l£o.  <x.**Jhtr»+
•V.;*-,
■■'-* &
HESSIAN    FLY:
ITS
HISTORY, CHARACTER, TRANSFORMATIONS, AND HABITS.
BY ASA FITCH, M. D.
AS PUBLISHED IN THE TRANSACTIONS OF THE NEW-YOBK STATE

          AGRICULTURAL SOCIETY, VOL. VI.
JUX
fB
-i Any
cr*y^f.
oijR 2l C N u t.«\;;:.:'' ->.1...j c r r ;:^ c.
Arr. £* i593  ... . -
ALBANY:
PRINTED BY C. VAN BENTHUYSEN* AND CO".
1847.
 
 
 
.I'lnl,
A.Ktcl.Del
hn.n-.n-rd 1'rJokn h\<„.
;rrrr/ic  <>n.irr,-r(v./t.„rn,tf of'J*rl,-„/n,r. 
THE
HESSIAN    FLY:
ITS
HISTORY, CHARACTER, TRANSFORMATIONS, AND HABITS.
BY ASA FITCH, M. D.
AS PUBLISHED IN THE TRANSACTIONS OF THE NEW-YORK STATE
          AGRICULTURAL^SOCIETY. VOL. YL____^^..^,^^.

r-\rs-\
SURjtONGLNLi^L'bUi-i-l^.L-i
APi\&i iB99
J
         ALBANY:
PRINTED BY C. VAN BENTHUYSEN AND CO.
1847. 
 
THE  HESSIAN   FLY.
  The insect which we are about  to consider, has for a long period
been, at times, a severe  scourge,  in every district of our country.
It is more formidable to us, says Dr. B. S. Barton, than would  be
an army of twenty thousand Hessians, or of any other twenty thou-
sand hirelings, supplied with all the implements of war.  Hence it
has  forced itself prominently to  the  notice both of agriculturists
and men of  science.   No other insect of the tens of thousands that
teem in our  land, has received a tithe*of the attention, or been chro-
nicled with a tithe of the voluminousness that has been assigned to
this  species.  Our scientific journals,  our agricultural magazines,
and our common newspapers, have each accorded to it a conspicuous
place in their columns.    As  may well be supposed, almost every
point  in its history, has by one and another of its observers,  been
closely investigated, and  laid before the public.  Very little that is
new, can, therefore, at this day be  embodied in an account of this
species.   The most  that an  observer can accomplish, is to add  his
testimony in confirmation of facts that have  been already announ-
ced.   The most that a writer  can  aim at, is to gather the various
papers that are scattered  through  volumes sufficiently numeious of
themselves to form a library,  sift  from them  whatever they contain
of importance, and arrange the facts thus acquired, into a connect-
ed and symmetrical memoir.  Such is  the object of the present  es-
say ; to carefully review the  various  accounts that have been hith-
erto published, extract from  each the  items of value which it con-
tains, compare these with personal observations made under favora-
ble circumstances during the past twelve months, and with  the
materials  thus  acquired, write  out a history of this species,  more 
4
ample in its details than any that  has been hitherto attempted, and
containing a complete summary of all  that is known of this insect
down to the present day.

                    It  is a European Insect.
  For several years subsequent to the first appearance of the Hes-
sian fly in this country, it was universally believed to have been de-
rived from abroad.  When, however, the severe devastations which
it was committing  upon  this continent became known in Europe,
public attention was so strongly excited as to lead to an extensive
and thorough search for the insect  there.  The  result of this inves-
tigation, as given by Sir Joseph Banks in his report to the British
government, was, that "no such  insect could be found to exist in
Germany or any other  part  of Europe."  It  was in consequence,
received as an established fact, and assented to on all hands,  that
this was an exclusively American  species.  Of  late years, however,
new light has been shed  upon this  subject; and we now proceed to
detail the evidence which  induces us to believe that the Hessian fly
is indeed a European insect.

  It would appear that this insect, or one identical with it in its
characters and habits, did exist, and commit severe ravages in  Eu-
rope, long anterior to  its appearance  in America.   In Duhamel's
Practical Treatise of Husbandry,  (London,  1759, 4to. p. 90,) and
also in his Elements of Agriculture, (Lond. 1764, 8vo., vol. i., p.
269,) after alluding to a worm in  the root of oats, he says,  " I sus-
pect it to have  been an insect of this kind that destroyed so, much
wheat in the neighborhood of Geneva,  and  which M. de Chateau-
vieux describes thus :  ' Our  wheat in the present month of May,
1755, sustained a loss, which even that  cultivated according to the
new husbandry has not  escaped.  A number of small white worms
have  been  found on it, which, after a time, turn to a chestnut color;
they place  themselves betwixt the  leaves, and gnaw the stalk ;  they
are commonly found betwixt  the first joint and the root ; the stalks
on which they fix are immediately at a stand ; they grow yellow and
wither.  The  same  accident  happened in 1732 : these  insects ap-
peared about the middle of May, and did so much damage that the
crops were scarcely worth anything.' "   This  account, though per- 
5
haps too  brief and imperfect to justify a decided opinion, corres-
ponds much more exactly with the Hessian fly, than with any other
insect of which we have any knowledge.  Acquainted with  it, as
our men of science in this country were,  we are surprised that they
so readily and  unanimously  succumbed  to  the sentiment that the
species was indigenous to America.

  In  1788, as  we  are  informed in the Encyclopaedia Britannica,
(art. Hessian fly, §5,) the Duke of  Dorset addressed a letter to the
Royal Society of Agriculture in France, inquiring if the Hessian
fly existed in that  country.   " The  report  of the  society was ac-
companied with a drawing of two insects, one of  which  was sup-
posed to be the caterpillar of the Hessian fly, from its attacking the
wheat only when in the herb; beginning its  ravages in autumn, re-
appearing in the spring, and undergoing the  same metamorphoses."
From an  obscurity in the phraseology of the subsequent paragraph,
and a reference therein to the memoirs of the Stockholm Academy,
it would seem that the society regarded the Hessian fly as  identical
with the Chlorops pumilionis (Bjerkander) Meig.—a fly whose larva
lives  at  the  base of the stems of the wheat and rye, and which a
few years before  had been  extremely injurious to these  crops in
Sweden.  A doubt is therefore excited, whether the French insect
might not have been this latter species.  But,as the society deemed
their insect to be the  Hessian fly, it is somewhat  singular that its
history was not investigated and distinctly recorded, before the an-
nouncement was so confidently put  forth, that this species could not
be found  in Europe.

   But, more recently, clearer evidence upon this point is furnished
us.  Mr. Herrick, in his valuable  article  in Silliman's Journal,
(vol. xli. p. 154,) informs us, that Mr. J. D. Dana, who had been
much associated with him in making a thorough investigation of the
habits of the Hessian fly and its parasites, being on a voyage in the
Mediterranean,  " on  the 13th of March, 1834, and subsequently,
collected several larvae and pupae, from wheat plants growing in a
field, on  the Island of Minorca.   From these pupae, were  evolved
on  the  16th of  March, 1834, two  individuals of an insect, which
his recollections (aided by a drawing of the Hessian fly with which
he was provided), enabled him to pronounce to be the Cecidomyia 
                              6

destructor.  More of the perfect insects were evolved in the course
of the month, one of which deposited eggs like those of the Hes-
sian fly.   In letters, dated Mahon,  April 8 and 21, Mr. D. sent me
five of the insects, and several of the pupae.   They arrived in safe-
ty, and after a careful  examination, I saw no good reason to doubt
the identity of this insect with the Hessian fly.  The  Mahonese as-
serted that the insect had been there from  time immemorial,  and
often  did  great  damage  both there and in Spain."  And further,
" on the 28th of  April,  1834, Mr. D. collected from a wheat field
just without the walls of  Toulon, in France, several  pupae and one
larva  like those before obtained.  On the 4th of June, 1834, he ob-
tained similar pupae from a wheat  field near Naples."  We  doubt
whether there was living, at that day, two persons better qualified
to determine the identity  of these insects with the Hessian fly, than
Messrs. Herrick  and Dana.  Testimony from  such a source needs
no comment.

  Finally, the year previous to that in which Mr. Dana made the
above examination, it appears that the wheat crops in some parts of
Germany, were seriously  injured by an insect which was generally
regarded as the Hessian fly.  M. Kollar, of Vienna, in his treatise
on injurious insects, (London, 1840, p.  119,) relates that in the au-
tumn  of  1843, complaints were made that the wheat on the estates
of his imperial highness, the Archduke Charles, at  Altenburg, in
Hungary, had be^en  considerably injured by an unknown insect, of
which the follc-wing account was forwarded to the archducal office.
"Till the end:of May, the wheat  was in  excellent condition, but
about the commencement of June, the ears began to hang down,
and the stem to bend, and in a few days patches appeared in differ-
ent parts of the^ fields which were of rather poorer soil than the
others, with  the "plants  entangled and matted together, as though
lodged by heavy rains.....More  than two-thirds of the
straw was lodged in less  than a week ; and the heavy rains which
fell in the latter half of June, so fully completed the work of de-
struction, that the wheat fields looked as if herds  of cattle had gone
over them.  The  cause of this damage was sought for, and we soon
discovered at the  crown of the root of each of the wheat plants, or
at the first joint, within  the sheath of  the  leaf, whole clusters of 
7
pupa© of an unknown insect.   Those plants, the roots of which had
been attacked, died off;  and the'spot to which the insects had fast-
ened themselves on the still soft straw within the sheath of the leaf,
was found to be brown, withered, and tough, yet without any appa-
rent wound.  The straw which had become lodged, produced small
ears, with few and imperfect  grains, which ripened with difficulty,
and the straw was twisted, and of a very inferior quality."
   Nearly a hundred miles south-west of Saxe-Altenburgh, a similar
account is simultaneously given by Baron Von Meninger, agricul-
tural director of the  Duke of Saxe-Coburg.  According to his re-
port,  " In the fields of Weikendorf, and other neighboring localities,
caterpillars were found which had  devastated  whole fields.  These
caterpillars  had their first  abode near the ground, in the first joint
of the straw, where they were found in whole families, in a sort of
nest.   The largest were about the length of two lines.  Their color
was pale  green, with a small black  dot above......The
straw became dry at the  first  joint, and fell over or leaned on its
neighbor. The upper part of the straw received  its nourishment
from the  atmosphere alone, and  the ears formed : but they continu-
ed in a sickly  condition, and  could only produce  small, shrivelled
grains.   The life of the caterpillars (their duration as naked worms?)
appeared  to be from about twenty-four to thirty days.   As the straw
ripened, the insects, changed their color into a brownish hue, shriv-
elled up,  and finally disappeared."
   M. Kollar, who seems to have  known nothing  of the American
history of this insect beyond what he gathered from Mr. Say's brief
account, obtained  some  of the  diseased straw from Germany,  in
which, he says,  " many of the browrn pupae were found.   I opened
the pupa-case, and  was able  to determine with great probability,
partly from the form of  the pupa, and partly  from the unchanged
caterpillar in the pupa-case, that it  must be a small fly. I only as-
certained  this from  the minute description and  drawing of the insect
from Mr,  Thomas Say, in  a  North American journal, in which a
stem of wheat, with the pupa within it, is  exactly  represented as  I
have seen  our wheat."
   Mr.  Westwood, in a note  appended  to this  account, says, it is
perhaps questionable whether  the  species,  of  which the above de- 
8
tails are given by M. Kollar, is identical with Say's Cecidomyia de-
structor.   He even intimates a doubt whether the European species
is a Cecidomyia, for, from all that had been observed, this genus in
its pupa state, is naked, like the other Tipulidae, and not enclosed in
a case.  Having himself received  specimens  Irom  Dr.  Hammer-
schmidt of Vienna, and still in  the straw  near the roots, he found
the insect " enclosed in a leathery case," on  opening  which, he dis-
covered the  larva shrivelled up and dead.  Now this nice point, so
particularly  noted, and so strikingly showing the acuteness of dis-
crimination possessed by that eminent naturalist, we think must dis-
pel the last lingering doubt as to the identity of the American and
European insects.  As will  fully appear  in a subsequent part of
this paper, the Hessian  fly  presents this singular anomaly, that its
pupa is coarctate, or enclosed in a case like those of the other fami-
lies of dipterous insects, but unlike all the pupae of the  Cecidomyians
and other Tipulidae that have been  hitherto  observed !  The very
fact, therefore, which leads Mr.  Westwood to suspect the European
insect is not a Cecidomyia, all but  demonstrates that it is the Hes-
sian fly I
                  Its Introduction into America.
   The existence of the Hessian fly in Europe being premised, so
many circumstances conspire to render it probable that it was intro-
duced into this country in the mode originally supposed, that scarce-
ly a doubt can now be  entertained upon this point.

   When the habits and transformations  of the insect itself  are con-
sidered, it will be perceived that  these interpose great obstacles to
its  being  transported  across the Atlantic, at  a  period  when two
months or more were required for the voyage.  Its passing through
two generations  in a year, makes its continuance in any one stage of
its existence comparatively brief.  The  first of these generations oc-
cupies about seven months, from October to  April inclusive.  This
generation is nurtured  at the roots of the young plants, and there is
no  probability that any of  these  plants would be taken up, so that
the insect could thus be conveyed away.   The second generation is
nurtured in  the lower joints of  the  straw.  The worm attains matu-
rity in May, becomes a dormant "  flax  seed "  in June, continues in 
9
 this state till August, when the  fly comes out to deposit its eggs in
 September.  Though most of these flax seeds remain in the stubble
 when the grain is harvested, numbers  of  them are  so  high  in the
 straw, as to be gathered with it.  But they are so firmly imbedded
 in the straw, and enveloped within the sheathing base of the leaf,
 that it must be rare that any of them are detached by the flail in
 threshing, so as to find  their way among  the grain, and thus with it
 be carried to a  distance.  As the  flax seeds moreover, evolve the
 perfect insect in August, it must be equally rare that a solitary fly
 comes from the straw after that  date.   These facts clearly show that
 there is but one mode, and  but one month  in  the year, in which this
 insect could probably   have been conveyed to this country at that
 time, to wit, in straw landed upon  our coast  in August.  If landed
 at a later date, the flies would have completed their transformations,
 and made their escape,  or  perished in their confinement; if earlier,
 there is no probability that the straw could have been of the growth
 of that year, consequently  it would have  contained no live insects.
 Our present knowledge of  the habits of this insect thus affords us a
 singularly accurate test, for ascertaining the truth of  the  original
 theory respecting the mode in which it was introduced.

   And how do  the tacts furnished us by the military history of
 those times, accord with what we have seen to be almost essential
 contingencies to the importation  of this  insect ?   Early in July of
 the year 1776, General  Sir  William Howe arrived  on  the New-York
 coast from Halifax, with the troops which had evacuated Boston,
 and debarked upon that part of  Staten Island which  lies within the
 Narrows—one of the reasons which induced him to  make this part
 of  the continent the central point of his operations  being, that
 " Long Island was very fertile in wheat  and all  other corns, and
 was deemed  almost equal  alone to the maintenance of an army,"
 (BissePs Hist.  Geo. III).  We are  informed in Marshall's Life of
 Washington,  (vol. ii. p. 424,) under the date of August, 1776, that
 " the reinforcements to  the  British army  were now arriving daily
 from Europe  "  Lord  Howe's strength was hereby  augmented  to
 twenty-four thousand men,  about half of whom (as is  probable from
the statement, page 416,) were newly arrived " Hessians and  Wal-
deckers."  The most  of these were from Hesse  Cassel, a district
                                2 
10
but about  a hundred miles distant from Saxe-Coburg and Saxe-AI-
lenburg, where, as we have already seen, the same insect did much
damage to the wheat crops in 1833.   And again,  under the date of
August 25, (p. 437,)  it is stated, that " on  this  day, General  De
Heister landed with  two brigades of Hessians.   The  next day he
took pest at Flatbush," on Long Island, about six miles distant from
the main encampment on Staten Island.

   In juxtaposition with this account, let us now place the statement
of one, who, Sir John Temple, the British Consul  General  at New-
York tells us, " had been more curious with respect to this insect,
than any other person with whom he was acquainted."  Says Col.
Morgan, {Encyc. Britann.) "The  Hessian fly was first introduced
into America by means  of some  stiaw made use of  in package, or
otherwise, landed on Long Island, at  an  early  period  of  the late
war; and its first appearance  was  in the  neighborhood of Sir Wil-
liam  Howe's debarkation, and  at Flatbush."  So  many  circum-
stances concur to evince the truth of the account here given by Col.
Morgan, to its very letter, that we  think no one will hereafter hesi-
tate to give it full credence.

   We have searched in  vain for the date of the  embarkation  of  the
Hessian troops, or the number of days  occupied by them in  crossing
the ocean.   It is possible they may all have left Europe  anterior to
the harvest.   But in Germany, as  in this country, as is shown by
M. Kollar's statement, the infested straw becomes broken  and tan-
gled, and turns yellow,  early in June.  Had a company  of soldiers
needed straw for package, no objections  would have been made to
their going into a  field of this kind,  and with  a  scythe, gathering
what they required, weeks before the usual time  of harvest.

   We have no where met with  but one  statement, which  goes di-
rectly to prove that this insect is indigenous to this country, or existed
here anterior to the arrival of the Hessian troops.  The late Judge
 Hickock of Lansingburgh, N. Y., in a communication to the Board
 of Agriculture in the  year  1823, and published  in their Memoirs,
 (vol. ii. page 169,) says,  " a respectable and observing farmer of
 this town, Col. James Brookins, has  infonned  me,  that on his first
hearing of the alarm on Long Island, in the year 1786, (doubtless 
11
1776 is intended,) and many years before its ravages were complain-
ed of in this part of the country, he detected  the same insect, upon
examining the wheat growing on  his  farm in this town."  If this
insect, observed by Col. Brookins in 1776, was the genuine destruc-
tor, it is a little singular that to betray its  real character, it patient-
ly awaited some fourteen 3 ears, to be reinforced by its kindred from
Long Island, who teached  it  by regular  advances made year after
year—that on their arrival, and not till then, it acquired the skill
and courage to go forth  and lay waste the crops through  all this
section of country for several  successive years.   The strong proba-
bility is, that it was  some  other  insect which was  found by Col.
Brookins.

                Its Civil History and Bibliography.
   We now proceed to adduce such facts  as  we have been able  to
collect, respecting the devastation of  this  insect in  different years,
or in other words, to trace out  with  as much precision  as the data
before us will enable us to do, its civil history, from the period  of
its first appearance, down  to  the  present  time; and in  connection
with this, to notice the different memoirs and  other papers of value
that have been published respecting it, so far as we have  had an op-
portunity of becoming acquainted with them.

   Anterior to the revolutionary war,  the Hessian fly was unknown
in this  country.   No allusion  to an  insect  of this kind has been
found in. any American work, or in the journal of any foreign tra-
veller, nor since its appearance has  it been  intimated that any  of
our citizens had ever  observed it previous to that time.

   All accounts concur in  stating  that its first appearance was up-
on Staten Island, and the west end of Long Island.  There is some
discrepancy between  different waiters, as  to  the particular year  in
which it was first observed.  Dr. Mitchell states {Encyc. Britann.)
that " it was first discovered in  the year  1776."  The  ravages  of
the insect, however, are so much more conspicuous and liable  to
attract attention  from the broken  and tangled  condition of the
straw as it approaches maturity in June, than  they are when a por-
tion of the young shoots are  discolored and  withered in October,
that there caE  be little doubt but it  would first be observed at the 
12
former period.   Had  Dr.  Mitchell,  therefore,  received definite
information upon this point, it would doubtless have been coupled
with the  statement, that it was noticed at or before the harvest in
that year, and consequently  anterior to the arrival of the Hessian
troops—which fact, he, confident as he was that this was an indige-
nous insect, would not have failed triumphantly to have stated.  It
is hence believed, that Dr. M.  has  assumed this date, from the cur-
rent report that this insect was introduced by the Hessian soldiers,
knowing this to  have been the year of their arrival.

  From the " flax seeds"  casually lodged in the  imported straw,
only a few flies wuuld  probably be evolved, to deposit their eggs
upon the  young wheat  in  the autumn of 1776; nor  would these
have multiplied to such an  extent  in the following spring as to at-
tract attention at the time  of harvest.   But, increasing with  each
successive brood, by  the  harvest  of the  following year,  177S, we
might  anticipate its being observed,  and by a year thereafter, it
would become so numerous that its real character would no longer
be in  doubt.   And  in accordance  with this, we are informed by
Colonel Morgan, that " the fly made its first appearance in 1778;"
and Mr. Clark,  who in 1787  went to Long  Island  expressly to
gather authentic  information respecting this insect,  says in his re-
port,  " on the best inquiry  I could make, during my stay there,  I
satisfied  myself  in the following particulars,  namely: first, that
the Hessian fly made its first appearance there about the year 1779,
so as to injure, and in some cases to destroy their crops of wheat."
An anonymous writer in Carey's Museum,  (vol. i, p. 143,) gives
the same year as about the period of its discovery.

  We therefore regard the year  1779 as most probably the date
when its  ravages actually commenced.  The crops of wheat were
severely injured  or wholly destroyed by it in Kings and Richmond
counties, during  several of the  following  years; and each succeed-
ing generation regularly enlarged the sphere of its devastations in
every direction.

  Quite early in its history, the important fact became accidentally
discovered, that certain varieties of wheat are capable of withstand-
ing its attacks. In the year 1781, a prize schooner loaded with wheat 
13
was  taken in the Delaware river, and carried  into  New-York,
whence the cargo  was sent to the mill of Isaac Underhill, near
Flushing, Long Island, to be  ground.  Mr.  Underbill's own crop
of the previous year having been  so  entirely  destroyed that he had
no grain for  seed, he took what  he  required for sowing from this
cargo, and reaped  therefrom upwards of twenty bushels per acre,
whilst few of his neighbors for  miles around had any to reap, so
calamitous wTere the  operations  of the fly.   To his praise  be it
recorded, he  distributed his entire crop,  in small  quantities, and at
a moderate price, among his neighbors, for seed; and all who made
use of it were  similarly successful.   The " Underhill wheat" at
once became noted, for effectually resisting the attacks of the fly,
and for many years subsequently, as  we shall have frequent occa-
sion to notice, was eagerly sought for and successfully cultivated,
where all other  varieties  of this  grain  failed.  {Vaux and Jacobs,
Clark).

   In 1786, the fly reached Col. Morgan's farm, at Prospect,  New-
Jersey,  about forty miles south-west  of Staten Island.  It was first
observed in May, and by October was so inertased, that some farm-
ers in Middlesex, Somerset, and  Monmouth counties were  induced
to plow  up their young wheat and sow the fields to rye.   Other
fields, less injured, were  allowed to  renir.in  until the succeeding
spring, when their appearance  was so disheartening, that m;>ny of
them were plowed up and sowed  with spring  grain.

   Eastward its progress would appear to have been much more ra-
pid than towards the  west  and  south,  for  this  same year it had
reached a hundred miles, nearly to the east end  of Long Island, and
was detected  on  Shelter  Island.   " It was first  perceived a little
before the harvest, and appeared to have come from the west end of
Long Island, in  a  gradual progress of between twenty and  thirty
miles in a year.   Before the harvest the species appeared to be few
in number, but in the fall it was  found  to have greatly increased,
and appeared in great numbers on the green  wheat, and  was  ob-
served to do  most injury to that which had been most early sown."
{Havens, p. 71). 
14
   Public attention was now becoming strongly turned towards this
formidable foe.   The  New-York  Society  for promoting Useful
Knowledge, issued an advertisement,  requesting information res-
specting it.  Two communications were soon received by them, and
were directed to be inserted in the  secular  papers.  These are the
first published  documents relating to the fly, that have occurred to
our  notice.    They  are  copied  into Carey's  American  Museum
(Phila.  vol i.  p. 324-326).  One  of them, dated New-York, Sep-
tember  1, 1786,  gives  a  brief but  pretty  accurate  account of the
situation and habits of the insect, particularly in the fall and spring.
The other, dated Hunterdon, New Jersey,  January  1, 1787, after
hastily  alluding to its habits, proposes as remedies, late sowing, on
rich land; drawing elder  bushes over the young plants; and passing
over the wheat with a heavy roller to crush the worms.

   In the Pennsylvania  Mercury of June  8, 1787, is published a let-
ter from Col. George Morgan, addressed to  the Philadelphia Socie-
ty for promoting Agriculture.  He suggests the importance of their
appointing some competent person to fully investigate the habits of
the Hessian fly, and the remedies to protect from it, after the ex-
ample of the Paris Academy of Sciences, which had commissioned
Messrs.  Duhamel and Tillet to  enquire  out the history of the An-
goumois grain  moth; he alludes to  contradictory reports respecting
the Underhill wheat, copies the  paragraphs  already given from M.
Chateauvieux, as " answering in every  respect to our Hessian fly,"
and gives an account of the ravages of the insect in his  vicinity,
and its habits so  far as  observed.

   The  Mercury  of September 14th, contains  another letter  from
Col. Morgan, correcting some inaccuracies  in his previous commu-
nication, and  giving some  additional interesting items.  He  says
" those  who are doubtful  whether the fly is in their neighborhood
or cannot find the eggs or nits in the wheat, may satisfy themselves
by opening their windows  at  night, and  burning a candle in the
room.   The fly  will enter  in proportion to their numbers abroad.
The first night after the  commencement of the wheat harvest this
season, they filled my  dining  room in  such numbers, as to be ex-
ceedingly troublesome in the  eating  and drinking vessels.  With-
out exaggeration, I may say, that a  glass tumbler, from which beer 
15
had been just drank at dinner, had five hundred flies in it, within a
few minutes.   The windows are  filled with them when they desire
to make their escape.  They  are  very distinguishable  from every
other fly, by their (having) horns or whiskers."

   Accompanying Col. Morgan's letter is a brief report, made  by
Thomas Clark, who,  at the request of his neighbors had gone to
Long Island to gather correct information respecting  the fly, and
the means of escaping its depredations.   He became well satisfied
that the Underhill wheat%was fly proof, and  could  be obtained in
any desired  quantities, at the moderate price  of $1.25  per  bushel.
He also reports the interesting  fact,  that the fly had now  become
so reduced in its numbers on  the west  end of Long  Island, that
many of the inhabitants  supposed there had been none the  present
year, though he himself saw it  there quite common  still.   Since
1779 their crops had been destroyed more or less every year, until
the present.

   In 1788, a.  communication in Carey's  Museum,  (vol. iv. p. 47),
from Buck's county, Pa., informs us that  in the vicinity of Trenton,
N. J., so much as the seed  sown  would  not  be harvested.   Many
farmers had plowed up their wheat crops  in the spring, and  planted
them with corn.  The fly also in this year commenced it ravages in
the State  of Pennsylvania.   " Near seed-time last  year, many per-
sons on the Pennsylvania shore saw the insect so thick in the air as
to appear like a cloud, coming over Delaware river."

   Following this communication, is a paper signed  " a landholder,"
who regards the eggs as laid  in the grain  of ripe wheat, and sowed
with them ;  and proposes procuring seed from  places not  infested
with the fly, as a remedy.

  Messrs.Vaux and Jacobs, farmers of Providence, Pa., in July, 1788,
made a tour through New Jersey  and Long Island,  for the  purpose
of gathering information respecting the fly, and the best modes of
withstanding its attack.  Their account  is published in the Phila-
delphia Packet of August 21st, and is mainly occupied with a des-
cription of the Underhill wheat, and a full confirmation of previ-
ous reports respecting it. 
16
  On the east part of Long Island, where, as already noticed, the
fly arrived in 1786, it so rapidly multiplied, that the following year
many fields were  nearly destroyed,  and this  year the third  of its
presence, the wheat crop " was  cut off almost universally."  The
red-bald, which was  the  common  winter  variety there raised; and
the  spring wheat were  equally affected.   Rye in many fields was
much injured, and a  field of summer barley was wholly destroyed.
{Havens, p.  73).
  Wheat in large quantities, was at  this period exported  hence to
Great Britain.  Accounts of the appaling  havoc that this insect was
making, excited the attention of the government there, and aroused
their fears, lest so dreadful a scourge should be introduced into that
country, by  means of the  American  grain.   " The Privy Council
sat day after day, (says Kirby and  Spsnce, vol. i. p. 50), anxiously
debating what measures should  be  adopted to ward off the  danger
of a  calamity more  to  be dreaded, as  they  well knew,  than the
plague or pestilence.  Expresses  were sent off in  all directions to
the officers of the customs at the different  outports respecting the
examination  of cargoes—despatches written to the  embassadors in
France, Austria, Prussia and  America, to  gain that  information of
the want of which they were  now so  sensible;  and so  important
was the business  deemed, that  the minutes of the council, and the
documents collected from all quarters fill upwards of 200 octavo
pages."   In consequence of the  information laid before them, a
proclamation was issued by his Britanic majesty, on the 25 th of June,
 1788, prohibiting the entry of wheat, the  growth  of any of the
territories of the United States, into any of the ports of Great Bri-
tain.  It has been remarked as very singular, that although the en-
 try of American wheat was thus interdicted, it was still allowed to
be stored at  the different  seaports, thus affording the  obnoxious in-
 sects, if any of them had been contained  in  the  grain, a  very con-
 venient opportunity to escape and make their way into the country!

   When  the news of the closing of the British ports  against Ame-
 rican wheat reached this country,  the measure  was  at once regarded
 as having resulted from misinformation respecting the habits of this
 insect.   The supreme executive council of Pennsylvania immediate-
 ly addressed a letter to the Philadelphia society  for promoting  Ag- 
17
 riculture, requesting the society  to  investigate and report to  the
 Council the nature of the Hessian fly, and particularly whether the
 quality of the grain is affected by it.  The society promptly replied,
 " that from every communication made to them on that subject, they
 are decidedly of  opinion that it is the plant of the wheat alone, that
 is injured by this destructive insect, that what grain happens to be
 produced from such plants, is sound and good, and that this insect
 is not propagated by sowing wheat  which  grew  on fields infected
 with it."   They  also refer  to  the letters of Col.  Morgan, and of
 Messrs.  Vaux and Jacobs,  as containing the best information ex-
 tant,  relative to  the natural history of the insect, and the most suc-
 cessful method of preventing its  depredations.  {Carey's Museum,
 vol. iv. p. 244).
   Dr. Currie took an active part in  showing  the government and
 people of England, that the information which had led to the clos-
 ing  of the ports  against the entry of American grain,  was wholly
 erroneous;  and in eight or ten months the government bought  the
 stored wheat at prime cost, kiln-dried it, and resold it at great  loss.
 The prohibition was taken off almost immediately thereafter.  {Me-
 moir of  Currie, ii. 65).

   In 1789, as we learn from the Encyc. Britann., the Hessian fly
 first reached Saratoga, two  hundred miles north of its original sta-
 tion.  From the  statements of several persons who were residing in
 Washington and  Saratoga counties so long  ago as  this date, it ap-
 pears that the crops in this district of country, (at  that day second
 to no  other in the quantity of  wTheat which  it produced,) first  be-
 gan  to fail about  the year 1790  or 1791.  The insect  reached  here
 by a regular progess  from the south, coming nearer and nearer each
 successive year.   It continued to infest the  crops during a  number
 of the following  years, sometimes severely,  at others but moderate-
 ly.   On two or three occasion?, many of the fields in Saratoga coun-
 ty were entirely destroyed.   I do not learn that in this vicinity their
 devastations at any time reached this extent.  About the year 1803,
their last depredations were committed.  From that time this insect
 has never been observed in this vicinity,  that I can  ascertain, until
the autumn of 1845.  In Rensselaer  county, however, I am credi-
bly informed, that it was quite injurious  about the year 1810.
                               3 
18
  In 1792, the recently instituted New-York Society for the pro-
motion of Agriculture, Arts, and  Manufactures,  issued part first of
its Transactions, containing (p. 71-86), " Observations on the Hes-
sian fly, by Jonathan N. Havens."  This is the most valuable memoir
that had  hitherto  appeared upon this subject, and few of  those of a
later date surpass  it.   After sketching the  ravages of the fly in dif-
ferent years in his own vicinity, Judge H. describes with much pre-
cision its situation and  appearance in the  respective stages of its
existence, showing that it passes  regularly through but two genera-
tions in a year, instead  of three  or four, as anterior writers had
stated.   As remedies, he recommends sowing none but the bearded
wheats, and burning or plowing  up the stubble soon after harvest.
This last important measure had never before been proposed; Judge
H. had been led directly to it, by  a  close investigation of the habits
of this insect.

  The American  Philosophical  Society this year appointed from
among its most competent members, a committee (Thomas Jefferson,
B. Smith Barton,  James Hutchinson, and Casper Wistar), " for the
purpose of collecting  and communicating to the society materials
for forming the natural history of the Hessian fly." This committee
immediately issued a circular, requesting all persons acquainted with
any facts relating  to this insect, its depredations, and preventives,
to communicate the same by letter to their  chairman.    The nu-
merous points upon which information was  desired,  were particu-
larly detailed in an extended series of questions, which  clearly in-
dicate  the  importance  which they attached  to  this subject, and
the thorough investigation which  they proposed  making. {Carey's
Museum, vol. xi.  p. 285).  It cannot but be  regretted that this bu-
siness, committed to  such  capable hands,  was  not pursued and
brought to  a  close with  the same zeal with which it was evidently
commenced.   We have met with no report ever rendered by them.

   At this time, as we  infer from a clause in the circular just alluded
to, and also from  some passages in Dr. Mitchell's address before the
New-York  Society of Agriculture {Transactions,  vol. i. p. 32,) the
insect was  becoming so rare in all the more  densely settled parts of
the Middle States, which had been first overspread by it, that it was
the common  opinion that it would soon vanish from the country en- 
19
tirely.  Notices  of it in the magazines and newspapers become
more rare, and it was evidently ceasing  to be regarded  with that
intense solicitude which it  had hitherto excited.   It was, however,
with unabated vigor, continuing  its progress  southward.  A letter
from  Prospect Hill, Delaware, dated June 12th, 1792, {Carey's Mu-
seum, vol. xi. p.  301,) states that the  fly arrived there "in prodi-
gious clouds," about the  middle of the  preceding September.  It
describes  the place were eggs were deposited on the young  wheat,
the growth of the worm, and the perishing of all the plants, except
those growing upon a rich soil, and adds further testimony in favor
of the Underhill wheat.

   In 1797, Dr. Isaac Chapman, of Bucks county, Pa., prepared one
of the best accounts of  this species that has ever appeared, contain-
ing the details of his own  careful  observations upon the insect and
the time  of its appearance in its different stages.   These observa-
tions led  him  to recommend as the most certain  safeguards  against
the fall attack, late  sowing, and against the  spring attack, a quick
vigorous  growth,  to be  obtained  by procuring  southern  seed  and
sowing it on a rich, elevated and dry soil.  His  paper is  published
in the fifth volume of the  Memoirs of the Philadelphia Society for
promoting Agriculture, a volume which we regret having been un-
able to find in either of the largest libraries of this State.  We are
therefore  obliged to depend  for its contents  upon second hand ac-
counts.   Dr. C. states that the  fly was  this year found upon the
west  side of the  Alleghany mountains.

   The eighth volume of the  Encyclopaedia  Britannica,  published
this year, gives (pages 489-495) an extended article under the head
Hessian Fly, consisting  chiefly of a summary of the  several  docu-
ments laid before the privy council during their investigations.

  In Dr. B. S. Barton's  Fragments  of the JVatural History of Penn-
sylvania, issued in 1799, the author announces (p. 23) his intention
of publishing  " a memoir upon  that  destructive insect called the
Hessian fly."  It is probable that  whatever communications  were
addressed  to the committee of the  Philosophical Society, had been
consigned to his hands.   We are not aware that  the  promised me-
moir ever appeared. 
20
   " About the year 1801, the Hessian  flies  first made their appea-
 rance in the neighborhood  of the city  of Richmond.   We saw but
 little mischief that year.  But in 1802 they were much  more de-
 structive—1803, they swept whole fields—about the same in 1804"
 {H MPClelland, Amer. Farmer, vol. ii. p. 234).

   In the year 1803, we arrive at the first notice of this species, of
 a scientific nature.  Dr. Mitchell, in a  short article in the Medical
 Repository (vol. vii. p. 97,  98), entitled " Further  ravages of the
 wheat insect, or Tipula tritici of America, and  of another  species
 of Tipula in Europe," states that it is now understood that  our in-
 sect is a Tipula.  He alludes to  the  extent of this  genus, (ninety-
 four species being enumerated by Weber,) and though he has often
 examined our insect, and bred it so as to observe its transformations,
 he declines giving a decided opinion whether or not our species is
 different from all those that had been  described.  He refers to the
 species  " treated as a  nondescript" by  the Rev. Mr. Kirby,  in the
 IAnncean Transactions, copies its name  and technical characters, and
 closes with the remark, that  whether Mr. Kirby's insect  is a new
 one or not, it is not the same animal  which has been so injurious in
 this  country.   Had  the doctor but  added  a few words descrip-
 tive  of our species,  he would  undoubtedly be entitled to " the
 barren honors of  a  synonym."  Respecting the depredations  of
 the insect at this time, we learn from him, that " during the cold and
 dry spring of  1803 these creatures again infested  the wheat more
 than they had  done   for many  years.   Many crops were cut off
 early in June, and the ground plowed up for other purposes.

   During a long interval we  meet with no further notices of this
 species.  Its depredations would appear to have been so slight, and
 public attention was so much engrossed, with other affairs, that noth-
 ing,  as we have discovered, is recorded  of it.

   At length, in 1817, it  is stated to have renewed its ravages in
various  sections  of  the country.   In the neighborhood of New-
York and of Philadelphia, it is evident  that it was unusually abun-
dant, and in parts of Maryland and Virginia, it was perhaps more
destructive than^.-it had ever been before. 
21
  It was on the 24th of June in this year, that Mr. Say read before
the  Philadelphia Academy of Natural Sciences a  paper  entitled
" Some account of the insect  known by the name of Hessian fly,
and of a parasitic insect that feeds on it."   This contains  an accu-
rate  technical description of the insect, on which he bestows the
name of  Cecidomyia destructor, and also of its most common para-
site,  referred by him to the  genus Ceraphron,  and also named des-
tructor.   This paper was published in the Journal of the Academy
(vol. i. p. 45-48), issued in the course of the ensuing month, and
was  followed in  August by  a  copperplate illustration of these  in-
sects, drawn and engraved  by Mr. C. A. Le Sueur.   " A local habi-
tation and a name"  were thus  conferred upon  this world-renowned
species, by which it has ever since been definitely specified and ar-
ranged in works of science.

   In the  American  Monthly  Magazine  and  Critical  Review  for
August, 1817,  New-York,  (vol.  i. p. 275-279,)  appeared a paper
bearing the  title, " An account of the wheat insect  of America, or
the  Tipula  vaginalis tritici,  commonly  called the Hessian fly."
This paper gives the substance of Judge Havens's memoir, and pro-
fesses to copy a technical name and description which had been pub-
lished by  Dr. Mitchell in the Mew-York Gazette of July 3d.  But
whoever refers to the Mew-York  Gazette, will find  no attempt at  a
technical description, and  no  name except  that of  Tipula Tritici,
which is in one instance, casually as  it were,  made use of.  The
word vaginalis is therefore an interpolation  of the writer in the
Magazine;  and as he, at  least on  some  subsequent occasions, re-
frained from bringing this name farther into  notice,  when a fair op-
portunity was presented him   for doing  so (as editor of Hooper's
Medical dictionary, fyc.) we doubt not, when the excitement of the
day was past,  he  deeply  regretted that  he had ever drawn up an
article so  derogatory to himself as that which appears in the Maga-
zine.  We  should  therefore suppress all allusion  to this subject,
with the hope that it might pass  wholly  into oblivion, but that the
article from  the Magazine has of late years been copied into some
of our agricultural journals, and  has  been  referred to in terms of
commendation by some names of  respectability.   With the curren-
cy thus unfortunately given to it, it will be read by hundreds who
can never see the Mew-York Gazette, and will thus deem, that one 
22
of our most distinguished savans had degraded himself by a paltry
attempt to forestall Mr. Say  in giving  to  this  species a technical
name.

  Gen. John H. Cocke this year  communicated  his observations to
the Albemarle Agricultural Society of Virginia.  Having well as-
certained that the fly deposits its eggs upon  the blades of the wheat,
at from a half to three inches from the central stalk, and that these
remain there four or five days before  they  hatch, he recommends
feeding off the crop, by pasturing sheep upon  it; thus destroying
the eggs, and depriving the fly of its  wonted  place for depositing
them.   " A King William  Farmer" dissents from this  advice, and
thinks covering the seed to the depth of three inches the best safe-
guard against the  fly.  " A Frederick County  Farmer" and Dr.
Merriwether oppose this, and a controversy ensues, reaching through
several communications in the Richmond Enquirer and Mational In-
telligencer, and afterwards continued in  the American Farmer, till
in 1820 it was brought to  a close  by  a valuable article  from that
distinguished agriculturist, the  late James  M.  Garnett, {American
Farmer, vol. ii. p. 174,) accompanied by an illustration, which would
seem to clearly demonstrate the correctness of  the statements first
put forth by the King William Farmer.  This subject will be fully
considered in a subsequent part of  this essay.

  In 1820,  Edward Tilghman, of Maryland, described {American
Farmer, ii. 235)  the place and mode of deposition of the eggs, he
having in  numerous instances  watched the  fly in the  very act of
ovipositing.   At a later day Mr. T. has favored the public with a
more full and exact description of this process, (Cultivator, vii-i. p.
82).  James Worth of Pennsylvania, also in 1820 minutely descri-
bed from  his  personal observations,  the situation  of  the egg, its
hatching, and the journey  of the  worm  down the leaf to its  usual
nidus,  {American Farmer, ii., 180).

  In the second volume of  the Memoirs of the Mew York Board of
Agriculture, issued in 1823, is a   communication (p. 169-171) on
the  Hessian  fly, from Judge Ilickock,  who deems a fertile soil the
best safeguard.   In the third volume of the same work, published
in 1826, (p. 326-338,) is a paper  by the indefatigable  secretary of 
23
the board, the late Judge Buel, giving a condensed summary of all
the information respecting this insect,  contained in the accounts of
Judge Havens, Dr. Chapman, and the different writers in the Ameri-
can  Farmer.

   In 1840, Miss Margaretta H. Morris, of Germantown, Pa., in a
communication to  the American Philosophical  Society, revives the
theory of " a landholder,"  already noticed, that the egg of the fly
is deposited in the grain, and  that obtaining  seed from uninfected
districts will  therefore be the best safeguard.  The report of the
committee upon this paper,  is inserted in the society's Proceedings
of November, 1840, and the  paper itself is published in the socie-
ty's Transactions (vol,  viii. p.  49-51).  Communications bearing
upon the same subject were also made to the Academy of Natural
Sciences, in 1841, by Dr. B.  H.  Coates, {Proceedings Acad., vol.
i. p. 45, 54 and 57).

   In 1841, Mr. E. C. Herrick,  librarian of Yale College,  gave " a
brief, preliminary  account of  the Hessian fly, and its parasites," in
 Silliman's Journal of Science (vol. xli., p. 153-158).   This paper
 announces the interesting fact of Mr.  Dana's having met  with ap-
 parently the same insect on the shores of the Mediterranean, details
 the writer's own accurate observations of the changes from the egg
 to the flax seed state, and enumerates four different parasitic insects
 that prey upon it  during these periods of its existence, by which
 " probably more than nine-tenths  of  every generation  of  the Hes-
 sian fly is destroyed."  Another valuable  paper from Mr. Herrick
appears in the Report of the  Commissioner of Patents for the year
 1844, (p. 161-167),  giving a most exact  and particular history of
 the transformations of this  insect, and a summary view of the va-
 rious remedial measures that  have been proposed.  Both of these
 papers evince the close  and patient investigation which the writer
 had made, and the utmost  carefulness in announcing  nothing be-
yond what he had clearly ascertained.

   Dr. T. W. Harris's invaluable  " Treatise on the insects of Mas-
 sachusetts injurious to vegetation" was also completed  in  1841.
An excellent summary of all the leading facts pertaining to the histo- 
                                24

 ry of this species, is given in this work, and its generic place, upon
 which point Mr. Herrick, Latreille and others had intimated doubts,
 is correctly settled.

   The numerous agricultural periodicals of our country, abound
 with notices of this insect, more or less extended and valuable.  To
 specify these notices in detail, at least as respects some of these pe-
 riodicals wTould require a  reference to almost every  number issued.
 Wherever important facts are derived from these  sources, in  the
 course of this essay, they  are accompanied by  a particular acknowl-
 edgment  in each  instance;  an additional, reference in this place,
 is therefore deemed  unnecessary.

   We close this section of our  subject, with  a condensed view of
 the  depredations of this insect in different parts of our  country
 during a few of the  past  years; the materials  for which,  are  fur-
 nished us, in those valuable documents, the yearly reports of the
 Commissioner of Patents.

   In the  year 1842, the ravages of the Hessian fly would appear to
 have been quite limited.  Pennsylvania suffered the most severely.
 The wheat crop in this State is estimated to have been twenty per
 cent less than it was the preceding year, and of four different causes
 that produced this diminution,  the fly is placed first.   Some parts
 of Maryland, and also  of Ohio, were visited  by it.  In the latter
 State it appeared to  be increasing so  much, that serious apprehen-
 sions were beginning to be felt respecting its future ravages.

  In  1843, it was so abundant  in western Pennsylvania in June,
 that it was thought it would diminish the crop twenty-five per cent.
 Through Maryland, and the great wheat-growing valley of Virginia,
 it was noticed at the same time as committing great havoc in many
 fields, and  threatening a very decided  failure in the  crop  ; at har-
 vest, however, the yield was found to be much better than was an-
ticipated.   In Ohio it was less injurious than in the preceding year.
Upon some parts of Long  Island it  was observed, but in  limited
numbers.

  In  1844, it seems to have been much more destructive  than in
either of the preceding years, and to have made its appearance pro- 
25
minently in some districts where it had  been unobserved  before.
Thus, through all  the  northern  parts of Indiana and Illinois,  and
the contiguous parts of  Michigan and Wisconsin, it did much inju-
ry, and in  many places occasioned almost  a total failure of the
crops.   Near  Goshen,  la., a person writes, the fly is taking the
wheat  here at a dreadful  rate, destroying  some  pieces  entirely ;
some fields have been  plowed up, and corn planted therein.  The
Prairie Farmer states that the wheat crop has  suffered  severely in
various sections by the  fly.  In Will county. 111., says the Chicago
Journal, several entire fields  of both winter and spring wheat have
been destroyed by the Hessian fly.   In  Michigan also, it is reported
to  have made sad havoc, particularly in light sandy soils.   From
different places in this  State, we are told as  follows :  " In some
cases the injury was so  severe, that the farmers had to plow up their
fields and  sow  them over  again."  " There  is not more than one-
fourth of the  surplus of 1843, owing to the wet season and the ra-
vages of the  fly."   " The wheat crop is almost an entire  failure.
The insects took it last fall, and the rust in the spring, and then
again  the  insects a second time."   It is also  stated that the same
enemy  had  made its appearance in great force at the  close of the
season, in the early fall sown wheat.  From  different parts of Ohio,
the crop was reported in May and June to be suffering considerably
from the ravages of the fly.  In the  vicinity  of Masillon, it had ne-
ver been so destructive before, whole fields being entirely destroyed.
In  the  neighborhood of Rochester,  N.  Y., also,  the fields suffered
some,  particularly  those having a sandy soil, and that  were early
sown.   On  the west end of Long Island, its ravages were also bad,
many farmers  not having more than  half a crop.   Both in the east-
ern and western sections of Pennsylvania, the fly lessened  the pro-
duce of this year.  In Bucks county it was particularly destructive.
One person  states, in  the month of June, that where he had  expect-
ed to gather 1,200 bushels  or more, he could not now hope for 300.
Though it is noticed on both shores  of the State of Maryland, the
injury done by it here appears to have been but slight.
  In 1845,  through those districts of Michigan, Indiana and Illinois,
where it committed such havoc the  last year, it is said  by different
persons to have wholly disappeared.  The Prairie Farmer, however,
states that it was still present, doing more or less injury all over the
                                4 
26
State of Illinois.   Ohio sustained  but little  injury.  It is not no-
ticed north  of Maryland, in the central  parts of which State it is
reported tint on nearly all  the light  lands the Hessian fly made  se-
rious ravages, and in  many instances rendered the  crops  totally
worthless.  In Georgia, moreover, its ravages in the counties around
Milledgeville are said to have been dreadful ; whole fields were  to-
tally destroyed, and others yielded not more than a fourth of an or-
dinary  crop.
  We  regret that we have not at hand the requisite information, for
tracing with  equal  precision the ravages of this insect during the
past year, 1846.   From such notices as we have  casually observed
in the  public papers, we presume that through the country i;eneral-
ly, it has  been unusually numerous.   In this vicinity, some fields
have produced less than a fourth of  what they would  have done,
but for the invasion of  the fly last autumn, after an absence of over
forty years, and its great increase in the spring.  On sandy soils in
Saratoga and the  north-west parts of Rensselaer counties,  several
fields were observed early in July with the wheat stalks  so " few
and far between,"  that  no harvesting of them would be attempted  ;
whilst  many others had been, at an  earlier period of the  season,
plowed up and occupied with spring  crops.   In the western section
of the  State, it has also been quite destructive.   The  loss from the
fly alone,  says the Genesee Farmer, (vol. vii., p. 251,) will doubtless
be at least 500,000 bushels.  In those districts of Illinois, Wisconsin,
and Iowa, which are contiguous to the Mississippi river, it appears
to have been common, and also in eastern  Pennsylvania.   From a
minute in the proceedings of the trustees of the Maryland Agricul-
tual Society, we learn  that " so great ravages have not been com-
mitted by the Hessian  fly, since  1817.   On some of the  best land
wheat  has been plowed up, and other portions are so  much injured,
that they  will not be worth harvesting.   At lecst  one-half of  the
crop of Talbot -county has been  destroyed."  And  in the 'upper
counties of Georgia, it is said, " the fly  has committed such ravages
upon the  wheat, as scarcely to leave enough seed for another year."
                   Its Mame  and Synonyms.
   It is a somewhat trite  but  very true adage, that " names  are
things."   Every  one who has had occasion to search through files 
27
of our agricultural journals for  information respecting any particu-
lar insect or other malady to which our crops or herds are subject,
well knows what doubt and perplexity is often occasioned from hav-
ing two or more names used by  different writers for the same thing,
and also from having two or more distinct things designated by the
same name.  To illustrate this,  let us refer to the Patent Office Re-
port for 1844, p. 26, where, in thirteen consecutive lines, we read as
follows :  " Near Onondaga county the wheat is said to be injured
by the grain worm.....In  Schoharie we find complaints
of the weevil.....In  Schenectady county the ravages  of
the fly were great.....In  parts  of Columbia county it
suffered from the maggot.....In Dutchess a yellow worm
in'the head destroyed it."  Of a truth, " what a host of enemies !"
By way of  climax, we only require some wiseacre who has never
seen the insect, or lived within a hundred miles of it, to say, " Good
people, you are all wrong ; wheat worms is the correct name for
your insect"—and we are furnished  with a tolerably  complete list
of the popular synonyms of the Cecidomyia tritici 1   But who, not
intimately conversant with its American history, would suspect this
single species  of being designated by such a  profusion of terms.
Who, on  reading the page referred to, of the Patent OJice Report,
(and  it is a  correct transcript of the very words which are in popu-
lar use,)  but would  receive its statements as conclusive  evidence
that we had in  eastern New-York  at least  four or five  kinds of de-
structive insects preying upon our  wheat crops.  Such mistakes are
the inevitable result of a diversity of  names.  So important, there-
fore,  do we deem  this  topic, that  we are induced to assign to it a
distinct head.
   It is very fortunate that no confusion of the kind just alluded to,
has ever existed with reference to  the species under consideration.
Its popular  name, Hessian fly, was first bestowed upon it by Colonel
Morgan, soon after its appearance on  Long  Island.  Some two  or
three of the earliest  writers allude to it by the names of Hessian
bug, and Hessian insect, but these designations were speedily drop-
ped, and Hessian fly became universally the only name by which it
was definitely distinguished, not only in this country, but in all parts
of the world where the English  language was spoken.  Even when
it was by  every one  deemed to be a native  insect, and the epithet 
28
Hessian was therefore remarked  by different writers as most inap-
propriate, still it was in such universal use, that no one ventured to
propose  that it should be changed.   And  this continues to be  the
only name by which it is spoken of at the present day, with  one or
two  exceptions.   In  the Ohio  Cultivator it is designated  as the
" wheat fly," and in late volumes of  the Genesee Farmer the  names
Hessian fly and wheat  fly are  indiscriminately applied  to it.   The
name " wheat fly,"  however,  had  been anteriorly  and extensively
applied to the C. tritici, upon both  sides of  the Atlantic, and was
indeed the only common name of that  insect  in use among  writers
in  agricultural journals  and  popular  treatises,  until  recently, the
perhaps more judicious name of " wheat-midge," has been bestow-
ed upon  it, by some of the  best foreign authorities.*
  • We may here state some additional reasons which induced us in our former essay,
to adopt the name " wheat-fly" in preference to that of " wheat-midge," the name
by which the C. tritici has been designated by Mr. Curtiss, Westwood, and some
other recent writers.
  1. The insect itself, is, next  after  the wholly inappropriate name of " weevil,"
most commonly called " the fly," we believe, in  all  those districts where it is most
abundant and has been longest known.  It is never called " the midge."  Why, then,
should we speak one common name, and  write another ;  or have in print as the com-
mon name, what we well know is not the common name.
  2. No other insect in the world  has a  popular name  better  established than the
Hessian fly.  Both it and the C. tritici will undoubtedly continue to be common in-
sects in this country, and very frequently  spoken of.   If one is called  the Hessian fly
and the other the wheat-mtdge, every person not well acquainted with this subject,
will imbibe the idea that they are very different insects, their names being so dissimi-
lar ; whereas, they are most closely allied to each other.
  3. It has often been remarked as a great  desideratum, that the technical and com-
mon names of species in natural history, should correspond with each other ; or, in
other words, that the common names should in all cases where practicable, be trans-
lations of the technical names.  Cecidomyia tritici. literally rendered in Englishes
gall-fly of the wheat; but inasmuch  as  this species does not produce galls, there is
an obvious impropriety in retaining that word.  Wheat-fly thus becomes the most direct
translation of the technical name, that the habits of the insect admit of.   No one will
maintain that  wheat-wndge is a translation.
  Dr. Webster is in error in saying the word  " midge "  is " not in use"  at the pre-
sent day;  In  the neighboring Green  mountain districts, one or more most annoying
species of Simulium that there abound, are  daily designated in common conversation
as the midges, or, as the  name is often  corrupted,  the  midgets.  From Dr. Harris'
treatise it appears that the same name is in popular use for the same insects in Maine.
The term is limited in this country, we believe, exclusively to those minute insects,
smaller than the musketoe, which suck the blood of other animals. 
29
   The scientific name, Cecidomyia destructor, bestowed upon this
species by Mr. Say,  is the  only one  belonging  to  it, neither the
name  Tipula tritici, nor Tipula  vaginalis tritici having any legiti-
mate claims to be  retained as synonyms.  Mr. Say's name might at
first view  be thought liable to criticism, as being in no wise distinc-
tive, many other species of Cecidomyians  being  also  destroyers.
Yet this species is so preeminent in that particular, as to throw the
injuries inflicted by each  of the  others  quite in the back ground.
We hence think it will be  conceded  that the name is signally ap-
propriate.   Placed beside it, all  its kindred are mere depredators—
this alone is the destroyer.

            Its Characters, Transformations, and Habits.
   As a general rule, the  Hessian  fly passes  regularly through two
generations annually.   The  first of these  occupies the autumn, win-
ter, and fore  part  of the spring, and is reared at the roots of the
young grain, slightly below  the surface of the ground. The second
occupies the remainder of the spring and  the summer, and is chiefly
nurtured at the first and second joints of the straw.   The time when
its several transformations occur, is not perfectly uniform, being va-
ried by the climate,  the  state  of the weather, and perhaps  other
contingencies ; and it is not improbable  that individual  specimens,
placed  in  circumstances  unfavorable to  their developement, have
their growth retarded  so  much as to require even a whole year  to
complete their metamorphoses.
                         First Generation.
   The Egg.   When and  where  deposited.—The  eggs of  the first
generation are deposited chiefly in the fore part  of September.   Dr.
  But, inasmuch as we have another common word (gnat), applied to species having
in this respect the same habit, in the paucity of terms which our language furnishes by
which to designate insects, it is desirable that no two of these terms should be em-
ployed as synonymous.  And as the night midge (Anglo-Saxon mygge or micge, a
warmer,) is appropriate for all those minute flies which assemble together in aeria
Jances, it would be well to adopt it as the generic or family term for all the small
TipulidaB, and apply the term gnat only to the Culicidae or musketoe family.  This ap-
pears to  be the  mode in which the  English entomologists at present employ these
words. And in this country  it will probably be more  easy to bring the new name,
wheat-midge, into common use as the distinctive appellation of the C tritici, than to
have any one of the names now bestowed upon it supersede all the others. 
30
Chapman says the deposit is  made  from the  latter end of August
till the 20th of September, and  most other  accounts coincide with
this, though some extend the time into October.  On the 8th of Oc-
tober the fly was seen ovipositing in eastern Pennsylvania, in 1819,
and  it had  wholly  disappeared on the 11th.   {Amer. Farmer, ii.
180).  The deposit is doubtless made later,  at the south,  than  in
this vicinity.  Mr. Tilghman's description of this process {Cultiva-
tor, viii. 82,) will convey so much more distinct a view to the gene-
ral reader, than any other that has ever been published that we here
insert it.   He says, "By the second week of October, the first sown
wheat being well up, and having generally put forth its second and
third blades, I resorted to my field to endeavor  to satisfy myself by
ocular demonstration, if  I could do so, whether the fly did deposit
the  egg  on  the blades  of the growing plant.  Selecting what  I
deemed to be  a  favorable spot to make my observation, 1 placed
myself in position, by  reclining in a furrow  between two wheat
lands.   It was a fine, wTarm, calm forenoon; and I had been on the
watch but a minute or two, before I discovered a number of small
black flies, alighting and setting  on the wheat plants around me ;
and so strong seemed to  be their predilection for the wheat,  that I
did not observe a single  fly to settle  on any  grass,  or any thing
within my view, but the  wheat.  I could distinctly see their bodies
in motion wrhen settled on the leaves or blades of the wheat, and
presently one alighted and settled on the ridged surface of a blade
completely within my reach and distinct observation.  She imme-
diately commenced  disburthening her apparently well stored abdo-
men, by depositing her eggs  in the  longitudinal cavity between the
little ridges of the blade. I could distinctly  see the  eggs  ejected
from a kind of tube or sting,  or by the elongation of the body ; the
action of the insect in making the deposit, being :,imilar to that of
the wasp in stinging.  After she had deposited, as I supposed, some
eight or ten eggs, I easily caught her,  upon the blade, between my
finger and thumb.....   After that, I continued my observations on
the flies, caught several similarly occupied, and could see  the eggs
uniformly placed in  the longitudinal  cavities of the  blades of the
wheat; their appearance being that  of  minute reddish specks." 
31
  Its appearance and  characters.—The account  of the  eggs, and
also  of the worms of the  Hessian fly, as given by Mr. Herrick, is
drawn up with  such scrupulous care, and is so full and definite  in
every particular, that we  are constrained  to  enhance the value of
this essay by presenting it entire.  He says; " The eggs  are laid in
the long creases or furrows of the upper surface of the leaves of the
young wheat plant.   While  depositing  her eggs, the insect stands
with her head towards  the point or  extremity of the leaf,  and at
various distances between the point and where the leaf joins and
surrounds  the  stalk.  The number found  on a  single leaf, varies
from a  single egg up to thirty,  or even more.  The egg is about a
fiftieth of an inch long, cylindrical, rounded at the ends, glossy and
translucent, of a pale red color, becoming, in a few hours,  irregu-
larly spotted with deeper red.  Between its exclusion and its hatch-
ing, these red spots are continually changing in number, size, and
position; and sometimes nearly all disappear.  A little while before
hatching, two lateral rows of opaque white spoty, about ten in num-
ber, can be seen in each egg.  In four days, more or less, according
to the weather, the egg is hatched."

   The Larva.   Growth of the  worm,  or active larva.—Mr. Her-
rick's excellent description  is  continued  as  follows, " The little
wrinkled maggot, or larva, creeps  out of  the delicate membranous
egg skin,  crawls  down the  leaf,  enters  the sheath, and proceeds
along the stalk, (see fig. m,)  usually as far  as the next joint below,"
(fig. B. §§,) or, in other words, to  the base of the sheath, which in
the young autumnal wheat,  is at the crown of the root,  (fig. A. §.)
''Here it fastens,  lengthwise, (fig.  n and o,) and  head downwards,
to the tender stalk, and lives upon  the sap.  It  does not gnaw the
stalk, nor does it enter the central cavity thereof; but, as the larva
increases in size, it gradually becomes  embedded in the substance
of the stalk.  After taking  its  station, the larva moves no more,
gradually loses its reddish color, and wrinkled appearance, becomes
plump and torpid, is at first semitranslucent, and  then more and
more clouded with internal  white spots;  and when near maturity,
the middle of the intestinal parts is  of a greenish  color.  In five or
six weeks (varying with the season,) the larva begins to turn brown,
and  soon becomes of a bright chestnut color, bearing some resem-
blance to a flax-seed, &c." 
32
  Its characters.—When freshly taken from the root of the wheal
the mature worm (fig. g,) measures about fifteen hundredths of an
inch (0.15) in length, by about 0.06 in breadth.   It shows no signs
of life when placed upon paper and turned over with a needle point.
It is soft, glabrous, shining, white, oval and apparently composed
of but nine segments, although twelve can often be distinctly per-
ceived before  its growth is completed.  These are  quite slightly
marked  by faint transverse lines of a greenish brown hue.   Its under
side is flattened, and has an oblong grass green cloud or spot in  the
middle,  placed longitudinally.  No regular contractions  or crena-
tures  occur along the margin to mark the segments, though after the
worm has laid exposed to the air  an  hour,  the  color of the trans-
verse lines above  spoken of becomes  bleached out  as it  were, and
then,  perhaps from  the worm's  having become somewhat dried,
faintly impressed  transverse lines  are perceptible at the junction of
each of  the nine segments:  faint longitudinal striae are also discern-
able, as  though produced by  the  pressure of the parallel veins or
ribs of the sheath  and culm, between which the worm had laid.

  Its mode of feeding.—We have hitherto sought in vain to ascer-
tain,  by ocular and microscopic  examinations,  how  it is that the
worm imbibes its nourishment from  the  stalk.   To expose it to
view, we are obliged to  place it in circumstances  so  unnatural to  it,
that it apparently refrains from feeding.  That it "gnaws" the stalk,
as some writers in our  agricultural papers,  and some compilers of
popular treatises inform their readers, is an error so gross as scarcely
to deserve notice.  Some have supposed that it absorbs its nourish-
ment  through the pores of its skin ; but we incline to the belief that
Dr. Lee's opinion is nearest the truth of  any  that has been hitherto
advanced—that it takes  in its  nourishment by suction, in a manner
more  analogous to the leech than  any other familiar object.  {Gen.
Farmer, vii. 225).

  Its effects upon the crop.—The autumnal attack of the fly is in a
double sense a  radical  one.   Each particular shoot at whose root
one or more of these larvae nestles, is commonly destroyed by the
time the  worm has  attained  its growth.  The  presence  of these
worms is therefore readily detected by an examination of the young
wheat in October or November.   Individual shoots will  be found 
33
here and there in the field, withered and changed to a  light yellow
color, (fig. A. f), strongly contrasting with  the  rich green of the
vigorous  uninjured plants, (fig.  A. *).  The frost or some other
casualty may cause the ends of some of the other leaves to be of a
pale yellow  color, but here the whole  plant  is of that hue;  and
where a field is badly infested this yellow "sickly" aspect is per-
ceptible from a  distance.   On examining the withered plants, the
worm, or flax seed  if it has advanced to that stage, can be readily
found.   It is situated a short distance below the surface of the earth,
at the crown of the root, (fig. A. $).   One or two radical  leaves
start from this point, their bases forming a cylindrical sheath around
the central or main shoot, which as yet is but in  its infancy.  It is
within this sheath, at  its  base, that the worms  repose, one, two,
three, or more, and by imbibing  the nutricious juices of the young
shoot, cause  it  to wither  and die.  The mechanical pressure of the
larvae, so frequently spoken of as impeding the circulation of the
fluids of the plant, and hereby causing it to perish, I think has had too
much  importance assigned to it, the young  plants being so soft and
pliant that they would readily accommodate themselves to this pres-
sure, if they  received no molestation beyond this.

   Is the crop ever benefitted  by it?—The vigor  and  luxuriance of
the uninjured shoots from the same root, contrasts so strongly with
the wilted and  feeble appearance of those attacked by the worm, as
to have led some to believe that the unaffected shoots were stimu-
lated to a more  rapid and robust growth in consequence of the prun-
ing given by the fly ; and that a better crop is thus sometimes  pro-
duced, by the presence of a moderate number of these worms among
the wheat plants.  The correctness of  this  opinion we very much
doubt.   The worm is nourished  and  reared  upon those very fluids
that are absorbed by the plant and elaborated for its own sustenance
and growth.   Every particle of this nutricious juice, therefore, that
is consumed by  the worm, is  a direct loss of just so much material
that would otherwise become  straw and grain.   At all events, we
think our farmers generally will  prefer that nature should be left to
her own undisturbed course in rearing their wheat plants, and will
be by no means solicitous to have this renowned  guest take any part
in the operation.
                                5 
34
   Its change to a u flax seed" or dormant larva.—When the worm,
 or active larva, has fully completed  its growth, a slight diminution
 in the dimensions of the inner  soft parts  of  its body commences,
 in which the outer and harder skin  does not participate, this latter
 retaining its original full size.  The result of  this contraction is,
 that the worm gradually cleaves from  its outer skin.   It examined
 with a microscope  when this change has recently commenced, a
 slight translucent space is observable at the head end, and  a larger
 and more obvious one  at the pointed or tail end, plainly indicating
 that the enclosed worm does not entirely fill  its outer skin.  This
 contraction continues,  until the worm  becomes  entirely separated
 from its outer skin, and lies  within  it like the  finger within a
 glove.   The  outer skin at  the  same  time  changes in  color.
 From its original whiteness and  transparency, it gradually becomes
 opake, brown, and finally of a dark bay or chestnut  color.   Though
 much less flat than a flax seed, its  resemblance  in  color, size, and
 form, to that familiar object, is so striking as at once to be  remark-
 ed by every one.

   Characters of the flax seed, or larva case.—Different specimens of
 these flax seed  like larva cases  (fig. h. i. j.)  vary  in length from
 0.13 to 0.19 and in breadth  from 0.05 to 0.08.   They are  shining,
 cylindrical-oval, more obtusely rounded  at the  lower or head end
 than at the other, which is generally attenuated into an acuminated
 point or small projecting papilla.   They are  commonly composed
 of but nine obvious segments, and these are  but slightly indicated
 by very faint acutely impressed transverse striae—a  similar trans-
 verse stria,  but  still  more faint,  being sometimes  perceptible
 (fig. h.) across the middle of some of the segments.  Longitudinal
 impressed striae are sometimes present,  (fig. j.)  more conspicuous
 than the transverse and reaching a part or the whole length of the
 worm ; and between these the surface is minutely  acuducted (i. e.
 appearing as if lightly scratched  by the fine point of a needle) longi-
 tudinally—all these longitudinal impressions being perhaps caused
 by the pressure of the veins  and fibres of the plant, against which
 the worm has been imbedded.  On the under side,  (fig. i.)  towards
 the head end, the case is  flattened, as if  pinched together, so much
 so that the anterior  segment  seems a mere empty fold of the mem-
brane, without  any inflation sufficient to make  room  for  internal 
35
viscera.   At this end is often observable one or two little brush-like
granules, resembling those on the soles of the feet of some carabidous
insects.  (One of these is indicated on  the* anterior edge of  fig. i.)
Are these the relics of the  suctorial mouth of the larva?  This lar-
va case is comparatively tough and leather-like at first, but becomes
more brittle and also darker with age.

   Characters of the dormant larva.—On carefully opening the larva
case just described, a worm (fig. k.) is found within it, scarcely dif-
ferent in any  respect from  what  it  was immediately before entering
upon this flax seed state.   It has the same oval form, opake milk-
white color, and green, cloud-like  visceral spot  or  line  beneath.
The nine segments into which it appears divided, however, are now
much more distinctly marked than  they previously were, the trans-
verse lines being more deeply  impressed, and the margins showing
corresponding crenatures.   No  traces of the members of the future
fly are  yet  discernable.  The  insect  now  undergoes no  further
change,  for a period of five months or more.  Enveloped in  its flax
seed like mantle, and reposing at the root of the now lifeless grain,
it is buried beneath the snows  of winter.   Over one-half of its en-
tire term of life is therefore passed  in this state.

   Error in previous accounts.—This  is the  stage  of this  insect,
which has been spoken of by all preceding writers  as its  pupa  or
crysalis state.  Upon a close observation of Cecidomyia tritici, the
writer succeeded in discovering that that species had, what some
had conjectured, but none had  actually observed, a regular pupa
form,  identical with  that  of other species of Cecidomyia,  whose
metamorphoses had been fully described.   It hence appeared neces-
sary to distinctly mark that long period  of inactivity which inter-
venes in  the wheat-fly, after the larva has completed its growth, and
before it enters its pupa state;  it was therefore, during this state  of
its life denominated a dormant  larva, in my essay upon that species.
It occurred to me whilst writing out that essay, that the dormant
larva state of  the wheat-fly, was exactly  analogous to the  flax seed
state of the Hessian fly, and in a note, my suspicions were expressed
that the real pupa of the Hessian fly had never been detected.  The
ample opportunities which  I  have since enjoyed for investigating 
36
this species, have enabled me fully  to  trace  out  this point in its
transformations, and to show that it is not till near the close of its
flax seed period  of existence that the Hessian fly puts on its pupa
form.   In penning the note just alluded to, I had overlooked a pas-
sage in Mr. Herrick's last paper, from which  it  is obvious that he
has seen the real pupa of the Hessian fly, although he still speaks
of its pupa state as commencing when the worm becomes a flax-seed.
Inaccuracies of this kind, which  to the general reader appear so tri-
vial as scarcely to require correcting, are liable to lead to important
errors.  Of this, we have a striking illustration in this very instance.
Mr. Westwood, on opening the  flax  seeds contained in the wheat
straw from Germany, came upon " the  larva," where, according to
all the accounts of the Hessian fly he ought to have found the pupa;
he therefore at once draws the  important inference, that the  Ger-
man insect cannot be the Hessian fly of America.  Indeed it is sur-
prising, that so plain a fact as this, that it is a worm and not a  pupa
which is enveloped in the flax seed case of  our insect, has  been so
wholly overlooked by every one who has hitherto written upon this
subject.
   The Pupa.   When formed.—On the access of the first warm days
 uf spring, as soon  as the weather becomes  sufficiently genial for
some of our earliest plants to put forth their blossoms, the larva of the
Hessian fly is rapidly stimulated  to maturity.   The present year,
so early as the 21st of April, most of the insects were found to have
taken on their pupa form.   As  this  season was more forward  than
usual, this may prove to be an earlier date than is common for this
 occurrence ; a more accurate criterion  by which to indicate it defi-
 nitely, is no doubt by a  reference  to  the progress which vegetation
 has made at this time.   We may therefore state, that in all  parts of
 our country, the Hessian fly will probably be  found in its fully form-
 ed pupa state, about a week after  the liverwort, {Hepatica triloba,)
 the trailing arbutus {Epigcea repens), and the red or swamp maple
 {Acer rubrum,) first appear in  bloom, and simultaneously with the
 flowering of the dry strawberry  {Comaropsis fragarioides), the com-
 mon five-finger {Potentilla canadensis), the  hill-side violet {Viola
, ovata), &c.   It continues in this state about  ten or twelve days, and
 then sends out the winged fly. 
37
  lis characters.—The flax seed shell has now become quite brittle,
breaking asunder  transversely if rudely handled, and one of its ends
slipping off from  the inclosed  pupa  like a  thimble from the end of
the finger.   On removing the pupa (fig. /.)  from its case, it is found
to be 0.13  long by 0.05 broad, of an oval form, with rounded ends,
and  having its limbs and body enveloped in separate membranes.
The thoracic portion is slightly narrower than the abdominal.  The
wings do  not  quite attain the middle of the length of the body.
The outer pair of feet come out  from under the tips of  the wings,
and  reach to the anterior margin of the penultimate abdominal seg-
ment, slightly curving inwards at their tips.  The next pair of feet
are somewhat shorter, and the inner pair  are shorter still.  They all
lie in contact with each  other, and in a  direction parallel with the
body.  The abdominal segments are distinctly marked by strongly
impressed transverse lines, and are of a milk-white color, the thorax
and head being of a delicate pale pink-red, and the feet translucent-
white.  On  the  anterior  margin is a chestnut-brown crescentiform
mark.  It  will hence be perceived, that in all the details of its form,
the  pupa of the  Hessian  fly coincides precisely with those  of the
other species of this genus which have been described.
   Its change into a fly.—The time for its final transformation hav-
ing  arrived, the pupa breaks open and crawls from its puparium or
flax seed case, and works its way upwards  within the sheath of the
leaf, until it arrives  at some cleft in  the now dead, brittle and elas-
tic straw ; through this cleft it  gradually,  by bending from side to
side, crowds its body until all except the tip  of the abdomen is pro-
truded into the air, the  elasticity of  the straw causing it to close to-
gether upon the tip  of the abdomen, so much as to hold the pupa in
this situation, secure from falling to the  ground ; and as if  to pre-
serve the body in a horizontal position, the feet are slightly separar
ted  from the abdomen, and directed obliquely downwards, with their
tips pressed against the  side of the straw, thus curiously serving,
like the brace to  the arms of a sign  post, to support the body from
inclining downwards.   Thus securely fixed, and now freely exposed
to  the  drying  influence of the atmosphere, the  outer membrane of
the  pupa speedily exhales  its moisture, and as it becomes dried,
cracks apart upon the back part of the thorax; out of this cleft the
inclosed fly protrudes its head and thorax more and more, as it gra- 
38
dually withdraws its several members, the antennae, wings and legs,
from the cases in which they are respectively enveloped—a process
analogous to that of withdrawing the hand  and its several fingers
from  a tight glove ; until at length  entirely freed, the now full-
fledged and perfectly formed fly leaves its pupa skin  and mounts
into the air.

  Peculiarity in its metamorphoses.—It is sufficiently apparent from
the account  that  has now been given, that the Hessian fly differs
notably from all its congeners in  one important point in its transfor-
mations.  From all  the observations that have been hitherto made,
the cecidomyians correspond with the other tipulides in this promi-
nent particular—that their pupae are naked.   Other species, at least
many of them, after completing their growth,  cleave from  their
skins  in the same  manner  that  the Hessian fly does, but when the
separation is formed, the inclosed worm invariably  crawls from and
forsakes its larva case.  It is thus, even, contrary to what has been
hitherto  supposed, with the C. tritici.  Since my  essay  upon that
species was published, I have  clearly  ascertained  that the mature or
dormant larva does cast its skin.  Indeed, this fact is distinctly re-
lated by Dr. Harris, in his treatise, to whom is due  the credit of
having first announced it.   His  statement had escaped my observa-
tion when previously alluding to this subject.  So far as I  am aware,
moreover, the cast skins in the several species are  translucent, and
of a membranous texture.   In the Hessian fly, however, it becomes
opakc,  changes  its color, and is of  a firm or coriaceous texture.
The inclosed worm, also,  does not  leave it, but remaining, eventu-
ally changes  within it to  a pupa, the same  case thus forming its
puparium.   Its metamorphosis thus approximates it to the Muscidae
or true flies, the  Stratiomidae or soldier-flies, &c,  and its pupa, in
technical language is " coarctate" and not " incomplete," like the
pupae of the  other cecidomyians.  Should  usage,  therefore, settle
down upon the name midge as distinctive of the minute tipulides,
there  will still be a marked propriety in continuing to  this species
its old name, Hessian fly.*
  • I doubt,, however, whether the Hessian fly will continue to be the sole member of
this genus having a coarctate pupa.  Quite recently a species has occurred to my no-
tice, analogous to the Hessian fly flax seed in every point that I have been able to 
39
   The Fly.   Its  Characters.—In the female, (fig. 3,) the head is
flattened globular, and black throughout.   The antenna (fig. e,) are
about half as long as the body, and composed of sixteen joints, each
of a  cylindric-oval form,  the  length being about double the diame-
ter ;  each joint  is clothed with a  number of hairs, of which those
towards its base  are slightly more  robust and  longer,  about  equal-
ling the joint in  their length, and surrounding it in  a whirl.   The
joints are separated from each other by very short translucent fila-
ments, having a diameter about a third as great as the joints them-
selves.  The terminal joint is at least a third longer than the pre-
ceding ones.   The two basal joints of each antenna are  globular,
and compact or  not separated by an intervening filament, and ex-
ceed  the following joints  in diameter.  The  palpi (fig. /,) consist
of three obvious  joints,  clothed with very  short minute hairs.   The
two last joints are cylindrical, nerrly equal in size, and about  twice
as long as broad :  the basal joint  is  more short  and  thick.   The
thorax is oval, broadest immediately back of the wing sockets, and
black.   The  scutel is  of the  same  color,  projecting,  and slightly
polished, with the suture  surrounding it  sometimes fulvous.   The
poisers are dusky.   The abdomen is elongate-ovate, its broadest part
scarcely  equalling the thorax in diameter; it is  of a black color
above, more or less widely marked at the sutures with tawny-ful-
vous, and furnished with numerous fine blackish hairs.   The ovipo-
sitor  is rose-red,  and slightly exserted commonly in the dead speci-
men; it is susceptible of being protruded to a third of the  length of
the abdomen.  The wings are  slightly dusky, and fulvous at their
insertion  into  the  thorax.  Their  form and neuration is identical
with that of the  other  species of this genus, except that  the slight
connecting nerve between the mediastinal and postcostal is common-
ly wanting, and the medial and forks of the anal nerves are extreme-
ly faint for  a species of Cecidomyia so large as this.   The legs are
detect, except that its larva case is of a pale brown color, untinged with rufous or
castaneous.  It infests the Agrostis lateriflora ?, numbers dwelling together in an
imbricated gall, somewhat resembling the fertile aments of the hop, though larger,
and connected with the main stalk by a short pedicel which is inserted into one of the
lowest joints of the culm. From the  coriaceous texture of the larva case, I suspect
the inclosed worm will not leave it, until transformed to a pupa and upon  the point
of evolving the perfect fly. 
40
pallid brown, the tarsi black, the femurs paler at their bases.   The
several  pairs of legs  equal  each other in length, being about 0.24
long when extended,  of which length the tarsus embraces one-half.
The several joints of  the tarsus are of the same relative length as in
other species; the short basal joint however, is much more indis-
tinct than usual,  insomuch  that  a minute examination of  several
specimens is required ere one is met  with showing this joint dis-
tinctly.*  This character, and also the neuration of the wings, clear-
ly shows that this species belongs to the genus Cecidomyia, and not
to.Macquart's genus Lestremia, nor Meigen's Lasioptera.

   In the male, the antenna (fig.  d,) are three-fourths of the length
of the body, with the joints of a short oval and nearly globular form,
the diameter hardly equalling the length: each  joint is surrounded
with a verticil of longish  hairs.   The terminal joint does not differ
from the preceding ones.  The two basal joints are compacted toge-
ther as in the female.   The antennae diminish very slightly in  dia-
meter towards their tips.   The filaments separating the joints are
smoky-translucent, nearly as long as the joints, and about one-third
of their  diameter.  The abdomen (fig. 2,) is cylindric or  slightly
tapering towards its tip, and consists of seven joints beside the ter-
minal one, which  (viewed from beneath, vide fig. c,) consists of a
transversely oval joint, giving off two robust processes, armed with
incurved hooks at  their tips; and between these  processes at  their
base are two exceedingly minute papillae. As ordinarily  seen, in
the living specimen, the abdomen is of a browTnish-black color, more
or less widely marked at the sutures with pallid  fulvous or smoky
whitish  lines.  In  all other  points the  male coincides with  the
female in its characters.

   Its duration.—That the fly which comes out in the spring conti-
nues but a very short  time, I infer from the following data.   A num-
ber of wheat plants, containing pupae, were transplanted into a box
of earth, April 21st, and inspected daily.   On the morning of  May
1st, about half of  them were found lo  have sent out the perfect fly
  * How well the engraver has executed his task will be obvious by passing a magni-
fier over the plate;  The joints of the tarsi in fig. 3, and other minute details scarce-
ly, if at all perceptible to the naked eye, will then be distinctly recognised. 
41
within the preceding twenty-four hours.  On repairing to  the field
whence these plants were taken, the fly  was found to be out in large
numbers.  At every step, a dozen or  more would arise from their
coverts,  sluggishly fly  a few feet, and alight again.   In other fields,
where none of the flax seeds  could previously be found, an occa-
sional fly w7as met with,  on the same  day.  A week after this, on
a thorough examination, no flies could be found, nor were but two
specimens afterwards met with, until  the coming out of the summer
brood.

                       Second Generation.
   After  the full details that have already been given,  but  a  few
words will be required under this head.  About the first of May the
fly appears,  and deposits its eggs upon the same crop  of grain that
has already reared one brood, and also upon any spring wheat that
is  sufficiently forward for  its  purposes.  The  radical  leaves  of the
winter w'heat are  now more or less  withered,  and the fly therefore
selects the more luxuriant  leaves that have put forth above these
The worm hatches, and again makes  its short  journey to its future
home, at the base of the  sheath; it consequently now nestles at the
first and second joints of the young stalk, and is sometimes, though
rarely, as high  as  the third joint.   Even  before the worm reaches
the base of the sheath, it has frequently grown nearly to its full size,
(as shown, fig. m.). The stalk  has now attained such vigor and hardi-
ness that it  is  seldom destroyed by this  spring attack.   A slight
swelling, immediately  above the joint,  (fig. B.  §§,)  commonly indi-
cates the presence of the  larva beneath. This  is a  fact which has
been overlooked, or at least not distinctly stated by writers hitherto.
We only find it noticed by Mr. Bergen, {Cultivator, viii., 133,) who
informs us that in a crop of barley which was destroyed by the Hes-
sian fly,  many of the stalks  were " at  the joints as  thick as a man's
finger."   The insect is therefore a true gall-fly, although when but
one larva succeeds in reaching the joint, the swelling caused by it is
but little if at  all  apparent.  More commonly however, the straw
becomes  so weakened,  that  it is unable  to sustain the weight of the
wheat head,  and  it accordingly bends down  (as represented,  fig.
Bff,) with the force of the wind and rains.  The appearance of a
badly infested field, as harvest  time  approaches, cannot better be
                               6 
42
described than in the words of M. Kollar.  The grain looks as
though a herd of cattle had passed through it, so broken and tangled
together is the straw.  The worm attains its growth and enters its
flax seed state about the first  of  June,  and the flies of  this second
generation commonly  come  forth  about  the last of July  and in
August.

   Miss Morris's theory.—We do not deem it necessary to go into
a detailed examination of the theory revived by Miss Morris in 1S40,
that the eggs of the  Hessian fly  are deposited in the grain, and that
the larva  lies in  the centre of the  culm.   We suppose this theory
to be  abandoned by  its late advocates, from the  fact that for four
years past, we have met with no farther attempts to sustain it.  To
us it appears manifest that the lady was widely misled at the very
outset of her observations by  an  error in Mr. Say's account,  to wit,
that " the perfect fly appears early in June."   Were this the case,
she might well enquire, " Where are the eggs placed?   Surely not
in the old and dying stalk .... and there is no young wheat growing
from June until September."  The flies which Miss M. saw in June,
1836, " in countless numbers, hovering over and settling on the ears
of wheat," we cannot but suspect were the same species which in
this section of country appears in  such swarms upon the heads of
wheat about the middle of June, that it has been for years mistaken
hereabouts for the wheat-fly  or midge, (vide Transactions  M.  Y.
State  Agr. Soc, vol. v., p. 260 and 267).  In size and color  it does
closely resemble the Hessian fly, and might readily mislead any one
just commencing their observations.  That occasional specimens of
the Hessian fly may be  taken in June we do not doubt; but that
the main brood comes out, deposits its eggs, and disappears, a month
earlier than this, we are quite confident, from our own observations
as already related, as wrell as from the testimony of  almost every
writer who speaks  definitely upon this  point.  Those  few larvae
which have been found in the centre of the  wheat culm,  were not
unlikely of some other  species, since in this particular its habits cor-
respond with those of the Cephus pygmcrus, the Chlorops pumilio-
nis, fyc.  That the Hessian fly  larva  resides in the sheath  of the
culm, and not in  its  centre, we  feel confident Miss M.  has herself
become convinced ere this day:—so earnest and candid an enquirer 
43
 after truth, and one so capable of giving to every fact its due weight,
 cannot long  remain in error, upon a point so susceptible of demon-
 stration as this.

                          Its  Parasites.
   It is well  known that one of the  most effectual means for keep-
 ing the Hessian fly in check and preventing it from literally swarm-
 ing all over  our land, has been  provided by nature herself.  Other
 insects have  been  created, apparently for the very purpose of prey-
 ing upon this, and thus  preventing it from becoming inordinately
 multiplied.  The  world is indebted  to Mr. Herrick for much inte-
 resting information respecting these insects, the result of his  own
 accurate and patient investigations.   As we purpose, should we suc-
 ceed in more  fully tracing out the history of  these and  other Ce-
 cidomyian parasites, making them a subject of a separate  memoir at
 some future  day, we refrain from  devoting to them any considerable
 space in the  present paper.  The general reader,  however,  will
 scarcely pardon us, if we omit  all allusion to them.  We therefore
 subjoin a brief sketch of the contents of this part of Mr. Herrick's
 article.

   The Hessian fly is preyed  upon and  devoured by at least  four
 other insects.  When its eggs are  layed upon the wheat leaves, they
 are visited by an exceedingly  minute  four winged fly, (a  species  of
 Platygaster,) which punctures  the egg  and deposites in  it four  or
 six eggs of its own; the  Hessian % wrotm  hatches, grows,  and
 passes into its  flax seed state with these  internal foes feeding upon
 it: it now dies, and its destroyers  in due time escape from the  flax
 seed shell.   Three other minute four  winged flies, or bees as  they
 would be called in common  language, destroy the fly when in  its
 flax seed state.  The most  common  of  these,  by far, is  Say's Ce-
 raphron destructor.  Alighting upon  the  wheat stalks, instinct in-
 forms them precisely where one of these flax  seeds lies concealed.
 They thereupon "  sting" through the sheath of the stalk, and into the
 body of the worm, placing an egg therein, which hatches to a mag-
 got, lives upon and devours the  worm.  Such  are the means which
 nature has provided  for preventing this pest from becoming unduly
 multiplied.   And  so  efficient and inveterate are  these foes, that
more than nine-tenths of all the Hessian fly larvae that  have come 
44
into existence, are probably destroyed by them, Mr. Herrick thinks,
and we have strong reasons for believing that his estimate is within
the truth.

   From the date given by Mr.  Herrick of his first discovery of the
egg parasite, we know that the first or  autumnal generation is  at-
tacked by it.  Whether it preys upon the second or spring  genera-
tion also, does not so clearly  appear.   From our own observations,
and the well known habits of  the  other parasites, it would seem
to be principally upon the second or spring  generation which they
prey.  Indeed we can scarcely conceive it  possible for them with
their short ovipositors to reach the flax seeds of the first generation,
buried as these are beneath the  surface of the earth and reposing at
the roots of the young wheat.   That these parasites are surprising-
ly abundant, and destroy immense numbers of the spring generation,
any one can easily ascertain by collecting the infested straw at har-
vest  time, and  securely enclosing it, to  preserve  all the  insects
which hatch from it.  He will  thus obtain  parasites in abundance,
and only occasionally a Hessian fly.   On the other hand, numbers of
the young plants taken up by us in April, evolved nothing but Hes-
sian flies.  The  observations  of a single season,  we are aware, can-
not be relied on  for establishing a point like this.  But  they force
upofi  us the suspicion that it is  chiefly the second generation that is
infected by parasites, and that the first  is comparatively free from
therif.
                           Remedies.
   "An effectual remedy" against the Hessian fly,  which has been
so much inquired after and talked about, and by which term  we sup-
pose is meant some specific  which  will  infallibly destroy or  drive
away the insect, or protect the  crop from its ravages, never has been
and probably never will be discovered.  In truth, we regard  the idea
that a remedy of this character exists, as being  equally absurd with
a belief  in the  philosopher's  stone.  There  is probably no such
thing as sure and infallible specifics against any  of the insects which
invade our crops, any more than there is  against those diseases which
attack our persons.  Still, believing this, we also believe that there is
no noxious insect but what, when we closely study into its habits we
can invariably discover some one or more ways of opposing it, by 
45
which  we can  with  certainty to  a great  extent, if not  entirely,
shield  ourselves against  its depredations.   Thus it is with the in-
sect under consideration.   There is no  remedy with which we can
" doctor" it  away—no charm with which we can say to it, " vanish
presto;" yet there are measures, which employed, will  guaranty fair
crops,  when if  not  reserted to, no  wheat will be gathered.  Of this
fact we are well convinced, both from personal observations, and the
concurrent testimony of  a cloud of witnesses.

   A  consideration  of the various remedial measures which have
been proposed, is therefore a subject of surpassing  interest to  every
cultivator of the soil.  We shall hence proceed to review them  in
detail, treating first of those, which, after a careful consideration of
this topic, we regard as  the most  important.

   1.  A rich soil.—This is a safeguard which has been  strongly
urged by almost every one who  has written upon this insect.  In-
deed an inspection of different fields  of wheat in a district where
this enemy  is present, cannot fail  to impress upon the  observer  the
utility and importance of this requisite.  Other things being  equal,
the crops on impoverished lands invariably suffer the most.  Hence
those  on sandy soils, which retain the strength of fertilizing agents
less than other  soils, have in numerous instances been remarked as
most severely devastated.   A striking contrast, even,  may very of-
ten be perceived in different parts of the same field.   The summits
 of the knolls and  ridges, situations where  the soil is the most mea-
 gre, almost invariably show the greatest amount of damage;  whilst
 the intervening hollows, to which the fertilizing matters are washed
from the surrounding acclivities, sustain a  comparatively slight if
at all  sensible  injury.  Yet  the  latter situations are  the very ones
which insects of this family are known to be most prone to frequent,
being more low, shady and damp.  There  can be no doubt, there-
 fore, but the fly is as numerous in  the  hollows of a grain field, as
 upon  its ridges; and  that it  is only  in consequence  of the greater
 fertility of the former situations, that  the crop there, is enabled so
 effectually to  withstand  this enemy.  Indeed,  the  farmers them-
 selves, in districts  where the  fly has prevailed, have all learned from
 experience, that it is  only upon fertile lands that it  will  do  to sow
 their wdieat.  Hence Ezra L'Hommedieu long ago intimated that the 
46
 Hessian fly on Long Island, by driving the farmers to manure their
 lands, instead of a curse had actually been a blessing.   He says,
 " the land in Suffolk  county and other parts of Long  Island, was
 easily tilled, and by continual cropping with wheat was so reduced,
 that on an average not more than five or six bushels was  raised to
 the acre.   This  mode of husbandry was still pursued, and  although
 the land was gradually impoverished,  the  farmer found  the crop,
 although small, more  than would pay for his labor and  expense.
 The Hessian fly  put an end to this  kind of husbandry,  and in that
 respect has proved a blessing instead of a curse;  no other way being
 found  to prevent the injury done by this insect,  but by highly ma-
 nuring the land." {Trans. M. Y. Soc.  for Prom* of Agric, fyc, i.
 57).   A writer in Delaware also states that the universal  predilec-
 tion there, was to have large rather than rich fields of wheat; that
 this insect was counteracting  this,  by compelling them to  cultivate
 less land, in order to cultivate it well;  and that its tendency conse-
 quently was, to make  our population more dense, by making it the
 interest of every man to  own no more land than what he could ma-
 nure  highly and till  carefully.  {Carey's Museum,  xi. 301).  We
 thus have, even in the devastations committed by this destroyer evi-
 dent indications of that
                   "All partial evil, universal good,"
 which  is every where manifest in the works of the Supreme Archi-
 tect of nature.   It is  doubtless the additional  strength and  vigor
 enjoyed by plants growing upon a  rich soil, which enables them to
 withstand the depredations of this  insect.   Those shoots which are
 first sent up from a kernel of seed, are the ones which are common-
 ly attacked and destroyed, and in an impoverished soil  the seed  it-
 self thereupon perishes; whilst in a rich soil, its vitality continues,
 and other  shoots are sent forth  by it, which grow  vigorously and
 unmolested.  In the spring attack also, the weak and slender stalks
 growing upon a poor soil, are much more liable to become broken
and fail of maturing any grain, than the large, robust, well  nourish-
 ed stalks of a fertile soil.  Hence a rich soil enables a plant to ela-
borate a sufficient amount of fluids for its own sustenance,  in addi-
 dition to that which is abstracted from it by a few of these insects.
 We  therefore regard  this as  a primary and indispensable measure,
 and one which must accompany others next to be considered, in or-
 der to  their full  success. 
47
  2. Late Sowing.—This measure also  comes to us sanctioned by
the almost unanimous recommendations  of writers; and we regard
it as one of  the most efficient,  as  it certainly is the most facile of
any that can be  resorted  to.   It  is universally  admitted that it is
the earliest sowed fields that are always  the most infested; and we
cannot hut suspect that the  present visit  of this enemy to this sec-
tion of  the country, after so  long  an absence, has been invited by
the general  practice of early sowing,  resorted to  by  our farmers
under the probably incorrect idea  of hereby escaping from the de-
predations  of the  wheat-fly.  Just before  harvest, our attention
was directed to two contiguous fields of wheat in the to^n of Still-
water,  one  of which  was  seriously injured by the  Hessian  fly,
whilst in the other  not a  solitary  straw  broken  by the insect  could
be found.   The only cause to which this  striking contrast  could
be imputed, was, that the latter  field had been sowed  a fortnight
later than  the  former  one.   Analogous  instances have often oc-
curred to the notice of every observing person  living  in districts
where the fly has  been  present.   Such  cases, however, must  not
be  deemed to prove so much as th< y at  first view appear to. It
is not probable that the fly had  entirely  ceased  from depositing its
eggs before the  second  of  the  above fields  had  become forward
enough for  its  purposes.  Had the sowing of the first field been
delayed a fortnight, both fields, it is probable, would  have suffered
equally.  The whole injury  that fell  upon the  first  field,  would
thus have been  divided  between  it and its  neighbor.   And so in
all cases, we presume that the field which is the  earliest,  attracts
all of  the insects in  its  immediate  vicinity, and  these finding all
the accommodations they desire there, have no occasion for  going
elsewhere.  For a  more  extended  elucidation of this  topic, see the
American   Farmer, vol. ii. p. 167.   Two  objections have been
urged  against late sowing; the  liability of the young plants to
" winter-kill," and of the crop when  near maturity to  be attacked
by " the rust."   There  is little danger of the first of these casual-
ties, we suppose, upon porous soils, it  being a disaster almost pe-
culiar  to stiff clays, which  retain a large  amount of  moisture at
their surface.   In  such  soils,  therefore, it may  be advisable  to re-
sort to the plan  employed in sirae parts  of England,  namely, sow-
ing only on a newly turned over sward,  the grass roots in  which 
48
serve to bind the soil  together  in  such  a manner as to retard its
"heaving" by  the  frost. {Fessenden's  Complete Farmer,?. 114),
This disaster, moreover,  is  guarded against in  a great degree  by
sowing only upon a very fertile soil, whereby a  quick and vigor-
ous growth is secured, and  the young plants are thus enabled to
acquire sufficient strength of root to withstand  the winter's frosts.
The same expedient, also, by insuring  a rapid growth and an early
maturity of the crop  is the best safeguard against the rust, a dis-
aster to  which late  crops only  are  ordinarily liable.   Upon rich
land, therefore, scarcely  any scruples  need be entertained with  re-
gard to  late sowing.   If  a neighboring field has been already sowed
and the  season  is favorable for its  vegetation,  it will be  safe to
commit  the seed to the  ground within a week or two thereafter,
as all the insects in the vicinity, unless they are present in immense
swarms, will  be attracted to and remain in the earlier crop.  About
the last  of September is probably as late  as it will be judicious to
defer sowing wheat in this climate; and in most seasons this will
secure it from any  serious  attack  of  the fly.  Although when it
comes forwardj the season for the deposition of the eggs of the fly
may not in some years be entirely over, it must be rare  that a num-
ber of these  sufficiently  large  to  be  materially  injurious, will be
laid; but should that at any time be the  case,  other remedies still
can thereupon be resorted to, to counteract the evil.

   3.  Grazing.—This  measure is alluded  to as worthy of attention,
in the first account of this  insect published in this  country, where
the fact  is stated, that " by feeding the crop very close in the win-
ter and  spring, if  the land is rich it will again spring  up,  and  the
worms do not much injure  the second growth."  It is plain that a
close fed  crop will  furnish few leaves for the fly to place  its eggs
upon, and these leaves will be commonly consumed before the eggs
are hatched.   Gen. Cocke directed public attention strongly to  this
measure in 1817,  and six  years subsequently states that full  expe-
rience had amply confirmed him in his  estimate of its  efficacy.—
 {American Farmer, v. 241).   If in autumn it be omitted till after
 the eggs are hatched, and the worms have descended to the root, it
 can obviously be of little or no service.   When, therefore, an attack
 of the  fly is feared, as the exact time of the deposition of  the eggs
 is  somewhat variable in different  seasons, it will  be necessary  to 
49
 watch the young wheat,  as soon as two or three blades from  each
 root  appear ; and  if the fly is discovered  profusely depositing its
 eggs, sheep or other stock should at once be turned upon it, in  such
 numbers, if possible, as to eat  down the crop in a few days.   The
 eggs  will thus be destroyed, and the favorite nidus of the fly for
 continuing this deposite, will be effectually broken up :  it will thus
 be compelled to  resort to other quarters.  The same process  may
 also be repeated in the spring, if  found necessary.   No injury to
 the crop need be apprehended from its being thus grazed  down, if
 the soil is of due fertility — it  soon and  entirely recovers from this
 operation.  Moreover,  if the soil is poor and impoverished, the fly
 will be sure to injure it far more than what the sheep will do.  We
 cannot, therefore, but regard this as a most judicious and important
 measure,  if seasonably  resorted to.  The intelligent wool grower,
 will  scarcely require to be informed, that sheep taken from their
 ordinary walks,  should at first remain  upon the rank feed  of the
 wheat field  but an hour or two of a day.

   4.  The roller.—Passing over the grain with a heavy roller, is a
 remedy in commendation  of which several writers concur, supposing
 that many of the eggs upon the leaves will thus be crushed.   Col.
 Morgan was in the habit of both rolling and grazing his wheat fields,
 before the Hessian  fly  appeared in his vicinity  ; and as his crops
 were  much less injured than those of his  immediate neighbors, he
 attributes his escape to these causes.  If there be  any foundation for
 Mr. Smeltzer's opinion, that certain varietes of wheat are fly proof,
 because their leaves grow horizontally instead of  inclining upwards,
 assuredly  by a repeated use of  the  roller  every kind of wheat may
 be made fly  proof.  No doubt this  measure is a judicious one,  par-
 ticularly on  fields that  are so  smooth  and  free from stones  that
 almost every plant  will receive a  firm  pressure by the operation.
 If resorted to, it should obviously be done at those times when the
 eggs are newly laid upon the leaves.  After all,  is not the efficacy
 of the roller, at least in part, owing to its loosening and dislodging
the eggs from their position and causing them to drop to the ground,
where the worm,  hatching, is unable to find its way into the sheath
of the young plant 1  This point merits investigation ; for if there
is any truth  in the suggestion, sweeping the plants with a broom or
                               7 
50
some similar implement, will probably brush off much greater num-
bers of the eggs than passing a roller over them can do.

  5. Mowing.—Mr. Goodhue, of Lancaster, Wisconsin, in a com-
munication in the fifth volume of the Prairie Farmer, suggests that
the larvae concealed within the bases of the leaves, may be destroyed
by mowing the wheat, and feeding it to the stock.   We deem this
proposal a valuable one for exterminating  the second or  spring
brood from a wheat field.  In those cases where the worms are dis-
covered in the month of May, to be fearfully numerous at the joints
of the young stalks, there can be little doubt but that on smooth
grounds the scythe may be so used as to take off almost every spear
below where the larvae are lodged ; and that thus a second growth
of stalks will be produced, quite free from these depredators.  The
following facts incline me to  believe that on  a fertile  soil, wheat
may be thus mowed, with little if any eventual injury to the crop.
Portions of  a field of my own, the past season grew so rank, that
deeming it would become lodged and mildewed, by waj of experi-
ment  a space in it was mowed  down after the  plants were two feet
in height, and another after the  heads  had  begun  to put forth.
Though not so early in ripening, the appearance of these  two patches
at harvest, indicated,  so far  as a single experiment could  do, that
wheat might be mowed at the former period without any diminution
of its productiveness, whilst at the latter, both the straw and heads
would be of a more slender and feeble growth.

   6. Fly proof wheats.—That there are any kinds of wheat which
are perfectly  " fly proof," (to use  a common and expressive term,)
as has  been 'sometimes stated, we  wholly  disbelieve.   At times
when the fly is so excessively numerous as to attack barley and rye,
it is not probable that any of the cultivated species of the genus
Triticum can  entirely withstand  its attacks.   But that  there  are
kinds of this grain, that escape with  little injury, when other kinds
are almost wholly destroyed, is a well  established fact.  What  the
peculiar properties possessed by these varieties  are, that render them
thus singularly invulnerable, has nevtr been investigated with that
degree of accuracy, which so interesting and important a  subject
well merits.   Mr. Worth supposes that fly proof wheats must have
smooth leaves, affording no  grooved or channelled surface to  hold 
51
the eggs of the fly. {Amer. Far, ii. 181).  Mr. Smeltzer thinks the
leaves of such wheat stand out horizontally from the stem, or incline
downwards, instead of being erect, and that the egg is thus washed
to the ground by rains. {Patent Off. Report, 1844, p. 434).   The
Hon. J. Taliaferro regards  the immunity as proceeding from the
strength and vigor of the roots, whereby the plant continues to grow,
notwithstanding the exhaustion of its  juices by the worm.  {Patent
Off. Report, 1842, App. No. 1).  This  theory appears to us  more
plausible and more in accordance with  the facts recorded with regard
to these varieties, than any other which  has been proposed.   Other
opinions less  specific, might  be alluded  to, but  all of them  are
opinions merely, as  we discover no evidence of their having been
substantiated by a diligent investigation  of this point.  The reputa-
tion of  the Underhill wheat has already been sufficiently shown.
This was a bearded white chaff, with a plump yellow berry, requiring
to be thoroughly dried before grinding, and then producing flour in
quantity and quality equal to the best of the other varieties.   Its
fly proof quality was by many supposed  to be owing to the hardness
or solidity of its straw. The fly freely deposited its  eggs upon this
wheat,  but it was seldom,  if ever, materially injured by it.   The
Spelter wheat {Triticum  spelta, Linn.,) was also long since re-
marked as never having been injured by  the fly.  This  is so very
inferior a species, that  it is but little in use in this country, and  only
cultivated because it  will  grow well  on the poorest soils,  whether
the season be  wet or dry, and is free from  all maladies.   It has a
long, slender, beardless head, with the chaff so firmly attached to
the grain, that it can only be separated by passing through a mill,
and yields a yellowish flour.  It is more  highly esteemed  in  Ger-
many than in any other country,  being  there preferred even to  all
other kinds of wheat.   The China wheat, said originally to  have
been found in a  crate of imported China ware, branches and grows
very much like  rye, ripens at  least a week earlier  than other varie-
ties, yields largely,  (forty or fifty bushels per  acre  it is said,)  and
has never been known to be injured by the fly. {Pat. Off. Report,
1844, p. 43).   The Mediterranean  wheat, in  such high repute
for its fly proof and other qualities, was introduced  into Maryland
in 1837.  It is a slight red chaff, having a long stiff beard, a long,
red, and very flinty berry,  and ripens about ten  days earlier than 
52
 other varieties.   Mr. Garnett, in his Fredericksburg address, consi-
 ders its only title to be designated as fly proof, is, that it recovers
 better than other wheats  from the depredations of this insect.  In
 the South. Planter,  (vol. ii. p. 243,) it is said to be a coarse, dark
 grain, much like rye, and yielding such indifferent flour,  that some
 of the merchants had announced they would buy no more of it.   Its
 straw too, when grown upon a fertile soil  is said  to  be  too weak
 to support  the  head.  Mr. R.  L. Wright, in the American Ag-
 riculturist  of 1843, and others, state that it improves by culti-
 vation.  As it becomes fully acclimated, it will, we doubt not, lose
 its most objectionable traits; but will it not with them also lose its
 fly proof and other qualities, which are its main recommendations at
 present ?   On the whole, this variety is so very prolific, and so  ex-
 empt from all diseases, that we are not surprised at the marked favor
 it has received.   It is admirably adapted  for securing a premium in
 our  agricultural societies, where, " the largest crop, raised at  the
 least expense "  receives the prize ; but its grower will  be reluctant
 to inform his neighbors,  that  he sells it in market at six cents  per
 bushel under the current price.   In fine, we think this noted variety
 can never come into general favor in those districts where choicer
 kinds can be successfully cultivated. The Etrurian wheat, brought
 home by Com. Stewart, so far as yet appears, possesses all the most
 valuable qualities, and none of the defects  of the Mediterranean.
 This is a bald variety, having a strong and vigorous stalk, a beauti-
 ful long smooth head, yielding a round plump, white kernel, with
 a remarkably thin bran.   It is  very prolific, and  quite as early as
 the Mediterranean, (Rev.  D. Zollickoffer and others in the  American
 Farmer,)  and has thus far  resisted the attack of  the fly.   We are
 gravely told by an anonymous writer, that " this wheat was not, as
 its name would indicate, brought from the little Island of Etruria."
 In what creek this " little island " is situated, we  have been unable
 to discover, but with such a decided negation,  we are driven to the
 inference  that the grain   in question was derived  from a territory
 which  we moderns call Tuscany.   The White flint wheat,  one
 of the choicest varieties of western New-York, withstands the attack
 of the fly better than any  of the other kinds there in use.  For a full
 account of it, see  Gen. Harmon's paper in the Trans.  M. Y. State
Agric.  Soc,  1843,  p. 217.  In  conclusion of this branch of  our 
53
subject, we would observe, that we should by no means be solicitous
of procuring any variety of wheat, merely because of its fly proof
qualities, believing as we do, that in all ordinary visitations of the
fly,  other  measures are  a sufficient  safeguard.   If  vigor of  root,
firmness  of stalk, and rapidity of growth, are, as would appear, the
points which render these varieties fly proof, a fertile soil will cer-
tainly go far towards  imparting to  most other varieties the  same
quality.
   7. Steeps for the seed.-----These have been recommended with a
two-fold view.   1st. To destroy the eggs ; decoction of elder, juice
of elder, boiling water, &c. These assume the erroneous position that
the  eggs of the  fly are deposited upon  the grain ; it is manifest
therefore that they can be of no utility.  2d. To insure a quick and
vigorous growth of the young plant.  Where sowing is deferred un-
til late in the season, it may be  judicious to resort to some measure
of this kind to  stimulate the seed to a  more speedy and rapid ger-
mination and growth.   In Carey's Museum, (vol. xii, page 182,) an
experiment of a Poughkeepsie farmer is related, who had soaked his
seed wheat in a solution of saltpetre, four ounces being  dissolved in
water sufficient to wet a bushel.  After soaking twenty-four hours,
it was spread out and dried twelve hours, and then sowed, so late as
the  first  of November.   Early in the following June, this  crop  is
reported as being in advance of neighboring ones which had been
sowed early.   This experiment, and others  of a similar character
strikingly  indicate that it lies  much  within the compass of human
instrumentality to accelerate the growth of vegetation, by measures
of this kind.
   8. Oats as a decoy.—It has been recommended, to furnish a crop
of young or of " volunteer" oats to the insect, on which to deposit
its eggs ; and when it has nearly or quite completed this operation,
plowing  the oats under, thus burying the  eggs and larvae, and then
sowing the wheat upon their  graves.   To us, this appears  only  as
" a tub to  amuse the whale ;" or in  other words, an admirable pro-
ject  for wheedling honest "Farmer John" into  late sowing, upon
an enriched well pulverized soil.  We  have no clear evidence that
the fly will deposite its eggs upon oats.  It certainly will not be in-
clined  to do so  if there is any young wheat, barley, or rye in the vi-
cinity  to which it can resort. 
54
   9,  Wheat  as a decoy.—The preceding measure suggests to us
another, which is well worthy of the attention of the agriculturist.
The facts recorded respecting this  insect, clearly show that it is the
earliest sowed and most forward fields of grain that are most infest-
ed.  The fly is attracted to these fields, and finding a more luxuriant
vegetation, and a more shady covert here than elsewhere, and meet-
ing with all the accommodations which  it desires, it here remains,
even though adjoining fields separated only by an open fence, have
come forward sufficiently to afford at least a part of the brood, quar-
ters equally as comfortable.   To us  it  appears evident, from these
premises, that if one or two acres  across the middle of a large field
be sowed with wheat about the middle of August, all the flies in the
vicinity will be attracted to  this point,  and there retained ;  so that
it will be perfectly safe to sow the remainder of the field  by the
middle of September.  If the Hessian  fly is common in the neigh-
borhood, the early sowed strip  will be badly infested.  If so, let it
be turned under by the plow, either after two or three severe frosts
have rendered it certain  that the season for  depositing  the eggs is
fully past, or early in the following spring—resowing it with win-
ter wheat in the former  case, or with  spring wheat in  the latter.
By this procedure all the larvae will be buried and perish.  Only in
one contingency,  as we can perceive, will this plan be inexpedient or
liable to fail, namely, when  the  flies are present in such vast num-
bers, that the decoy thus prepared is inadequate fully to accommo-
date them.  Upon this point, the amount of damage done at the pre-
ceding harvest, will enable the  cultivator to judge with a considera-
ble degree of certainty.  The advantages which this plan promises,
are, that it draws all the insects of the  neighborhood together, and
destroys their entire progeny ; it enables most  of  the grain to be
sowed as early as is desirable ;  and finally, there will no second or
spring generation come forth in the field to attack  any part  of the
crop.   This measure therefore, should receive a fair trial from some
intelligent wheat grower in a district suffering under this pest.

  10.  Deeply covering the seed.—From the letters  of a King Wil-
liam County Farmer, and from  the specimens furnished by him to
Mr. Garnett, which are figured in the American Farmer, (vol. ii. p.
174,) the following facts would seem to be conclusively established, 
55
to wit :—That when a  kernel  of wheat  is  buried to the depth of
about three inches, it  sends a single  stem upwards, which, within
an inch of the surface forms a crown,  sending from that point a tuft
of fibrous roots  downwards, and a tuft of blades upwards ; these be-
come the main roots and stalks, if undisturbed.   But if these be de-
stroyed by the fly, a new set  of shoots and roots start directly from
the deep buried kernel,  and these  latter shoots are never attacked
by the fly.   A kernel but slightly covered, on the other hand, sends
up its blades at  once  directly from the seed ; if these be attacked
therefore, the whole is destroyed.   Such is a brief but plain state-
ment, we believe, of the  argument of  the  King William Farmer.
In other words, seed slightly covered can  send up but a single set
of shoots, and being attacked by  the fly,  the whole perishes ; but
seed deeply buried can send up a  double  set of shoots ; those first
appearing are attacked and destroyed ;  those which thereupon start
directly from the seed are never infested by thi> fly.  Admitting the
facts to be as set forth,  it amounts  to this, that by deeply covering,
the same quantity of seed in  reality produces two crops;  one, which
is speedily harvested by the fly ;  and the other, gathered at a later
day by human hands.   To this procedure we  have two objections.
By adopting it, you do nothing whatever towards destroying the in-
sect or frustrating it in  the least in  its operations.  On the contrary,
you aim to provide food for it.   You  cherish it. You, in effect, say
to it, " be fruitful, multiply, and  replenish  the earth."  True, by
giving it what it wants, it leaves us as much  more.  But it is rather
humiliating to us "lords of creation" to rear crops " at the  halves"
and place ourselves in the rank of mere tenants to so ignoble a land-
lord !   Again, this measure only  shields us against the autumnal at-
tack.   It does  nothing  against that of  the following spring.   Nay,
by providing so well for  the first  generation,  it tends to make the
second generation  more numerous, and  the spring  attack  conse-
quently more severe.   Thus much upon  the  supposition that the
facts are precisely as set forth by the King William Farmer.  That
he sincerely  believed them to be  correct, and that he was perfectly
honest in the selection of the specimens which  he forwarded to Mr.
Garnett, we  do not in the least doubt.  Indeed the encomium which
Mr. G. has written upon the character of his  friend, must forever
place him above all suspicions of insincerity or of anything approach- 
56
ing  to  chicanery.   But our  own observations impress upon us
strongly the conviction that he is in error in one  most important
point in his  argument,  namely, that  seed slightly  covered,  dies
whenever its blades are destroyed by the fly.  It is only in an im-
poverished soil that it thus  dies ; in a rich soil, as has been already
stated, its vitality continues, its  roots are  so well surrounded with
nutriment that they readily  sustain it, and  its first shoots being de-
stroyed, it sends up a second  set  which growr unharmed.  It thus
performs the same operation which the King William Farmer con-
tends, it can  only  do  when deeply buried.  Our  specimen, from
which  the drawing (fig. A,) was taken, plainly shows this fact. The
illustration is an exact  copy from nature, of two  shoots which were
separated from a tuft of similar ones, all growing from one shallow
covered seed ; and in every infested field which we have  examined,
myriads of similar specimens might have been gathered, whilst com-
monly  only on knolls  and  other barren  or dry parts of the fields
were the plants found  to be wholly  destroyed, as they are repre-
sented in the figures of the American Farmer.   A fertile  soil there-
fore insures the same results which are claimed for a deep covering
of the seed.   In  both  cases, the  shoots which first appear are de-
stroyed ; another set appear afterwards, which are unharmed—not
because the seed is buried too deep for the  worms to crawl down to
it, as the King William  Farmer  seems to  infer, but because there
are no  flies any longer  abroad to deposite their eggs upon the leaves.
The exact truth then, with regard to this matter, we are firmly per-
suaded is as follows.  In a  meagre soil, the seed will die, whether
it be covered  slightly or deeply.  In a less impoverished soil, if the
weather be dry in September as  it frequently  is, seed near the  sur-
face will often perish, when that which is deeply buried will survive.
In a fertile soil the  seed will survive, whether it be covered shallow
or deep.  That suits of  specimens can therefore be easily procured
which will appear to demonstrate a state of things in every particu-
lar the very  reverse of those figured in  the  American Farmer,
scarcely admits of a doubt.  Our conclusion then is, that the King
William Farmer is  measurably  correct  in  his position, but  by no
means correct to the extent contended for.  When the Hessian fly
is present in any district, deeply covering the seed, especially if it be
early sowed, will in most cases  be an additional safeguard against 
57
 its destruction.   The measure is therefore good as a subordinate one,
 but it must fall far short of ranking as a primary one.

   11. Procuring seed from uninfested districts.—This measure also,
 is based upon the erroneous  supposition that the eggs are deposited
 upon the grain.   It can consequently be of no utility whatever as
 a safeguard against the Hessian fly.   The measure has been fairly
 tested in several instances without success.

   12. Sun-drying the seed.—Mr. W. H. Hill, in the Mashville Ag-
 riculturist of 1842, states that for fifteen years  his wheat  crops had
 not been injured by the Hessian  fly,  whilst those of  his  neighbors
 had suffered more or less.  This immunity he attributes to two cau-
 ses ;  exposing his seed to  the sun for two  days  previous  to sowing
 it, and sowing  none but  the  largest and  fullest grains,  the others
 being separated by a sieve.   Doubtless stronger roots and  a more
 vigorous growth is obtained  by sowing large, plump seed.  We think
 that effectually drying  the seed  in the sun can  have  but  one effect,
 that of retarding its germination a short time—an  end that may be
 equally  as well attained, and with  less trouble, by deferring the
 sowing until a somewhat later  period.

   13. Drawing  elder bushes over the young plants.—We  have here
 one of the fancies of a former  day,it being supposed  that  elder pos-
 sessed an  odor or some more  occult property, which rendered  it
 peculiarly repulsive to insects.   A trial of it against the Hessian fly,
 however, soon demonstrated that it possessed little or no virtue  of
 that kind in reference to this insect.   If any benefit ever resulted
 from  it, it was probably only by dislodging and brushing off some
 of  the eggs from the blades of the wheat.

   14. Sprinkling fine salt, ashes, or caustic lime over  the young
plants.—The first of these measures was proposed, from its appear-
ing at one time that wheat growing upon points  of  land exposed  to
the sea air was less injured than that growing back from  the coast.
Neither of these  remedies, however,  have  been  attended  with suc-
cess,  in  any case on record, and they probably are of no service
whatever, except as they may slightly increase the fertility of some
fields.   There is  no likelihood that the fly, its eggs, or larvae can  be
materially  discommoded by them.
                               8 
58
   15.  Burning and plowing up the wheat stubble.—This measure
was originally proposed by Judge Havens, and has been unanimous-
ly approved of and strongly urged by  several of the mcst intelli-
gent writers since.  Indeed, a slight examination can scarcely fail of
impressing upon every one its utility, independent of the sanction of
authority.  Whoever will at, or soon after haivest, inspect the stub-
ble of a field that has  been  badly infested by the Hessian fly, will
find these  insects in their flax seed state lying one, two,  three  or
more, at the joints of perhaps  half the straws of the field.  What
a trifling labor, or rather what a pastime will it now  be to set fire to
this dry stubble, and hereby inevitably consume countless thousands
of these destroyers.   This point appears so plainly evident, that no
one, we think, will hesitate in pronouncing this  remedy  decidedly
the most important and  valuable of all.  But a thought breaks  in
upon us, of such fearful import, that fancying we see the burning
brand extended, in an instant more to send a sheet of vivid flame,
leaping, hissing, and crackling  over the fated field, we involuntarily
shout,
               " Stop! or thy tread is on an empire's dust!"
Of a truth, what a short sighted mortal is man, and how  often are
the words of  the poet verified, that " a  little knowledge is a dan-
gerous  thing."  Seeing  his enemy chained to the stake, he exult-
ingly rushes at once to fire the faggots, and lo, a dozen of his friends
are immolated upon the same pyre !  Is it not a fact, that  whilst by
this measure we consume the Hessian fly by hundreds, we inevitably
destroy its  mortal foes by thousands 1   And that the  very means
which we thus resort to for averting a future calamity are the surest
means  that could be  devised for bringing that  calamity upon us !
If nine-tenths of every generation of the Hessian fly are destroyed
by three or four other insects, who can  calculate the value of the
services which these  latter are  yearly rendering us ?  And who,
then, will  be so inconsiderate and ruthless  as  to destroy nine of
these useful parasites, in order to exterminate one Hessian flv  ! Yet
this must, in most cases, be the result of burning the stubble of the
wheat field.  We commenced our account of this remedy impressed
with a belief  that it was the best that had ever been proposed •  we
close it, persuaded that it is  the very worst. 
59
            Brief Summary of the preceding History.
   The  Hessian fly {Cecidomyia destructor of Say,) is a European
 insect, and has been detected in Germany,  France, Switzerland and
 Italy, where it at times commits severe depredations upon the wheat
 crops.  Its ravages are alluded to so far back as the year 1732.  It
 was brought to this country, probably in some straw used in pack-
 age by the Hessian soldiers, who landed on Staten and the west end
 of Long Island, August, 17 76, but did not become so multiplied as
 to severely injure the crops in that neighborhood, until 1779.  From
 thence as a central point, it gradually  extended over the country in
 all  directions, advancing at the rate of from ten to twenty miles  a
 year.   Most of the wheat crops were wholly destroyed by it within
 a year or two of its first  arrival at a given place, and its depreda-
 tions commonly continued  for several years, when they would near-
 ly or quite cease ; its parasitic insect enemies probable increasing to
 such an extent as to  almost exterminate it.   It is frequently reap-
 pearing in  excessive numbers in one and another  district of our
 country, and in addition to wheat, injures  also barley and rye.

   There are two generations of this insect  annually.  The eggs re-
 semble  minute reddish grains, and are laid  in the  creases of the up-
 per  surface of the leaf, when  the wheat is but a few inches high,
 mostly  in the month of September.  These hatch in about a week,
 and the worm crawls down the sheath of  the leaf to its base, just
 below the surface of the ground, where it  remains, subsisting upon
 the juices of the plant, without wounding it, but causing it to turn
 yellow and die.  It is a small white maggot, and attains its growth
 in about six weeks.  It then changes to a flax seed like body, with-
 in which the worm becomes a pupa the following spring, and from
 this  the fly is evolved in ten or twelve days.  The fly closely re-
 sembles a  musquitoe in its appearance, but is a third smaller,  and
 has no bill for sucking blood ; it is black, the joints of its body be-
 ing slightly  marked with reddish.  It appears early in May, lays its
 eggs for another generation and  soon  perishes.   The worms from
 these eggs nestle at the lower joints of  the  stalks, weakening them
 and  causing  them to bend and fall down from  the weight of the
head, so that towards harvest, an infested field looks as though cat-
tle had passed through it. 
60
   Wheat can scarcely be grown except upon a fertile soil in  those
districts where this insect is abundant.   The sowing should be de-
ferred until about the last of September, the season then being past,
when  the fly usually deposites its eggs.  If at any time in autumn
the eggs of the insect are observed to  be profusely deposited  upon
the leaves, the crop should  be  speedily grazed down by sheep and
other stock, or if this cannot be done, a heavy roller should be pass-
ed over it, that as many of the  eggs as possible may be crushed  or
dislodged thereby.   One or the other of the same measures should
also be  resorted  to in the spring, if the  same contingency occurs;
or if the worms are at a later date discovered to be numerous at the
first and second joints of the young  stalks, the experiment may  be
tried of mowing as close down as  possible, the most infested por-
tion of the field.   Where the soil  is of but medium  fertility,  a re-
sort to some of the hardier varieties of wheat, which are known to
be in a measure fly  proof, may be advisable.
   Fitch's Point, Salem, M.  F., April, 1847.
  Note.—Since our preceding essay, upon the Cecidomyia tritici, was published, hav-
ing had an opportunity of perusing the original articles of Mr. Kirby upon that spe-
cies, we find that he both figures and describes the joints of its antennae as " medio
constrictio."  It  is singular  that this most important distinctive  mark has been so
misstated in the descriptions  of that species which have been republished upon this
Bide of the Atlantic, and also in Turton's edition of  the System of Nature.  From
the remarks introductory to our " Description," some might perhaps infer that this
error arose with the founder of the species.  We hasten, therefore, to obviate any
such impression. 
DESCRIPTION  OF  THE PLATE.
 1.  Agrilus ruficollis, Fab.  a. Its natural length.
 2.  Hessian fly, male.   (Cecidomyia destructor.)  From a young specimen, hav-
      ing the fulvous sutures of the abdomen wide.
 b.  Its natural size.
 c.  Ventral view of  the terminal segments of its abdomen.
 d.  Joints of its antenna.
 3.  Hessian fly, female. (C. destructor, 4..)  From an older specimen, having
      the fulvous sutures narrow and in part obliterated.
 e.  Joints of its antenna.
/.  Profile view of the head, palpi, and origin of the antenna.
 g.  Dorsal view of the worm or active larva.
 h.    do      do     "flax seed," or larva case.
 t.  Ventral view of the same.
 j.  Lateral view of the same.
 k.  Dorsal view of  the dormant larva, taken from the larva case.
 I.  Ventral view of the pupa.
 m. Wheat stalk; sheath broken away, showing the young worms  on their
      way to the joint.
 n. and 0. Wheat stalks; sheath broken away, showing the "flax seeds" in their
      ordinary situation.
 Appearance of a healthy (*), and of a  diseased  (\) shoot of wheat in autumn,
      the worms lying at §.
 Appearance of a healthy (**),and two diseased  stalks of wheat at harvest time.
      (ft) Stalk broken, from being weakened by the worms.  §§ Base of sheath
      swollen from  worms having laid  under  it, and perforated by  parasites
      coming from those worms.