840 
THE TROPICAL AGRICULTURIST. [April i, 1882. 
Deliveries 1st Jan. 
to 31st Dec 99,389 
Stock 31st Dec. 48,876 
Monthly Imports of 
January ...about 
February ... „ 
March ... „ 
April ... „ 
May ... „ 
June ... „ 
July ... „ 
August ... „ 
September ... „ 
October ... „ 
November ... „ 
December ... „ 
Total Packages ... 
68,713 53,969 49,141 
26,045 19,022 9,256 
Oeylon and East Indian. 
1881. 
1880. 
1879. 
800 
1,911 
647 
1,823 
1,443 
970 
1,586 
1,306 
1 040 
1,095 
L336 
813 
1,714 
816 
589 
2,794 
6,552 
1,138 
1,655 
1,273 
1,0 IS 
1 150 
1,293 
313 
563 
1,329 
595 
1,147 
1,750 
1,206 
1,136 
2,097 
16,081 
20,192 
13,414 
Your obedient servants, 
LEWIS & PEAT, 
BROKERS. 
6, Mincing Lane, London, 
27ttt January 1882. 
THE COFFEE GRUB AND MASKELIYA 
COCKCHAFER. 
SPECIMENS WANTED FOR THE BRITISH MUSEUM. 
We giva prominence to the following letter (with its 
enclosures) from Mr. Haldane, the writer of the Essay 
on "Coffee Grub' published at this office: — 
Care of Messrs. Anderson, Anderson & Co., 
5, Fer.cb.uroh Avenue, L melon, B.C., 
5 oh .January 1882 
Messrs. A. M. & J. Ferguson, Colombo. 
Dear Sirs,— I have to thank you for tne copies of my 
pamphlet on "Grub." On receipt of thein I distrib- 
uted them among people likely to give the subject 
some atlention. One copy L gave to the Field 
editor, and I call your attention to the notice taken 
from 'the issue of December 31st. 
I made enquiries as to the leading Entomological 
Societies, and will furnish them with copies. 
I was introduced to Mr. Waterhouse, Entomological 
Curator, British Museum, and gave him some dry 
specimens of the different cockchafers. I regret I 
could not find a bottle with specimens preserved in 
spirit?, which would have enabled a more careful 
examination to have been made by dissection. 
I enclose a copy of Mr. Waterhouse's letter on the 
subject, from which you will notice that the beetle 
I called the ■' Maskeliya cockchafer" is, in all prob- 
ability, a new variety not previously described. Mr. 
Waterhouse, in subsequent conversation, pointed out 
the importance of furnishing the Mu>eum with speci- 
mens in spirits. These, I have no doubt, you will pro- 
cure for him. 
The " Bronze Beetle" requires further identification, 
though it evidently belongs to the Burjrestidae. 
The same remarks (about identification) apply to 
the "small cockchafer. " 
Mr. Wat rhouse will be obliged by having speci- 
mens of the Ceylon beetles, especially the cock- 
chalers (about which there is still much to learu) 
and Ceylon moths, sent to the Museum. Beetles 
should be iu dpirits and addressed 
The Priu ipal Librarian, 
British Museum, Loudon. 
For the ZooTogiral Department. 
I was introduu d to Dr. Gunoher, the head of the 
Department. He shewcu great Lute-rest in the subj -ct, 
and hoped that specimens of Ceylon insects would 
be sent as the Museum is not very rich in them. 
Perhaps you will agree to receive specimens from 
correspondents in the hills, and loweountry, and 
have them sent to the Museum. In this way much will 
be learned about your insect pest- 1 . 
The alkaline dressings, alluded to in the Field 
articles are, I fancy, repeated applications of lime— a 
c mrse I have lo"g advi-ed planters to follow. The 
advice given that planter* must study the subject 
ab ovo is undoubtedly sound. No advice will be 
of the slightest use until planters can furnish entomo- 
logists with the life-history of the insects. 
in most copies of the pamphlet I wrote a note 
requ sting any one who could give information on the 
question to communicate with your pap"r. — I am, dear 
sirs, yours truly, K. C. HALDANE. 
(Copy.) British M useum. 
3rd January 1882. 
Dear Sir,— I have named the Ceylonese beetles so 
far as I am at present able. 
Fig. 1 is a species not in the Museum, and at 
present I do not know to what genus to refer it? 
1 think it must be placed in Leucopbolis for the present. 
Fig. 4. Family Rutelidae ; Mimela Xauthorrhina 
of Hope. 
Fig. 5. No specimen ; I know nothing like it. 
Fig. 6. Melolonthidae, Lachnosterna, very near L. 
co-tatus, Walker. 
Fig. 13 Lachnosterna pinguis, Walker. (Does not 
quite agree with type, but 1 think it is the same 
sp-ci.s.) 
Fig. 15 Cetoniidae Clinteria chloronota, Blanchard. 
Fig. 23 24. Leucopbolis pinguis, of Bnrmeister. 
The brown one (23) was de-cribed by Wa ker under 
the name MeloLntha rubiginosa ; but Burmeister's 
name must stand, supposing 23 and 24 to be the 
same species, as I believe. So far us I have seen, 23 are 
all ' males and 24 all femahs. • 
Fig. 28. (Ruieidae) Anomala elata of Fabricius. 
There are a great many more Melolonthidae found in 
Ceylon, but for practical purposes I expect you have 
mentioned all that are necessary. — Believe me, yours 
very truly, (Signed) Ciias. O. Waterhouse. 
COCKCHAFERS VERSUS COFFEE. 
(Field, 31st December 1881.) 
" All about Grub : including a Paper on the Grub 
Pest in Ceylon. B^ing the result of observations on 
the Coekchafers and their Larvae, in connection with 
Coffee Planting." By R. C. Haldane. Colombo - A 
M. & J. Ferguson, 1881, 8vo., plates. 
The author of the little pamphlet with the above, 
at first sight, somewhat whimsical title (for which 
he is probably not auswerable), deserves every credit 
for his attempt to investigate a somewhat difficult 
subject, a correct knowledge of which is of the 
highest importance to coffee planters. Evidently an 
entomologist, but writing us a practical man for others 
like himself, he has put together notes derived from 
actual experience, referring to the habits and earlier 
stages of the Lamellicorn beetles belonging to the 
families Melolonthidae and Cetoniidae, of which the 
larvae commit vast ravages in Ceylone-e coffee plant- 
ations. He is quite aware of the imperfect nature 
of his observations, and adds a MS. note begging 
fo- additional information on the life-history •.t°the 
insects ' to which he refers, to be sent to Messrs. 
Ferguson for publication in the well-known ' ey'on. 
Observer, We fear that it is out of the power of 
anyone but a resilient to aid iu this good work — at 
all events, until more precise particulars are obta ned. 
There is. no attempt at scientific identilicatiou of the 
bee I s referred to, and tne rough figures giveu scarcely 
admit of the formation of a *ouud opinio .i as to their 
specinc status, considering. the numerous South Indian 
representatives of Ancyionycha and its allies. They 
are, however, probably quite accurate enough for re- 
