1883.] 141 [Grote. 
study the cotton worm in connection with the cotton plant. I protest 
against his Cotton Worm Report as doing me throughout grave injustice. 
I find even the, moths which I named for Professor Baird, which were 
mistaken for cotton moths by unskilled observers, recapitulated in this 
report, in which my observation as to the larval feet of Aletia and Anomis 
is appropriated. I have named moths for Prof. Riley for twenty years. 
He even lately tries to make me responsible for his re-description of the 
“Gorn-bud Worm” of Abbott and Smith, the Laphygma frugiperda of 
authors, as a new Prodenia autumnalis Riley ; and quotes a fragment of a 
private letter of mine to substantiate the charge. But I never saw the 
moths till after he had named them, and my letter merely acknowledges 
the specimens, and gives no opinion on the matter. Since 1864 I knew 
Abbot’s work thoroughly, as shown by my writings on the Sphingide, 
and my identification of his species. 
As to practical Entomology I allow myself here to express an opinion 
founded on my experience. ‘The reports of State entomologists often re- 
iterate a good deal, and do not seem to reach the farmers for whom they 
are intended. An inquiry about the way in which the money of the United 
States Entomological Commission has been spent with the results attained 
will show, Lam confident, that the facts it has published have not reached 
the great body of American agriculturists, the principa! parties interested. 
The system of State entomologists must be changed, and these officials 
should lecture before the public schools and institute meetings in the 
county districts, and thus bring the outlines of entomology and a knowl- 
edge of common pests before the young. In this way farmer boys will 
learn to respect robins’ nests and pull down the nests of the tent caterpil- 
lar instead. As matters are now, it is little use of one man’s cleaning out 
his orchard while another next door keeps a breeding place for the codling 
moth. Public education must take charge of the matter, and there will 
then be a prospect of saving much that is now wasted. Krom a perusal of 
Mr. Wm. Saunders’ excellent book* on ‘‘Insects Injurious to Fruit 
Trees,’’ it is plain that personal labor and mechanical appliances for jarring 
and gathering or crushing are better than poisons in most cases, and I re- 
iterate here the opinion I expressed at the Saratoga meeting of the American 
Association, that the use of Paris green is to be deprecated from the Jia- 
bility of poisoning to stock, and the persons handling it, to say nothing of 
its criminal use which has not unfrequently happened. 
In the following arrangement I have given our Thyatiride and the bulk 
of the Noctuidw down to the Catocaline and Deltoids. All the genera are 
here cited, but I have only given the species described by myself as a 
rule; the other species are cited in my “New Check List,’’? and do not 
usually give different characters from those here presented, which I have 
* This work (which should be used in public schools), from its admirably sim- 
ple and correct style, its illustrations and arrangement of material used, is 
entitled to be regarded as the best on the subject since the now classical treatise 
of the late Dr, Harris. 
