34 
If we turn to Prof. Riley’s, second report, 1870, we find him ex¬ 
pressing his opinion very decidedly as follows: - “The Army-worm 
delights in fact in cool, moist and shady situations, and from the 
passages already quoted from Mr. Kirkpatrick, where it is shown 
that the worms which swarmed on the Cuyahoga flats, did not at¬ 
tempt to remove to land a foot or so higher; and from further facts 
recorded by Dr. Fitch, it becomes evident that its natural abode is 
in the wild grass of our sw T amps or on low lands. During an ex¬ 
cessively dry summer these, swampy places dry out, and the insect 
having a wider range, where the conditions for its successful de¬ 
velopment are favorable, becomes greatly multiplied. The eggs are 
consequently deposited over a greater area of territory, and if the 
succeeding year prove wet and favorable to the groivth of the worms, 
we shall have the abnormal condition of their appearing on our higher 
and drier lands, and of their marching from one field to another 
* . * * * Thus the fact at once becomes 
significant and explicable that almost all great Army-worm years have 
been unusually wet, with the preceding year unusually dry, as Dr. 
Fitch has proved by record. The appearance of the insect last sum¬ 
mer in the West forms no exception, for the summer of 1868 was 
unusually dry and hot, while that of 1869 was decidedly wet.” 
In his eighth report (1876) he reaffirmed the same view, with 
emphasis. “ It is a well established fact that all great Army-worm 
years have been unusually wet, preceded by one or more exceptionally 
dry years ; and the widespread appearance of the insect in 1875 
formed no exception to the rule. The explanation of this fact origi¬ 
nally given by Dr. Fitch, is beyond doubt correct in the main, but 
needs further elucidation .” 
Here, then, we have his assertions based upon his own investiga¬ 
tions during two Army-worm years, that (( it is a icell established fact 
that all great Army-worm years have been unusually wet.” In i880 
all this evidence, so positively affirmed, is thrown aside. Dr. Fitch’s 
theory, formerly pronounced correct in the main beyond doubt, is 
also scouted as erroneous. He even adds that “the view that the 
Army-worm has its proper home in the wild grasses in the swamps, 
as Dr. Fitch has assumed, must also be considered erroneous.” 
An opinion which he affirmed in his former writings. 
When we find by new evidence that an opinion formerly given is 
incorrect, candor requires that we should abandon it and acknowledge 
our error, and Prof. Pdley is generally free to confess the changes 
in his own views, though on this particular point not so fully as 
justice to Dr. Fitch required. But the point we desire to urge in 
bringing forward these facts is this,—that as Prof. Pdley expressed 
his opinion so positively heretofore, based on a much larger amount 
of evidence than he has for his present view, and as his changes in 
reference to many of the most important characters and habits of 
the species have been so repeated and radical, can we feel satisfied 
with his present views in reference thereto? And more especially 
are we disposed to hesitate when we find his new views based upon 
such slender evidence, and differing in some most important respects 
from those expressed by Prof. Comstock. But it is proper to state 
that Prof. Comstock also remarks in his article in the Farmer’s 
