THE STATE ENTOMOLOGIST. 41 



The two principal remedies which have hitherto been relied upon 

 are, 1st, hand-picking ; 2d, destroying the moths by fires, to which 

 they are naturally attracted. The first method is sure, but tedious 

 and somewhat impracticable on a very large scale. The second is 

 most effectual if carried out when the first moths appear, in May and 

 June. If these two methods were persistently carried out in the early 

 part of the season throughout any given cotton-growing county, they 

 would of themselves be sufficient to save the crop ; but the efforts of 

 individuals are of no avail, where there are slovenly neighbors who 

 neglect to perform these labors. It would therefore be of incalcul- 

 able advantage, if something could be applied to the plants which 

 would prevent the moths from depositing their eggs upon them, as 

 the industrious planter could then set at defiance his more slovenly 

 neighbor. Mr. Affleck was enthusiastic in his praise of cresylic soap 

 as such a plant-protector, and I received a long letter, written a few 

 weeks previous to his death, and showing how he had found that no 

 cotton moth had ever deposited an egg on any plant that had been 

 sprinkled with a solution of this soap. But Dr. Phares states that it 

 was pretty thoroughly tried last year, and proved a failure, though he 

 does not give the reason why. 



It is some little consolation to know thaUhe character of the sea- 

 son determines their numbers, and that if none make their appear- 

 ance in any stage by the first of July, there is little to be feared from 

 them the rest of that year. 



Third— There is in the South another insect (Laphrygma frugi- 

 perda, Sm. & Abb. ?) which is frequently known by the ominous name 

 of "Army worm;" an insect which also will attack cotton, though it 

 prefers grasses and weeds. This species in its habits resembles the true 

 Army- worm of the Middle States, more closely perhaps than does the 

 Cotton Army-worm, and Mr. Joseph B. Lyman, in his recent work on 

 "Cotton culture "* (p. 92), calls it the "Army-worm ;" yet to prevent 

 confusion, the cognomen should be discontinued, and the term 

 u Southern Grass- worm" (by which it is already very generally known) 

 should be strictly applied to this third bogus Army-worm. We now 

 come to the veritable Army-worm of the Northern and Middle States 

 —the insect which is the subject of this article, and we will dwell for 

 a few moments on the 



PAST HISTORY OF THE TRUE ARMY- WORM. 



If we trace back the history of the Army-worm in this country, 

 we find that inaccuracy and confusion characterize most of the rec- 

 ords concerning it previous to the year 1861. In that year, however, 

 by the contemporaneous observations and experiments of several 

 entomologists, in different sections of the United States, its natural 

 history was first made known to the world, and the parent moth iden- 

 tified. 



* Cotton Culture, by J. B. Lyman, late of Louisiana. Orange Judd & Co., New tfork. 



