ES E E] 
A s OŘ 
EZ EEE 
z m dk do k NE DA dav m n 
= Em S 
= SE 
EB O > 
$ 
po] 
a 
J 
a 
| 
1 
îi 
| 
' | 
y 
| 
că mie o k n o EU 
ER Ar BT 
u C E 
= 
P 
sii ENS 
AS 
ee bs 
RN 
u L'an 
Se VE Ps, = za 
= 
Br u 
EI DIE 
6 
That Dr. Riley had given, practically, zo attention to the 
larvæ up to April 5th is shown by his answer to a question 
by Mr. Lugger : ‘‘ Prof. Riley was not certain whether or 
not it [the pupa] was among his material.” 
-While I yet remained in Washington Dr. Riley placed 
his larve in Mr. Lugger’s hands to determine-for me the 
position of the spiracles. In a very few days a letter with 
a hastily made photograph was sent me by Dr. Riley, and 
[ immediately wrote what I had learned from him and gave 
credit in the following manner: 
¡“For great assistance in the determination of the position of the 
spiracles I must acknowledge my indebtedness to Prof. C. V. Riley, 
who has also, for some time, had this larva under consideration. 
By means of stained specimens and photography the entire structure 
has been very accurately developed.’ 
The retarded form was then printed, as made up, and 
bears the date ‘‘ March, 1888’’ at bottom, this being the 
printer’s original ‘‘ make up,” and which I had never ob- 
served until a few months ago. 
. On my departure from Washington an important part 
of Dr. Riley's office force was put to work on Platypsyllus 
(Lugger, Pergande and Schwarz, with at least one artist), 
and a friend who had passed through Washington at the 
time wrote me on his return home: ‘‘ Hurry up your paper 
on Platypsyllus, or you will lose precedence, as Riley has 
his whole force at work on it.’’ I gave but little heed to 
this, as my paper was then very nearly all done and separata 
were distributed during the last week of April. Without 
suspecting that Dr. Riley would think of acting in any 
other than the most honorable manner toward me, I in- 
ferred that he was continuing the investigation with the 
view of publishing a well illustrated paper on the larva of 
Platvpsyllus, Leptinus and Leptinzllus, all of which for 
several years have constituted a part of his ‘‘ embarras de 
richesses entomologiques””. The result of this labor appeared 
in a paper read before the National Academy ‘‘ by request’ 
m 
/ 
on April 20th, just fifteen days after my communication to 
the Entomological Society of Washington, and was printed 
6 6 
in the 
same year. I had not seen the article, nor did I know that 
Scientific American Supplement" June 2d of the 
it had been read before the National Academy until it was 
reprinted in No. o... insect Life,’ April. 1880. 
In this paper there is nothing of any importance in refer- 
ence to the larva or imago of Platypsyllus that has not pre- 
viously been given by me in my papers, and to my great 
astonishment the only reference to me in my dealings with 
the larva is in these words: 
“I should probably not have called attention to this larva for 
some time had it not been that at the last meeting of the Entomo- 
logical Society of Washington, Dr. Horn, who was present, an- 
nounced the finding, the present spring, by one of his correspon- 
dents, of this very larva, and exhibited a specimen. Some points 
about it, and especially the position of the spiracles, being yet 
rather obscure in his mind, he requested me to examine my mate- 
rial, which I have been thus led to do.” 
There is. no mention of my views, nor of the argument 
to substantiate them, all of which took much time, very 
courteously yield to me by the members of the Society 
from their own allowance. 
In his concluding paragraphs of the paper Dr. Riley 
says, ‘' Platypsyllus, therefore, is a good Coleopteron.”' 
Why “‘ therefore 2'* - Evidently from the argument of the 
preceding pages. Were they original with him? Certainly 
not, as he and ten others had heard the same from me long 
before ‘Dr. Riley put pen to paper on the subject, or had 
any views that he could demonstrate. 
Believing that there was underlying all this an attempt to 
supercede my personally performed labor (a view that I find 
is not peculiar to myself ) I published in the ‘‘ Entomologica 
Americana’’ June, 1889, p. 122, the following : 

