CHRONOLOGICAL ACCOUNT OF DIFFERENT BROOJ 35 
Entom.j III, p. 29), where he says: ;i Mr. Meredith, a member of the 
senior class of the Agricultural College, and a resident of Taylor County, 
informs me that there were no Cicadas in that county this year, but that 
they xcere there in 18G3. He says he ' is certain as to the last date/ 
Unless there is some mistake in this, we have here a small area of a 
third brood — Professor Riley's Brood No. X Y." 
Professor Bessey himself classed this report among the doubt fal 
oim's, and it will be best not to adopt it without further corroborative 
testimony. 
Brood XVI.— Tre&ec&m— 1880, 1893. 
In tbe year IsSO, being the same as the preceding, they will, in all probability, ap- 
pear in the northern part of Cherokee County, Georgia, having appeared there, ac- 
cording to Dr. .Smith, in 182ri, 1^41. W>4, ami. according r<> Dr. Morris, in 1867. This 
brood occurred in 1-07 simultaneously with the northern septendeeim Brood XXI. 
Like the other broods recorded from northern Georgia, this Brood 
XVI lias since remained without confirmation. It seems difficult to 
get information on the appearance of the Cicada in that portion of the 
country, which on account of the interlocking and overlapping of sev- 
eral broods there, is of especial interest and importance in a correct 
chronology. I would especially urge correspondents from that region 
to send me data. 
Brood XVlI.—Septendetim—1881, 1896. 
In 1881, and at intervals of 17 years thereafter, they will, in all probability, appear 
in Marquette and Green Lake Counties, in Wisconsin, and may also appear in the 
in part of North Carolina and about Wheeling, W. Va., in northeast Ohio, and 
a few in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, and Westchester County, Xew York. 
There is abundant evidence that they appeared in the counties named in Wisconsin 
in 1864, and fair evidence that they appeared that year in Summit County, northeastern 
Ohio, while straggling specimens were found in the same year by Mr. S. S. Rath von, 
in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, and by Mr. James Angus, in Westchester County, 
New York. Dr. Fitch also records their appearance in 1*47, or 17 years previously, 
in the western part oi North Carolina, and Dr. Smith in Wheeling. W. Va., in 
1*47, and 1864. The distance between the localities given is very great, and it is 
doubtful whether all these records belong to one and the same brood. 
1881. — The more southern localities given for this brood, viz.. North 
Carolina and West Virginia, remained unconfirmed, and are thus ren- 
dered even more doubtful now than they were when I wrote the above, 
in L868. I have also no further records from northeastern Ohio, but 
from the remaining States confirmatory reports were received in L881. 
From Wisconsin, Dr. J. A. Renggly, of La Crosse letter of October 20, 
1881), records the appearance ^t' the Cicada in La Crosse I loanty ; and J. 
W.Wood, of Baraboo [letter of Jnne 28, L881), stated that they were 
abundant in 1881 in Sauk County, and still more abundant in L864. 
From New York State they were reported by .Mr. William T. Davig 
Tompkinsville (letters of dune lit and duly (I, L881), who observed the 
Cicadas on Staten Island : and from this Locality thev seem to extend into 
