SUMMARY. 
61 
examine them, this would meet part of the trouble. If he did not 
know his work they would discharge him ; and if he did, his wages 
would, divided as an outgoing payment from the body of his employers, 
be a great saving to them. 
This would not meet the loss on hide from former injury ; it would 
not meet the losses from coming-on injury; again quoting Mr. Hill’s 
letter to me of the 13th inst. on these points :—“ A warbled hide 
this year will bear signs, and is damaged by the result of last year , 
even when externally nothing could be detected. So, when the 
maggots are small, or have left their cells, the damage is still there, 
but by casual inspection not so easily discernible” (W. H. H.). But 
it would do something. 
The great loss from “licked beef” and “jelly” ranges, of course, 
with the height of the warble-season. After that is over there is not 
the same need for care (see remarks by Mr. John Child, Manager of 
the Leeds and District Hide, &c., Co., at pp. 20, 21). Therefore, the 
expense of examination for this part of the trouble would be only for 
a portion of the year. Some butchers are well aware of the bearing 
of the matter, some obviously not; and if all could be got to be on the 
alert, even about this one part when the attack is obvious to moderate 
examination, it would do something towards saving loss. 
At present we seem to be just in the condition described by Prof. 
Riley, the late Entomologist of the Department of Agriculture of the 
U. S. A., when, after the widespread American investigation in 1889, 
he was requested to take up the question officially. After some 
observations on the bearing of the subject, in which he greatly 
noticed our British observations and recommendations, he said he 
considered there was little to be done, excepting continuing the enquiry 
on statistical lines similar to those which had been already followed by 
the investigators; also, that even admitting that some more careful 
observations might be made on one or two points, that “ these are 
points of biologic interest rather than of economic importance.” 
Therefore, as the case stood, Prof. Riley, speaking officially, stated 
that, as regarded investigation with a view to fuller statistical informa¬ 
tion, “we should hardly feel justified in spending time and means 
therefor”; . . . and he closed his paper with this sentence :—“ Being 
thoroughly familiar with the stock-interests of the country, we know 
how difficult it is to get farmers to care for their stock, so far as 
this warble is concerned; and we are satisfied that where self- 
interest does not dictate better attention we can do little more than 
point out the means of avoiding injury and the desirability of so 
doing.” *—C. V. R. 
* Insect Life. Periodical Bulletin of U. S. Dept, of Agriculture. Vol. ii. No. 6, 
pp. 176, 177. 
