiley said it would extend his observations beyond 

 reasonable limits to enter into the details on which he based 

 his own conviction, which had been substantially expressed in 

 the full paper by Packard in the ' Third Eeport of the United 

 States Entomological Commission (1883).' His opinion was 

 that while we might drop the Hessian theory, — since Mr. Henry 

 Phillips, jun., as quoted by Hagen (1885), finds mention of 

 the "Hessian Fly" in the unpublished minutes of the 

 American Philosophical Society for 1768 (a rather astonishing 

 fact, as it antedates the landing of the Hessians !), — and con- 

 cede that the insect was introduced some time prior to the 

 revolution, yet that its introduction about that time must be 

 accepted, because Hagen's arguments to the contrary were not 

 supported by evidence. 



Prof. Eiley further remarked that he had referred to these 

 conflicting views of leading writers as to the original source 

 and time of introduction of the insect into America, not so 

 much to foreshadow the future conflict of opinion on similar 

 points in England as to bring out this important fact as a 

 warning to hasty generalises, viz., that the arguments of 



