1885 
481 
«*, '- 
r 
how can any honest man fail to see that the 
only hope of the maker of the pure article lies 
in building up a reputation that shall put him 
far above the competition of those who can 
not prove a clear record? Does it not rest 
with the honest maker of butter, with the 
shipper and with the retailer to do more than 
can be done by legislative enactments, to re¬ 
store genuine butter to the place it should 
have never lost? From that place no mixture 
of tallow, lard, oils, and other material could 
ever drive the pure, fragrant product of cream, 
well managed, if enough of the latter could be 
furnished to supply all the needs of the people. 
Some of the places in which bogus butter is 
made are said to be abominably filthy; but 
so are many of the places where the genuine 
article is produced. Some manufactories of 
the spurious goods are known to be managed 
with strict regard for cleanliness in every 
operation, as are also many home dairies. 
Misrepresentation of these facts can not long 
go undetected, and will react harmfully. 
A significant fact not much commented 
upon, is that consumers are not, apparently, 
especially urgent in trying to prohibit the 
sale of imitation butter. Some time ago con¬ 
sumers observed that butter put before them 
in restaurants, hotels, boarding bouses, and 
at last in private houses, suddenly lost the 
variety of odors and of colors it once had, and 
became uniform in color, texture, flavor and 
fragrance. At tbe same time they were told 
by tbe press that immeuse quantities of bogus 
butter wore finding their way to the tables of 
tbe people, aud that, too, in a guise so like 
that of the best creamery as to deceive the 
very elect. The ringed, streaked aud speckled 
stuff had disappeared. It was scarcely pos¬ 
sible that so sweeping a reform could have 
been effected,in so short a time, in making and 
in handling butter. Only one inference was 
possible: consumers saw that they had been 
entertaining the enemy unawares. Will it be 
surprising if the masses accept the less offen¬ 
sive compound as a desirable, or at least as a 
tolerable substitute fora palutabie but practi¬ 
cally almost unattainable food ? 
If every family that makes butter to sell 
will adopt business-like practices in disposing 
of its surplus,it will mJver have enough to sup¬ 
ply the demand. The first step in building 
up a direct trade that will absorb every ounce 
of the butter as soon as it is offered, should be 
the production of a thoroughly first-class ar¬ 
ticle. How this may be done the Rukaz, has 
told many times, clearly. The second step 
should be putt) ug the butter into perfectly pure 
packages, as nearly air-tight as possible, aud 
as neat and attractive as such packages can 
be made at reasonable cost. Sbrowd men 
have learned that a good profit can be made 
on the most common articles in every-day use 
by simply putting those goods up in conVen- 
• ient and tasteful coverings. What can be 
cheaper than gravel—plain, common gx-avel 
from the shore or the sand bunk—yet this 
material, “cheap as dirt" is put up in tidy 
pasteboard boxes, covered by showy labels, 
aud sold at a profit that takes the transaction 
“out of percentage and into larceny.” 
That natural and lovely modesty, which 
hides so many of our lights under a bushel, 
should not be allowed to step in here, to keep 
the maker from placing his or her name 
where it must be seen by all who set eyes on 
the package, or on the butter that is in it. 
The buyer will not object, for the brand is a 
guaranty of purity he will be only too proud 
to show, aud that showing will bring new 
customers. 
Dealiug thus with the consumer, the pro¬ 
ducer of a desirable article will gain several 
advantages. Of these one of the most impor¬ 
tant will be tho securing of a steady sale, at 
prices considerably higher than the local 
dealer will pay. Superior skill and care 
would secure a just reward. The delicious 
production by tho tidy housewife would not 
be exposed to contamination and ruin by con¬ 
tact with rancid grease brought to the 
“store” l>y some frowzy slattern, but would 
reach the consumer as sweet as a souud nut, 
aud us delightful as a dream of the fragrant 
meadows of June. 
In large cities shops have at various times 
beeu opened for the sole purpose of supplying 
a thoroughly good quality of genuine, home¬ 
made butter. Whether or not these shops 
have beeu successful does not appear. It is 
an instructive indication of the density o( the 
ignorance of the nature of butter, that many 
of these Bhops have boon in damp, musty 
basements of decaying buildings. People who 
know how ready butter is to absorb every 
odor, do not believe that any good thing eau 
come out of such u place. 
The ideal place for the storing or for 
the sale of butter should be above tho 
ground; should be built of brick, tile or 
stone, and finished with cement, stone or 
other impervious material, so that no decay¬ 
ing substance may obtain lodgment therein. 
The ventilation must bo as nearly perfect as 
tbe present condition of human knowledge 
can make such a place. No single ounce of 
butter In the slightest degree “off” in odor or 
in flavor should be permitted to enter. No 
wooden or other porous package should be 
admitted, if it has ever contained butter, or 
any substance the odor of which would injure 
butter. 
When all that has been suggested shall have 
beeu done, by the farmer whose duty it is to 
see that his pastures and watering places are 
pure, by the butter-maker, who should see to 
it that every surrounding of the milk, cream 
and butter shall be perfectly clean and inof¬ 
fensive, and by the dealer to whom the finished 
product may be entrusted, the maker of a 
really good article might adopt and record in 
the Patent Ollice at Washington some appro¬ 
priate trade-mark, which should be put upon 
every package of good butter he may make. 
He need then have little fear that his butter 
will remain unsold, or that the competition of 
bogus butter will seriously injure his business. 
Dealers in fraudulent goods will scarcely in¬ 
cur heavy penalties by willingly infringing 
upon rights protected by national laws. But 
if the latter prove ineffective for the purpose, 
they cau no doubt be changed so that they will 
afford ample protection to all who are able 
and willing to produce really wholesome, 
pure, aud palatable butter. Those who can 
not or will not do this can not justly ask that 
they should be aided in their efforts to foist 
upon the public an article of food, inferior to 
the imitation in appearance, peifume, taste 
and wholesomeness. 
Cook Co. 111. 
ENEMIES OF THE COTTON-WORM. 
The devastations of the cotton-worm, though 
very great, are held in check by many natural 
enemies. Hogs, dogs, cats, coons, bats and 
birds are their largest enemies 
after man. But the greatest 
number of their foes are found 
among insects, some of which 
we will illustrate and describe 
in this and a succeeding ar¬ 
ticle. At Fig. 296 is one of 
the jumping spiders, aud Pig. 
297 shows Oxyopes viridans, a 
large, pale-green spider with 
long, spiny legs Both of 
upon the cotton-worms, as do 
smaller spiders. The Aphis 
Fig. 296. 
these prey 
also many 
Fig. 297. 
lions are the larvae of the golden-eyed lace¬ 
wing flies, insects with slender bodies and 
gauze-like wings. The larva* are very vora¬ 
cious. Their eggs are white, and supported 
on long foot stalks, as shown at Fig. 298. Fig. 
Fig. 298. 
299 represents the Aphis lion in all stages. It 
devours the eggs and uewly hatched larvae of 
the cotton-worm. The Rear horse, Camel 
Fig. 299. 
Cricket, or Devil’s Riding-Horse, (Mantis 
Carolina), is a useful insect. It winters in the 
egg state, and its peculiar egg-masses, Fig. 800, 
are abundant upou twigs during the Winter. 
The Spined Soldier-bug (Arum spinosa), anil 
the Green Soldier bug (ltaphigaster hilaris), 
Fig. 801, prey upon the cotton-worm. The 
Thicked-tbighed Metapodius ( Acanthoeeph- 
ala femorata), shown at Fig. 802, percepti¬ 
bly diminishes the worms wheu it appears iu 
a cotton Held, At Fig. 303 is shown the Rapa¬ 
cious Soldier-bug (Siuea multispiuosa). Wheu 
young this beetle attacks only plant lice, but 
after attaining its full growth it also attacks 
larger insects, such as the cotton-worm, the 
Colorado Potato-Beetle, etc. It is brownish in 
Fig. 301. 
Fig. 300. Fig. 303. 
color, with a reddish stripe down the abdo¬ 
men. At Fig. 304 is shown one of the Asilus- 
flies or Robber flies—Erax apicalis. These 
insects are common in the cotton fields, and 
destroy the cotton-moths; but they also kill 
Fig. 302, 
useful insects, being specially objectionable 
because they prey upon wasps and bees. Were 
it not for this, they would be classed among 
the very best friends of the planter. 
There are several Tiger-beetles very useful 
in the cotton fields. The Carolina Tiger-beetle 
Fig. 304. Fig. 305. 
(Tetracha Carolina), is shown at Fig 305. It 
is of a brilliant metallic color; the eyes, legs 
and mouth parts are of a dirty white. The 
Virgiuia Tiger-beetle (T. Virginica), shown at 
Fig 306, may be distinguished from the former 
by the yellowish comma-shaped marks at the 
end of each wing-cover. At Fig. 307 are 
Fig. 306. 
shown other tiger-beetles that are use¬ 
ful to the cottou planters. The ground beetles 
do much good by destroying injurious insects. 
They remain duriug the day under sticks aud 
stones, aud go out at night to hunt their prey. 
The larva* live iu similar situations, and are 
also nearly always predaceous. At Fig. 308 
is shown a large green species, Calosonia scru¬ 
tator. At Fig. 809 are the beetle and larva of 
C. callidum; at Fig. 810 is shown a similar 
beetle, Harpalus caliginosus; and at Fig. 811 
its larva armed with strong jaws and capable 
of destroying numberless insects. 
THE ISOSOMA AGAIN. 
PROF. A. J. COOK. 
I read with much interest the article from 
Dr. Riley in the Rural of May, as I always 
do anything from his able pen. Of course, I 
knew all the facts given by Dr. Riley before 
I published the article which he regrets. 
I can but think, however, that the regrets 
are unnecessary, for, even granting that my 
Fig. 307 
Isosoma nigrum is I. hordei (Harris), still I 
think my article was needed. 
Fitch gives the fullest account of I. hordei 
(Seventh Report, p. 25). He says: “The an- 
tennre are black, with the basal joint pale 
tawny-yellow.” He says “the mouth is 
chestnut red.” Fitch in describing his four 
species, which both Harris and Walsh thought, 
and without doubt correctly, were ouly varie¬ 
ties, says: “These four insects are closely 
alike in their size, form and sculpture, the 
difference in the color of their legs being the 
most'conspicuous and almost the only char¬ 
acter whereby they are distinguished frou> 
each other.” 
Harris ;See Injurious Insects, page 554) says 
nothing about the color of antemue. Dr. 
Harris evidently had Fitch's description be¬ 
fore him, and in criticising Fitch’s view of 
Fig. 309. 
different species, it is strange that he should 
say (.See Injurious Insects, p. 568), “The only 
apparent difference between them consists in 
the color of the fore shanks." Mr. Walsh 
makes the same assertion in his criticism. (See 
American Entomologist Vol. 1 p. 330). It 
seems strange that three observers so careful 
Fig. 310. 
Fig. 311. 
and so accurate at description should have 
made no reference to the scape and mouth- 
parts, supposing, as Dr. Riley thinks, that 
1 these were black, except in case of Fitch’s 
variety, tritiei (Dr. Riley, iu a letter to me, 
makes a stronger cas« than he mas. es j u the 
