UKOOl) Xll SKI'TKNDKCIM — l!»21. /),') 
y\v. l^ritlon n^ports" that li(> was not al)l(' to sccui-c any records for 
Connoc'licut, altliouiih special clTort was made to do so tlirouLrli 
coiTOspoiulcMice. A personal (>.\aininat ion of the area was, howcxcr, 
not inado by th(^ (Mitoniolo^ist , and a clippiniz: from \\\v Hartford 
Courant of Juno reports them presenl. 
In this yoiw (19().")), however, the first record of the jx'riodical 
Cicachi from UliocU^ Ishmd was obtained, no l)roo(l haxinii; j)re\iously 
])een reportcnl from this Stat(\ The bite fJames M. St)utb\vi(;k, 
curator of the Museum of .Natural History, 1{o<;(M' Williams l^ark, 
rej)ort(Ml undcM- datt^ of May 2o that a liviiiii; specimen of the Cicada 
was l)rouixht to him tliat day takcMi near the southwcvst corner of 
Tiogue l\eservoir, about a mile north of tlio New London turnpike, 
an unsettled reji^ion w ith plenty of woods. The specimen was secured 
by ^fr. C. K. Ford, of Providence, who re|)()rted tluit tlie cicadas wore 
nndvin^ so nuich noise that ho thought they must bo frogs or toatls 
having a late spring concert. Mr. Ford says, on the authority of his 
mother, that some wore collected there thirty-four years before. This 
is a very interesting as well as unoxpoctod record. 
Th(» distribution by States and counties is as follows: 
(Onnkcticut. — Hart lord. 
Massachusetts. — Bristol, Franklin, liani])shire. 
Rhode Island. — Providonce. 
Brood Xll— Septendecim— 1921. (Fig. 15.) 
The records on which this very doubtful new^ brood was based are 
given in Bulletui IS, new series, of this Bureau, pages 56, 57. The 
oldest record is that of Dr. Gideon B. Smith, who in his manuscript 
reports the Cicada as occurring in 1853 in Vinton County, Ohio, and 
Jo Daviess County, 111. Neither one of these localities was con- 
firmed, either in 1870,. 1887, or 1904. In the latter year the wTiter 
made special effort to have records secured if possible, but without 
result. Professor Forbes particularly making inquiries for Jo Daviess 
County, 111. 
The other two records published in Bulletin 18 for this l)rood are 
as follows: 
Mr. J. R. lUirkc, Milton, ("abcl] ronnly, \V. Va., writingundcr dale of May 22, 1807, 
says: "The Cicada is not due Ik if uniil l!)()!: its last visit was in 1887." 
Mr. W. S. Herrick, Tlunnian, Allen Counly, hid., writes under date of June 10, LSiJ8, 
that "We had the 17-year locust in 1887, if 1 remember correctly." This is also a 
doubtful record, and it is possible that ho referred eiiher to Brood XXIT, orrurrin? in 
1885, or Brood V, occurring in 1888. 
Xo report whatcncr was rocoivod from Mi'. Burke. Mr. Herrick, 
under (bite of Se])t(Mnber 1. 1904, ro|)orte(l that he vvont through the 
neighborhood where tlio locusts aj)])earo(l in 1SS7, and failed to see 
a Report Conn. Exp. Sta. 1903, Part III, p. 214. 
