Although this is a common insect in many parts of the United States, it is not generally found in great numbers in any locality, and, notwith standing its general distribution, the various staes of the insect seem not to have been describe or figured.

While I am not yet able to clear up all the points in its history, I have studied the insect in all its stages, though I have not reared it from the egg to maturity, on account of the time required for it to develop—in all probability three years.

For several years I have observed traces of a borer in the tips of the tiwgs of my red currant bushes, whose habits did not correspond with those of any insect with which I am acquainted. My knowledge of the subject is very limited, and I consulted the department at Washington. In reply it was suggested that possibly it was the same insect which infested the tips of the raspberry, Oberea tripunctata. But the facts not quite agreeing with this reference, I wrote to Prof. Riley, stating the facts in the case.

Doubtless all agree that the meeting of this Club and that of the Association of Economic Entomologists in 1893 may afford unrivalled opportunities for us to meet and make the acquaintance of many foreign entomologists; that the occasion may afford excellent opportunities to make known our own methods and to extend a knowledge of teh nature and extent of entomological investigation being done in this country among those of other countries engaged in similar pursutis, and enable us to learn the same concerning them. In other words, our next annual meeting should be on occasion of great social advantage and of mutual scientific and practical benefit to ourselves and our visitors. To attain this should be our aim.

Geographically the State of Mississippi divided into what is known as the hills and the swamps. The hills comprise the middle and eastern portions of the State, while the swamps comprise the western border or the country adjacent to the Mississippi River, the larger portion of which is overflowed every year.

The insect fauna of this region presents many things of interest, there being an absence of many species found in other parts of the State, doubtless owing to the inundation and consequent drowning out in the spirng of the year. Indeed, how it is that some of the species which are quite common in this region survive an overflow lasting from three weeks to two or over three months, I leave for other to explain.

It would seem appropriate that this hitherto somewhat rare and inconspicuous little carabid should be brought to the notice of the Entomological Club of the A.A.A.S. in its new role of a benefactor.

I have been observing its habits for two years, and am confident that to it, more than to any other agent, do we, in the neighborhood of St.Louis, owe our present comparative freedom from the Web-worm nuisance. Whereas formerly almost every other tree would, at this season of the year, be infested with one or more of the disfiguring nests, they are now so few and far between that it requires some search to find one.

It will be remembered that at the meeting of the Club a year ago, Professor J. B. Smith gave the results of his observations for that year upon the Elm-leaf Beetle at New Brunswick, N. J., and concluded that it was single-brooded there. His observations were so carefully made that his conclusions could not well be doubted; yet they did not agree with those made at Washington, where the species had been found to be at those made at Washington, where the species had been found to be at least double-brooded. In the article which I had published upon this insect in Bulletin 6 of the Division of Entomology of the Department of Agriculture, I had discussed the evidence as to number of broods, both from European sources and my own experience; but Professor Smith's observations were so conclusive, so far as his locality is concerned, that I felt the need of more accurate notes than any that had been published hitherto, and of teh desriability of setting the question as to number of broods at Washington by a series of carefully-planned indoor experiments, where, by breeding from one generation to another, there could be no question of an erroneous conclusion.

In most books which treat of D. folliculorum, considerable space is given to a description of the lesions it produces in man, dogs, cats and sheep, while its presence on cattle is simply mentioned with the remark that Claus and Gros state that it is occasionally found on these animals.

Gros seems to be the first who observed it on cattle. His original article is not at my disposal, but I quote from Blanchard.

Professor Riley gave some verbal notes on the above subject, covering substantially the facts in articles recently published in the Canadian Entomologist, and an editorial prepared for the first number of Volume V., Insect Life.† Both the Bean Weevil and the Pea Weevil were found to have temporary thoracis legs of a peculiar form in the post-embryonic larval state, and also certain prominent spines on the prothoracic shield. The eggs of the Bean Weevil in the field are not attached to the outside of the pod, as had hitherto been stated and believed, but are laid in masses within the pod, through an aperture made by the jaws.

In the note on the post-embryonic larvæ of the Pea and Bean Weevils, published in the August number of the Canadian Entomologist, (p. 185). I have stated that the eggs of the Bean Weevil “are primarily laid upon the bean pod in the field, but chiefly, if not entirely, upon those which are already matured and ripening.” This statement was based upon the finding of the eggs upon more mature bean pods in years gone by, and represents the current belief hitherto held. A more careful examination of the eggs thus found the present season, after the note above referred to had been sent to the editor, showed that they did not entirely agree with the eggs of the Bean Weevil as laid on stored beans, the difference being sufficient to justify a doubt as to the former being those of the ordinary Bean Weevil, and to cause me to look into the matter more fully, which I have done in my own garden the past summer.

Mr. S. H. Scudder, in his “Butterflies of Eastern U.S.” states that “Feniseca Tarquinius” has never been captured east of the Connecticut Valley in Massachusetts. Other writers mention it as rare in New England. It may interest some of your readers to know that I found it very commonon the Glen Road near Jackson, N.H., in the second week in June. I also found a specimen on a window of the Boston Athletic Club, which seems a strange place for it. The building is on new made land, nowhere near any alder growht, in fact, in the ciy. I have collected a number of years in the suburbs of Boston, but have never seen a specimen.