| By Author | [ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z | Other Symbols ] |
| By Title | [ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z | Other Symbols ] |
| By Language |
|
Download this book: [ ASCII ] Look for this book on Amazon Tweet |
Title: Eleanor Ormerod, Ll. D., Economic Entomologist : Autobiography and Correspondence
Author: Ormerod, Eleanor Anne
Language: English
As this book started as an ASCII text book there are no pictures available.
*** Start of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "Eleanor Ormerod, Ll. D., Economic Entomologist : Autobiography and Correspondence" ***
[Illustration:
Elliott & Fry. Photo Walker & Cookerell Ph. So.
Eleanor A. Ormerod
]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ELEANOR ORMEROD, LL.D.,
ECONOMIC ENTOMOLOGIST:
AUTOBIOGRAPHY AND CORRESPONDENCE
EDITED BY ROBERT WALLACE
PROFESSOR OF AGRICULTURE AND RURAL ECONOMY
IN THE UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH
WITH PORTRAIT AND ILLUSTRATIONS
NEW YORK
E. P. DUTTON AND COMPANY
31 WEST TWENTY-THIRD STREET
1904
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DEDICATED
TO ALL
MISS ORMEROD’S CORRESPONDENTS
IN
ECONOMIC ENTOMOLOGY.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
PREFACE
-------
The idea that Miss Ormerod should write her biography originated with
the present writer during one of many visits paid to her at St. Albans.
Miss Ormerod had unfolded in charming language and with admirable
lucidity and fluency some interesting chapters of her personal
experiences and reminiscences. The first working plan of the project
involved the concealment of a shorthand writer behind a screen in the
dining-room while dinner was proceeding, and while the examination of
ethnological specimens or other attractive objects gave place for a time
to general conversation on subjects grown interesting by age. Although
the shorthand writer was selected and is several times referred to in
letters written about this period (pp. 304-307), Miss Ormerod, on due
reflection, felt that the presence, though unseen, of a stranger at
these meetings _in camera_ would make the position unnatural, and
dislocate the association of ideas to the detriment of the narrative.
She then bethought herself of the method of writing down at leisure
moments, from time to time as a suitable subject occurred to her, rough
notes (p. 318) to be elaborated later, and when after a time a subject
had been exhausted, the rough notes were re-written and welded into a
narrative (pp. 304-321). Some four or five of the early chapters were
thus treated and then typewritten, but the remainder of the
Autobiography was left in crude form, requiring much piecing together
and editorial trimming. Had the book been produced on the original plan,
it was proposed to name it “Recollections of Changing Times.”[1] It
would have dealt with a number of subjects of general interest, such as
the history of the Post Office, early records of floods and earthquakes,
as well as newspapers of early date. The introduction of Miss Ormerod’s
letters to a few of her leading correspondents was made necessary by the
lack of other suitable material. The present volume is still mainly the
product of Miss Ormerod’s pen, but with few exceptions general subjects
have been eliminated; and it forms much more a record of her works and
ways than it would have done had she been spared to complete it. From
the inception of the idea the present writer was appointed editor, but
had Miss Ormerod lived to see the book in the hands of the public his
share of work would have been light indeed. Armed with absolute
authority from her (p. 318) to use his discretion in the work, he has
exercised his editorial license in making minor alterations without
brackets or other evidences of the editorial pen, while at the same time
the integrity of the substance has been jealously guarded.
As in Miss Ormerod’s correspondence with experts only scientific names
for insects and other scientific objects were employed, it was found
expedient to introduce the common names within ordinary or round
brackets. Much thought and care have been given to the arrangement of
the letters, and a sort of compromise was adopted of three different
methods that came up for consideration, viz., (1) according to
chronological order, (2) according to the subjects discussed, and (3)
grouping under the names of the individuals to whom they were addressed.
While the third is the predominant feature of the scheme the
chronological order has been maintained within the personal groups, and
precedence in the book was generally given to the letters of the oldest
date. At the same time, to complete a subject in one group written
mainly to one correspondent, letters dealing with the subject under
discussion have been borrowed from their natural places under the
heading of “Letters to Dr. ——” or “Letters to Mr. ——.” While Miss
Ormerod’s practice of referring to matters of minor importance and of
purely personal interest in correspondence dealing mainly with definite
lines of scientific research, has not been interfered with in a few
instances, in most of the other groups of letters on technical subjects
editorial pruning was freely practised to prevent confusion and to
concentrate the subject matter. The chief exceptions occur in the
voluminous and interesting correspondence with Dr. Fletcher, in her
specially confidential letters to Dr. Bethune, and in the very general
correspondence with the editor. It was felt that to remove more of the
friendly references and passing general remarks to her correspondents
would have been to invalidate the letters and show the writer of them in
a character alien to her own.
The figures of insects which have been introduced into the
correspondence, to lighten it and increase its interest to the reader,
have been chiefly borrowed from Miss Ormerod’s published works; and
among them will be found a number of illustrations from Curtis’s “Farm
Insects,” for the use of which her acknowledgments were fully given to
Messrs. Blackie, the publishers.[2] The contents of this volume will
afford ample evidence of Miss Ormerod’s intense interest in her subject,
of the infinite pains she took to investigate the causes of injury, and
of the untiring and unceasing efforts she employed to accomplish her
object; also that her determinations relative to the causes and nature
of parasitic attacks upon crops, give proof of soundness of judgment,
and her advice, chiefly connected with remedial and preventive
treatment, was eminently sensible and practical. Mainly by
correspondence of the most friendly kind she formed a unique connecting
link between economic entomologists in all parts of the world; and she
quoted their various opinions to one another very often in support of
her own preconceived ideas.
The three biographical chapters, III., XI., and XII., were added to the
autobiographical statements which she had left, with the object merely
of supplying some missing personal incidents in an interesting life.
Other deficiencies in the Autobiography are made up by Miss Ormerod’s
correspondence, and the history of her work is permitted to evolve from
her own letters.
A strong vein of humour runs through many parts of her writings, notably
in the chapter on “Church and Parish.” The reader will not fail to
notice the splendid courtesy and deference to scientific authority, as
well as the fullest appreciation of and unselfish sympathy with the
genuine scientific work of others, which pervades all she wrote.
Prominent among these characteristics of Miss Ormerod should be placed
her scrupulous honesty of purpose in acknowledging to the fullest extent
the work of others.
The work of collecting material, sifting, and editing has been going on
for nearly two years, and could never have been accomplished but for the
kindly help rendered by so many of Miss Ormerod’s correspondents, all of
whom I now cordially thank for invaluable sympathetic assistance.
Special acknowledgments are due to Sir Wm. Henry Marling, Bart., the
present owner of Sedbury Park, and to Miss Ormerod’s nephews and nieces,
who have been delighted to render such assistance as could not have been
found outside the family circle. Besides Mr. Grimshaw, Mr. Janson, Dr.
Stewart MacDougall, Professor Hudson Beare, and Mr. T. P. Newman who
read the proofs critically, last, but not least, do I thank Mr. John
Murray, whose friendly reception of the first overtures made to him as
the prospective publisher of this volume brightened some of the dark
moments near the close of Miss Ormerod’s life. I have had as editor the
much appreciated privilege of drawing, in all cases of difficulty, upon
Mr. Murray’s great literary experience.
In making these pleasing acknowledgments I in no way wish to shift the
responsibility as Editor from my own shoulders for defects which may be
discovered or for the general scheme of the work, which was, with slight
modifications, my own. If it be said in criticism that the Editor is too
little in evidence, I shall be all the more satisfied, as that has been
throughout one of his leading aims.
ROBERT WALLACE.
UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH,
1904.
LIST OF ERRATA.
Page 70, line 31, for “Tenebroides” read “Tenebrioides”.
Page 130, line 11, for “Ceutorhyncus” read “Ceuthorhyncus”.
Page 130 in description of Fig. 14, for “CEUTORHYNCUS” read
“CEUTHORHYNCUS”.
Page 144, line 7, for “importad” read “imported”.
Page 185, line 1, for “Lucania” read “Leucania”.
=Transcriber’s note:=
These errata have been applied to this LibraryBlog text.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CONTENTS
-------
CHAPTER I
PAGE
BIRTH, CHILDHOOD AND EDUCATION: Born at Sedbury Park, May, 1
1828—recollections of early childhood—First insect
observation—Girlish occupations—Education of the
family—Eleanor Ormerod’s education at home by her
mother—Interests during hours of leisure.
CHAPTER II
PARENTAGE: Localities of Sedbury Park and Tyldesley, the 7
properties of George Ormerod—Roman remains—The family of
Ormerod since 1311—Three George Ormerods of Bury—Reference
to “Parentalia” by George Ormerod—The alliance of the
family with the heiress, Elizabeth Johnson of
Tyldesley—“Tyldesley’s” experiences during the Stewart
rebellion in 1745—Descent from Thomas Johnson of
Tyldesley—George Ormerod, father of Miss Ormerod—John
Latham, fellow and president of the Royal College of
Physicians, London, maternal grandfather of Miss
Ormerod—Connection with the Ardernes of Alvanley and
descent from Edward I.—The right of the Ormerod family to
the “Port Fellowship” of Brasenose College.
CHAPTER III
REMINISCENCES OF SEDBURY BY MISS DIANA LATHAM: The Ormerod 14
family of ten—The father and mother and their respective
interests in literature and art—Sedbury Park and the
hobbies of its inmates—Paucity of congenial
neighbours—Annual visit to London—Drives and
Excursions—The elder and the younger sections of the
family—Eleanor Ormerod’s favourite sister,
Georgiana—Interest in natural history and medicine—Miss
Ormerod at twenty-five—Routine of life at Sedbury—Drawings
by Mrs. Ormerod—The Library—Music—Models—Separation of the
family.
CHAPTER IV
CHURCH AND PARISH: Tidenham parish church—Leaden font—The 20
Norman Chapel of Llancaut—The history of Tidenham
Church—Curious practices in neighbouring churches—The
church as schoolroom—Pretty customs on special
occasions—The discomforts of the usual service—The choral
service on high days—No reminiscences of precocious
piety—Impressions of sermons by Scobell and
Whately—Clerical eccentricities in dress, &c.—The Oxford
Movement—Dr. Armstrong—Raising the latch of the chancel
door with a ruler—The woman’s Clothing Club of the
parish—Lending library instituted and successfully managed
by Miss G. E. Ormerod—Her accomplishments and merits as a
philanthropist.
CHAPTER V
SEVERN AND WYE: “Forest Peninsula” between Severn and 33
Wye—Ruined chapel of St. Tecla—Muddy experiences—Scenery
on the Severn—Rise of Tides—Colour and width of the
river—Sailing merchant fleet to and from Gloucester—A
“pill” or creek—Salmon fishing from boats—“Putcher” or
basket fishing—Disorderly conduct by fishermen—Finds of
Natural History specimens in fishing baskets—Severn clay
or “mud”—A bottle-nosed whale—Seaweeds—Fossils from
Sedbury cliffs—Saurian remains—Dangers of the cliffs.
CHAPTER VI
TRAVELLING BY COACH, FERRY, AND RAILWAY: Many coaches 43
passing Sedbury Park gates—Dangers of travelling—View of
the Severn valley—The Old Ferry passage of the
Severn—Swamping of a sailing boat in 1838—A strange custom
when rabies was feared—Window-shutter-like ferry
telegraph—The ferry piers—The first railways—Curious early
train experiences.
CHAPTER VII
CHARTIST RISING IN MONMOUTHSHIRE IN 1839: Chartist rising in 47
Monmouth under John Frost, ex-draper of Newport—Home
experience—Defenceless state of Sedbury house—Trial and
sentence of the leaders—Reminiscences of
troubles—Attorney-General’s address to the jury—Physical
features of the disturbed area—Plan of the rising—Prompt
action of the Mayor of Newport—Thirty soldiers stationed
in the Westgate Hotel—Advance of 5,000 rioters—Their
spirited repulse and dispersal—Arrest and punishment of
Frost and other leaders.
CHAPTER VIII
BEGINNING THE STUDY OF ENTOMOLOGY, COLLECTIONS OF ECONOMIC 53
ENTOMOLOGICAL SPECIMENS, AND FAMILY DISPERSAL: Beginning
of Entomology 1852—A rare locust—Purchase of Stephen’s
“Manual of British Beetles”—Method of
self-instruction—First collection of Economic Entomology
specimens sent to Paris—Facilities at Sedbury for
collection—Aid given by labourers and their children in
collecting—Illness and death of Miss Ormerod’s
father—Succession and early death of Venerable Thomas J.
Ormerod—Succession of the Rev. G. T. B. Ormerod—Miss
Ormerod’s brothers—Especial copy of “History of Cheshire”
presented to the Bodleian Library—A family heirloom.
CHAPTER IX
COMMENCEMENT AND PROGRESS OF ANNUAL REPORTS OF OBSERVATIONS 59
OF INJURIOUS INSECTS: Preliminary pamphlet issued in
1877—Explanation of the objects aimed at—Approval of the
public and of the press—Changes in the original
arrangement of the subject matter—Classification of facts
under headings arranged in 1881—Sources of information
stated and fully acknowledged—Adoption of plain and simple
language—Illustrations of first importance—Blackie & Sons
supply electros of wood engravings from Curtis’s “Farm
Insects”—The brothers Knight assist—Accumulation of
knowledge—General Index to Annual Reports by
Newstead—Manual of Injurious Insects and other
publications—Notice of the discontinuance of the Annual
Reports in the Report for 1900—“Times” notice of “Miss
Ormerod’s partial retirement from Entomological Work,” in
Appendix B.
CHAPTER X
SAMPLES OF LEGAL EXPERIENCES: First employment as an expert 68
witness in 1889—Case of Wilkinson _v._ The Houghton Main
Colliery Company, Limited—Form of subpœna—Rusty-red flour
beetle infestation in a cargo of flour transported from
New York to Durban—Report on insect presence—Confirmed by
Oliver Janson and a Washington expert—A compromise
effected—Case of granary weevil infestation in a cargo of
flour from San Francisco to Westport—Letter of thanks from
William Simpson of R. & H. Hall, Limited.
CHAPTER XI
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH BY THE EDITOR: Reasons for changes of 73
residence—Intimacy with Sir Joseph and Lady Hooker at
Kew—Interesting people met there—Appointed Consulting
Entomologist to the Royal Agricultural Society of
England—Insect diagrams—Serious carriage accident—Methods
adopted in doing entomological work—As a meteorological
observer—Professor Westwood as friendly
mentor—Appreciation of work by foreign correspondents.
CHAPTER XII
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH BY THE EDITOR (_continued_): Public 83
lectures at the Royal Agricultural College—Reasons why
lecturing was ultimately discontinued—Lectures at South
Kensington and other places—The Economic Entomology
Committee—Simplicity of Miss Ormerod’s home life before
and after her sister’s death—Programme of daily
work—Welcome guests—Intimate friends—Sense of humour—Story
of a hornet’s capture—Proofs of courage—Historical oaks at
Sedbury—Fond of children and thoughtful of
employees—Charity—Public liberality—Subsidiary employments
and amusements—Made LL.D.—Fellowships of
societies—Medals—Treatment of letters.
CHAPTER XIII
LETTERS TO COLONEL COUSSMAKER AND MR. ROBERT SERVICE: 99
(_Coussmaker_) Insect diagrams Royal Agricultural
Society—Surface caterpillars—Wood leopard moth—Puss moth.
(_Service_)—Paper by “Mabie Moss” on hill-grubs of the
Antler moth—The pest checked by parasites.
CHAPTER XIV
LETTERS TO MR. WM. BAILEY: Mr. Bailey’s letter to H.G. the 109
Duke of Westminster on Ox warble fly—Letter showing the
destruction of Ox warbles by the boys—R.A.S.E.
recognition—Annual letter and cheque for five guineas for
prizes in insect work—Looper caterpillars—Mr. Bailey’s
method of teaching agricultural entomology—Economic
entomology exhibit at Bath and West Society’s Show, St.
Albans—Examinership at Edinburgh University—The royal
party at the show—Cheese-fly maggot—Copies of Manual for
free distribution—Presentation slips—LL.D. of the
University of Edinburgh—Discontinuing colleagueship.
CHAPTER XV
LETTERS TO MR. D. D. GIBB: Great tortoiseshell butterfly 128
infestation—Charlock weevil—Gout fly—Forest fly—Structure
of its foot—Great gadfly—Horse breeze flies—Deer forest
fly in Scotland—Sheep forest fly—Hessian fly and elbowed
wheat straw—Bean-seed beetles—Millepedes—American
blight—Brickdust-like deposit on apple trees—Insect cases
for the show at St. Albans—Specimens of forest fly
chloroformed—Death from fly poisoning—Looper
caterpillars—Diamond-back moth—Corn sawfly.
CHAPTER XVI
LETTERS TO MR. GRIMSHAW, MR. WISE, AND MR. TEGETMEIER 149
(_Grimshaw_) The Red-bearded botfly—Deer forest fly—Ox and
deer warble flies. (_Wise_) Case of caddis worms injuring
cress-beds—Enemies and means of prevention—Moles—Black
currant mites—Biggs’ prevention—Dr. Nalepa’s
views—Attack-resisting varieties of currants from
Budapest—Dr. Ritzema Bos’s views—Mite-proof
currants—Woburn report on gall mites—Narcissus fly—Lappet
moth caterpillars. (_Tegetmeier_) Scheme of Miss Ormerod’s
leaflet on the house sparrow plague—Earlier
authorities—Enormous success of the free distribution of
the leaflet—Miss Carrington’s opposition pamphlet—One
hundred letters in a day received—Unfounded nature of
opposition exposed, including Scripture reference to
sparrows—Fashionable support—1,500 letters classified and
100 filed for future use—“The House Sparrow” by W. B.
Tegetmeier, with Appendix by Eleanor A. Ormerod.
CHAPTER XVII
LETTERS TO MR. MARTIN, MR. GEORGE, MR. CONNOLD, AND MESSRS. 169
COLEMAN AND SONS: (_Martin_) Elm-bark beetle—Ash-bark
beetle—Large ash-bark beetle—Galleries—Preventive measure.
(_George_) Mason bee—Roman coin found near Sedbury—Samian
cup—The family grave. (_Connold_)—Pocket or bladder
plums—Professor Ward describes the fungus—Dr. Nalepa’s
publications. (_Coleman and Sons_) Attack of caterpillars
of the silver Y-moth—Origin of the name.
CHAPTER XVIII
LETTERS TO PROFESSOR RILEY AND DR. HOWARD: (_Riley_) Flour 179
moth caterpillars—Differences of mineral oils—Trapping the
winter moth—Orchard growers Experimental Committee.
(_Howard_) John Curtis, Author of “Farm Insects”—Advance
of Economic Entomology—C. P. Lounsbury, Cape Town—Sparrow
Leaflet—Shot-borer beetles—Fly weevil—Lesser
earwig—Handbook of Orchard Insects—General Index—Flour
Moths—Snail-slug—Flat-worm—Tick—Degree of LL.D. of
Edinburgh University.
CHAPTER XIX
LETTERS TO DR. J. FLETCHER: Dr. Voelcker’s gas lime 195
pamphlet—Honorary membership of Entomological Society of
Ontario—Ostrich fly—“Silver-top” in wheat—The
“Crowder”—Mill or flour moth—Shot-borers—Progress of
Agricultural Entomology—Paris-green as an insecticide—End
of Board of Agriculture work—“Manual of Injurious
Insects”—Fruit-growers’ associations—Lesson book for
village schools—Entomology lectures in Edinburgh—Stem
eel-worms—Miss Georgiana’s insect diagrams—Mr. A.
Crawford’s death in Adelaide—Diamond-back moth—Insects
survive freezing—Resigned post of Consulting Entomologist
of R.A.S.E.—Finger and toe—Baroness Burdett-Coutts—Gall
and club-roots—Currant scale—Mustard beetle—Professor
Riley.
CHAPTER XX
LETTERS TO DR. J. FLETCHER (_continued_) AND TO DR. BETHUNE: 217
(_Fletcher_) Foreign authorities in correspondence—Dr.
Nalepa’s books—Silk moths—Red spider—Formalin as a
disinfectant—Professor Riley’s resignation—“Agricultural
Zoology” by Dr. Ritzema Bos—Ground Beetles on
Strawberries—Timberman beetle—Proposal to endow
Agricultural lectureship in Oxford or Cambridge—Legacy of
£5,000 to Edinburgh University—Woburn Experimental Fruit
Grounds—Insects in a mild winter—Index of Annual
Reports—“Recent additions” by Dr. Fletcher—Proposed book
on “Forest Insects” conjointly with Dr. MacDougall.
(_Bethune_) Proffered help after a fire—Eye
trouble—Locusts in Alfalfa from Buenos Aires—Handbook of
Orchard Insects—Rare attacks on mangolds and
strawberries—Pressure of work—Death of Dr.
Lintner—Sympathy to Mr. Bethune.
CHAPTER XXI
LETTERS FROM DRS. RITZEMA BOS, SCHÖYEN, REUTER, AND NALEPA, 232
MR. LOUNSBURY AND MR. FULLER: (_Ritzema Bos_) Stem
eel-worms—Cockchafer—Root-knot eel-worm—Black lady-bird
feeding on Red spider—Eyed lady-bird—Professor Westwood on
larvæ of Staphylinidæ. (_Schöyen_) Explanation of
resignation of R.A.S.E. work—Wheat midge—Hessian
fly—Wasps—San José scale—Mr. Newstead’s opinion.
(_Reuter_) Hessian fly—Accept reports on Economic
Entomology—Norwegian dictionary received and successfully
used—Antler moth—Paris-green pamphlet—Swedish grammar—Work
on Cecidomyia by Reuter—Forest fly—“Silver-top” in wheat
probably due to thrips. (_Nalepa_) Gall mites.
(_Lounsbury_) Boot beetle—First report from
Capetown—Supplies electros for future reports—Mr. Fuller
goes to Natal—Pleased to receive visits from entomological
friends. (_Fuller_) Experiences in publishing technical
literature.
CHAPTER XXII
LETTERS TO MR. JANSON AND MR. MEDD: (_Janson_) Deer forest 259
flies—Identification confirmed by Professor Joseph
Mik—Flour or mill moth—Granary Weevils—Shot-borer
beetles—Pine beetles—Contemplated removal to
Brighton—Grouse fly from a lamb—Cheese and bacon fly—Case
of rust-red flour beetle—Willow beetles—White
ants—Bean-seed beetles—Sapwood beetle—Death of Professor
Mik. (_Medd_) Agricultural Education Committee joined
reluctantly on account of pressure of Entomological
work—Sympathy expressed with desire to improve “nature
teaching” in rural districts—One hundred copies of the
Manual and many leaflets presented—Proposed simple paper
on common fly attacks on live stock—Objection to the
Water-baby leaflet of the committee—Paper on wasps in the
“Rural Reader”—Retiral from the Agricultural Education
Committee.
CHAPTER XXIII
LETTERS TO PROFESSOR ROBERT WALLACE BEFORE 1900: “Indian 275
Agriculture”—Wheat screening and washing—Text books of
injurious insects—Grease-banding trees—Dr. Fream—Mosley’s
insect cases—Professor Westwood of Oxford—“Australian
Agriculture”—Text-book “Agricultural
Entomology”—Entomology in Cape Colony—Appointment as
University Examiner in Agricultural
Entomology—Presentation of Economic Entomology Exhibit to
Edinburgh University—Death of Miss Georgiana Ormerod—Pine
and Elm beetles—Index of the first series of Annual
Reports.
CHAPTER XXIV
LETTERS TO PROFESSOR WALLACE ON THE LL.D. OF THE UNIVERSITY 287
OF EDINBURGH: Proposal of the Senatus of Edinburgh
University to confer the LL.D. on Miss E. A. Ormerod as
the first woman honorary graduate—Great appreciation of
the prospective honour as giving a stamp of the highest
distinction to her life’s work—Detailed arrangements
preparing for graduation—Miss Ormerod’s books presented to
the University Library—Successful journey to
Edinburgh—Stay at Balmoral Hotel—Letter of thanks for
personal attention sent after the event—Howard’s views of
the honour to Economic Entomology, and of the value of the
Edinburgh LL.D.—Slight chill on the return journey.
CHAPTER XXV
LETTERS TO PROFESSOR WALLACE AFTER THE GRADUATION: 299
Congratulations by the London Farmers’ Club—Agricultural
education and how to help it—Painting in oil of Miss
Ormerod for the Edinburgh University—Copies of “Manual of
Injurious Insects” for free distribution—Book of sketches
for the University—Photographs by Elliott and Fry—Proposed
“Handbook of Forest Insects” in collaboration with Dr.
MacDougall—Proposed “Recollections of Changing
Times”—Pamphlet on “Flies Injurious to Stock”—Graduation
book—Proofs of “Stock Flies”—Thanks for “Quasi
Cursores”—Digest of an inaugural address on “Famine in
India”—Presentation of the oil painting—_Re_ Sulphate of
copper for Professor Jablonowski—Gall mite experiments on
black-currants—Appreciation of the company in which the
oil painting of Miss Ormerod hangs in the Court Room of
the University.
CHAPTER XXVI
LETTERS TO PROFESSOR WALLACE (_concluded_): Papers of 313
“Reminiscences” sent to the editor—Details of letterpress
material and of subjects for plates—Photo of oil painting
taken by Elliott and Fry—Proclamation of the
King—Publisher for “Reminiscences”—Return of papers to
Miss Ormerod—One of several visits to St. Albans—“Taking
in sail” by discontinuing the Annual Report—Illness
becoming alarming—Material for “Reminiscences” consigned
to the editor with power of discretion as to use—Continued
weakness—Proposed week-end visit shortened—Taking work
easier—First chapters of “Reminiscences” typewritten—Dr.
MacDougall as collaborateur—Serious relapse—Proposal of a
pension misappropriate—Improvement in health followed by
frequent relapses—Pleasure of looking up “Reminiscences”
in bed—Medical consultation with Dr. J. A. Ormerod—Liver
complications—Fifteenth relapse—Touching farewell letters
written in pencil—Obituary notices in the “Times” and the
“Canadian Entomologist.”
APPENDICES: A. _Salmon fishing_, from the “Log Book of a 327
Fisherman”—B. “Times” notice of partial retirement—C.
Insect cases and their contents presented to Edinburgh
University—D. Note on _Xyleborus dispar_—E. Obituary
notice of Professor Riley.
INDEX 337
FOOTNOTES 359
------------------------------------------------------------------------
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS IN THE TEXT
-------
PAGE
PUTCHER FOR CATCHING SALMON 36
TIME-TABLE: TRAVELLING 200 YEARS AGO 44
FACSIMILE OF MISS ORMEROD’S HAND-WRITING 89
SURFACE CATERPILLARS 101
WOOD LEOPARD MOTH 102
PUSS MOTH 103
ANTLER MOTH AND CATERPILLARS 105
OX WARBLE FLY, OR BOT FLY 110
PIECE OF SKIN WITH 402 WARBLE-HOLES 111
PIECE OF WARBLED HIDE 112
BREATHING TUBES OF WARBLE MAGGOT, AND OUTSIDE PRICKLES 112
MAGPIE MOTH 114
HORSE BOT FLY, OR HORSE BEE 117
FACSIMILE NOTE RELATING TO THE KING AND QUEEN 122
WATER BEETLE 124
CHEESE AND BACON FLY 125
GREAT TORTOISE-SHELL BUTTERFLY 129
CHARLOCK WEEVIL 130
HESSIAN FLY 131
HESSIAN FLY MAGGOT ON YOUNG WHEAT AND ON BARLEY 132
HESSIAN FLY ATTACK ON BARLEY 132
GOUT FLY, OR RIBBON-FOOTED CORN FLY 133
FOREST FLY 134
GREAT OX GADFLY 135
BREEZE FLIES 136
SADDLE FLY ATTACK ON BARLEY 137
FOOT OF FOREST FLY 139
DEER FOREST FLY 140, 141
SHEEP SPIDER FLY 141
BEET CARRION BEETLE 142
CENTIPEDES AND A MILLEPEDE 143
AMERICAN BLIGHT OR WOOLLY APHIS 144
OAK-LEAF ROLLER MOTH 145
LOOPER CATERPILLARS; WINTER MOTH AND MOTTLED UMBER MOTH 146
CORN SAWFLY 147
RED-BEARDED BOTFLY 150
WATER MOTH AND CADDIS WORMS 152
LAPPET MOTH 158
HOUSE SPARROW 160
TREE SPARROW 162
ELM-BARK BEETLE 170
TUNNELS OF ASH-BARK BEETLE 171
GREATER ASH-BARK BEETLE 172
PIECE OF ASH-BARK WITH BEETLE GALLERIES 173
POCKET OR BLADDER PLUM 176
SILVER Y-MOTH 178
MEDITERRANEAN FLOUR MOTH 180
ANGOUMOIS MOTH, OR FLY WEEVIL 188
LESSER EARWIG 189
SNAIL-SLUG 191
FLATWORM, LAND PLANARIAN 192
SHOT-BORER BEETLES 199
STEM-EELWORMS 209
DIAMOND-BACK MOTHS 211
TOMATO ROOT-KNOB EELWORM 213
CURRANT AND GOOSEBERRY SCALE 214
MUSTARD BEETLE 215
GOOSEBERRY AND IVY RED SPIDER 221
GROUND BEETLES 223
TIMBERMAN BEETLE 224
SOUTH AMERICAN MIGRATORY LOCUST 229
PIGMY MANGOLD BEETLE 230
SPINACH MOTH 231
COCKCHAFER 233
LADY-BIRDS 234
LONG-HORNED CENTIPEDES 235
EYED LADY-BIRD 237
WHEAT MIDGE 239
NEST OF TREE WASP 241
PEAR LEAF BLISTER MITE 249
CURRANT GALL MITE 251
BREAD, PASTE, OR BOOT BEETLE 253
BOOT INJURED BY PASTE BEETLE MAGGOT 254
GRANARY WEEVIL 262
GROUSE FLY 265
RUST-RED FLOUR BEETLE 266
MOTTLED WILLOW WEEVIL 267
GOAT MOTH 268
PEA AND BEAN WEEVILS 269
BEAN BEETLES 270
“SPLINT,” OR SAP-WOOD BEETLE 271
SHEEP’S NOSTRIL FLY 305
----------------------------
LIST OF FULL-PAGE PLATES
PLATE
ELEANOR ANNE ORMEROD, LL.D. _Frontispiece_
PAGE
I. SEDBURY PARK HOUSE AND GROUNDS 6
II. GEORGE ORMEROD, ESQ., D.C.L., LL.D., F.R.S., F.S.A. 8
III. FAMILY GROUP—GEORGE ORMEROD AS A CHILD, AND HIS 10
MOTHER, UNCLE, AND GRANDMOTHER
IV. JOHN LATHAM, ESQ., M.D., F.R.S., PHYSICIAN 12
V. RUINS OF TINTERN ABBEY, MONMOUTHSHIRE 16
VI. NORMAN WORK FROM CHEPSTOW PARISH CHURCH 18
VII. LEADEN FONT IN TIDENHAM CHURCH, GLOUCESTERSHIRE, 20
_AND_ CHURCH OF ST. MARY THE VIRGIN,
TIDENHAM
VIII. NORMAN CHAPEL, LLANCAUT, WYE CLIFFS 22
IX. MAP OF THE BANKS OF THE WYE 32
X. RUINED ANCHORITE’S CHAPEL OF ST. TECLA, _AND_ 34
SEVERN CLIFFS, SEDBURY PARK
XI. ROMAN POTTERY, FOUND IN SEDBURY PARK, _AND_ 40
SAURIAN FROM LIAS, SEDBURY CLIFFS
XII. ROYAL MAIL, OLD GENERAL POST OFFICE, LONDON 42
XIII. OLD CHEPSTOW BRIDGE, WITH POST-CHAISE CROSSING 45
IT
XIV. A WEST OF ENGLAND ROYAL MAIL, _en route_ 46
XV. MAP OF DISTRICT OF THE CHARTIST RISING IN 50
MONMOUTH
XVI. CHEPSTOW CASTLE, MONMOUTHSHIRE 52
XVII. CHEPSTOW WITH THE BRIDGE OVER THE WYE AND 54
CHEPSTOW CASTLE ON THE RIVER BANK
XVIII. ANTIQUE CARVED CHEST, AN HEIRLOOM 58
XIX. TORRINGTON HOUSE, ST. ALBANS, HERTS. 74
XX. MISS ORMEROD’S METEOROLOGICAL STATION 80
XXI. HEDGEHOG OAK, SEDBURY PARK, _AND_ AP ADAM OAK, 92
SEDBURY PARK
XXII. MISS ORMEROD’S MEDALS, RECEIVED 1870 TO 1900 98
XXIII. FOOT OF FOREST FLY—SIDE VIEW 138
XXIV. FOOT OF FOREST FLY—SEEN FROM ABOVE 138
XXV. RUINS OF CHEPSTOW CASTLE, MONMOUTHSHIRE 174
XXVI. RAILWAY BRIDGE OVER THE WYE, NEAR CHEPSTOW 208
XXVII. MISS GEORGIANA ELIZABETH ORMEROD 284
XXVIII. ORMEROD HOUSE, LANCASHIRE 300
XXIX. ELEANOR ANNE ORMEROD, LL.D., F.R.MET.SOC. 312
XXX. MISS ORMEROD’S FATHER, AT FIVE YEARS OLD, _AND_ 324
MISS ORMEROD IN CHILDHOOD
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAPTER I
BIRTH, CHILDHOOD AND EDUCATION
I was born at Sedbury Park, in West Gloucestershire, on a sunny Sunday
morning (the 11th of May, 1828), being the youngest of the ten children
of George and Sarah Ormerod, of Sedbury Park, Gloucestershire, and
Tyldesley, Lancashire. As a long time had elapsed since the birth of the
last of the other children (my two sisters and seven brothers), my
arrival could hardly have been a family comfort. Nursery arrangements,
which had been broken up, had to be re-established. I have been told
that I started on what was to be my long life journey, with a face pale
as a sheet, a quantity of black hair, and a constitution that refused
anything tendered excepting a concoction of a kind of rusk made only at
Monmouth. The very earliest event of which I have a clear remembrance
was being knocked down on the nursery stairs when I was three years old
by a cousin of my own age. The damage was small, but the indignity
great, and, moreover, the young man stole the lump of sugar which was
meant to console me, so the grievance made an impression. A year later a
real shock happened to my small mind. Whilst my sister, Georgiana, five
years my senior, was warming herself in the nursery, her frock caught
fire. She flew down the room, threw herself on the sheepskin rug at the
door, and rolled till the fire was put out. But she was so badly burnt
that the injuries required dressing, and this event also made a great
impression on me. Other reminiscences of pleasure and of pain come back,
in thinking over those long past days, but none of such special and
wonderful interest as that of being held up to see King William IV.
Little as I was, I had been taken to one of the theatres, and my father
carried me along one of the galleries, and raised me in his arms that I
might look through the glass window at the back of one of the boxes and
see His Majesty. I do not in the least believe that I saw the right man.
However, it is something to remember that about the year 1835, if I had
not been so frightened, I might have seen the King.
In regard to any special likings of my earliest years it seems to me,
from what I can remember or have been told, that there were signs even
then of the chief tastes which have accompanied me through life—an
intense love of flowers; a fondness for insect investigation; and a
fondness also for writing. In my babyhood, even before I could speak,
the sight of a bunch of flowers was the signal for both arms being held
out to beg for the coveted treasure, and the taste was utilised when I
was a little older, in checking a somewhat incomprehensible failure of
health during the spring visit of the family to London. Some one
suggested trying the effect of a supply of flower roots and seeds for me
to exercise my love of gardening on, and the experiment was successful.
I can remember my delight at the sight of the boxes of common garden
plants—pansies, daisies, and the like; and I suppose some feeling of the
restored comfort has remained through all these years to give a charm
(not peculiarly exciting in itself) to the smell of bast mats and other
appurtenances of the outside of Covent Garden market.
My first insect observation I remember perfectly. It was typical of many
others since. I was quite right, absolutely and demonstrably right, but
I was above my audience and fared accordingly. One day while the family
were engaged watching the letting out of a pond, or some similar matter,
I was perched on a chair, and given to watch, to keep me quiet at home,
a tumbler of water with about half a dozen great water grubs in it. One
of them had been much injured and his companions proceeded quite to
demolish him. I was exceedingly interested, and when the family came
home gave them the results of my observations, which were entirely
disbelieved. Arguing was not permitted, so I said nothing (as far as I
remember); but I had made my first step in Entomology.
Writing was a great pleasure. A treat was to go into the library and to
sit near, without disturbing, my father, and “write a letter” on a bit
of paper granted for epistolary purposes. The letter was presently
sealed with one of the great armorial seals which my father wore—as
gentlemen did then—in a bunch at what was called the “fob.” The whole
affair must have been of a very elementary sort, but it was no bad
application of the schoolroom lessons, for thus, quite at my own free
will, I was practising the spelling of easy words, and their combination
into little sentences, and also how to bring pen, ink, and paper into
connection without necessitating an inky deluge. In those days children
were not “amused” as is the fashion now. We neither went to parties, nor
were there children’s parties at home, but I fancy we were just as
happy. As soon as possible a certain amount of lessons, given by my
mother, formed the backbone of the day’s employment. In the higher
branches requisite for preparation for Public School work, my mother was
so successful as to have the pleasure of receiving a special message of
appreciation of her work sent to my father by Dr. Arnold, Head master of
Rugby. All my brothers were educated under Dr. Arnold, two as his
private pupils, and the five younger as Rugby schoolboys, and he spoke
with great appreciation of the sound foundation which had been laid by
my mother for the school work, especially as regarded religious
instruction. From the fact of my brothers being so much older than I,
the latter point is the only one which remains in my memory; but I have
a clear recollection of my mother’s mustering her family class on Sunday
afternoons, _i.e._, all whose age afforded her any excuse to lay hands
on them. Whether in the earlier foundation or more advanced work, my
mother’s own great store of solid information, and her gift for
imparting it, enabled her to keep us steadily progressing. Everything
was thoroughly learned, and once learned never permitted to be
forgotten. Nothing was attempted that could not be well understood, and
this was expected to be mastered. In playtime we were allowed great
liberty to follow our own pursuits, in which the elders of the family
generally participated, and as we grew older we made collections (in
which my sister Georgiana’s love of shells laid the foundation of what
was afterwards a collection of 3,000 species), and carried on
“experiments,” everlasting re-arrangement of our small libraries, and
amateur book-binding. All imaginable ways of using our hands kept us
very happily employed indoors. Out of doors there was great enjoyment in
the pursuits which a country property gives room for, and I think I was
a very happy child, although I fancy what is called a “very
old-fashioned” one, from not having companions of my own age.
On looking back over the years of my early childhood, the period when
instruction—commonly known as education—is imparted, it seems to me
that this followed the distinction between education and the mere
acquirement of knowledge (well brought out by one of the Coleridges),
and embraced the former much more fully than is the case at the
present day. There was no undue pressure on bodily or mental powers,
but the work was steady and constant. The instruction, except in
music, was given by my mother, who had, in an eminent degree, the gift
of teaching. Although at the present time home education is frequently
held up to contempt, still some recollections of my own home teaching
may be of interest. The subjects studied were those included in what
is called a “solid English education.” First in order was biblical
knowledge and moral precepts, practical as well as expository, which
seem to have glided into my head without my being aware how, excepting
in the case of the enormity of any deviation from truth. In each of
the six week-days’ work came a chapter of Scripture, read aloud, half
in English, and half in French, by my sister and me. The “lessons,”
_i.e._, recitation, inspection of exercises, &c., followed. The
subjects at first were few—but they were thoroughly explained.
Geography, for example, was taken at first in its broad bearings,
viz., countries, provinces, chief towns, mountains, rivers, and so on
(what comes back to my mind as corresponding to “large print”), and
gradually the “small print” was added, with as minute information as
was considered necessary. Use of the map was strictly enforced, and
repetition to impress it on the memory. I seem to hear my mother
inculcating briskness in giving names of county towns—“Northumberland?
Now then! quick as lightning, answer.” “Newcastle, Morpeth and
Alnwick, in Northumberland”; and to enforce attention a tap of my
mother’s thimble on the table, or possibly, if stupidity required
great rousing, with more gentle application on the top of my head. If
things were bad beyond endurance, the book was sent with a skim across
the room, which had an enlivening effect; but this rarely happened. My
mother gave the morning hours to the work (unless there was some
higher claim upon them, such as my father requiring her for some
purpose or other) but she always declared that she would have nothing
to do with the preparation of lessons in the afternoon. If all went
fairly well, as usual, the passage for next day’s lesson was carefully
read over at my mother’s side, and difficulties explained, and then I
was expected to learn it by myself. What we knew as “doing
lessons”—which now I believe passes under the more advanced name of
“preparation”—was left to my own care, and if this proved next morning
not to have been duly given I had reason to amend my ways. The
preparation hour was from four to five o’clock, but if the lessons had
not been learned by that time they were expected to be done somehow,
though I think my mother was very lenient if any tolerably presentable
reason were given for short measure. If the work were completed in
less than the allotted time, I was allowed to amuse myself by reading
poetry, of which I was excessively fond, from the great volume of
“Extracts” from which my lesson had been learned. This plan seems to
me to have had many advantages. For one thing, I carried the morning’s
explanations in my head till called upon, and for another, I think it
gave some degree of self-reliance, as well as a habit of useful, quiet
self-employment for a definite time. This was, in all reason, expected
to be carefully adhered to, and I can well remember when I had hurried
home from a summer’s walk how the muscles in my legs would twitch
whilst I endeavoured to learn a French verb.
One educational detail which, as far as my experience goes, appears to
have been much better conducted in my young days than at present, was
that reading aloud to the little people had not then come into vogue. I
have no recollection of being allowed to lie about on the carpet, heels
in the air, whilst some one read a book to me. There was also the
peculiarity to which, if I remember rightly, Sir Benjamin Brodie
attributes in his autobiography some of his success in life, viz., work
was almost continuous. There was never an interval of some weeks’
holidays. A holiday was granted on some great occasion, such as the
anniversary of my father and mother’s wedding-day and birthdays, and on
the birthdays of other members of the family, but (if occurring on
consecutive days) somewhat under protest; and half-holidays were not
uncommon in summer. These consisted of my being excused the afternoon
preparation of lessons, and as the pretext for asking was generally the
weather’s being “so very fine,” I conjecture it was thought that an
extra run in the fresh air was perhaps a healthy variety of occupation.
Any way, the learning lost must have been small, for excepting the
written part of the work the lessons were expected to appear next
morning in perfect form, however miscellaneously acquired. One way or
other there were occasional breaks by pleasant episodes such as picnics,
on fine summer days, to one of the many old ruined castles, or disused
little Monmouthshire churches, or Roman remains in the neighbourhood,
where my father worked up the material for some forthcoming
archæological essay and my mother executed some of her beautiful
sketches (plate VI.). The carriage-load of young ones enjoyed themselves
exceedingly, and prevented the work from becoming monotonous or
burdensome. And there were joyful days before and after going from home,
and now and then, when it was impossible for my mother to give her
morning up to the work, if she had not appointed one of the elder of the
young fry her deputy for the occasion. I remember, too, that I took my
book in play hours, when and where I wished; sometimes on a fine summer
afternoon the “where” might be sitting on a horizontal bough of a large
old Portugal laurel in the garden. And I fancy that the perch in the
fresh air, with the green light shimmering round me, was as good for my
bodily health (by no means robust) as my entertaining little book for my
progress in reading.
It was remarkable the small quantity of food which it was at one time
thought the right thing for ladies to take in public. I suppose from
early habit, my mother, who was active both in body and mind, used to
eat very little. At lunch she would divide a slice of meat with me.
Although now the death, in her confinement, of the Princess Charlotte,
“the people’s darling,” which plunged the nation in sorrow, is a thing
only of history, yet it is on record how she almost implored for more
food, the special desire being mutton chops. Though not in any way
connected with the Royal Family, my mother held in memory the unhappy
event from its consequences. Sir Richard Croft, whose medical attentions
had been so inefficient to the Princess, was shortly after called to
attend in a similar capacity on Mrs. Thackeray, wife of Dr. Thackeray,
then or after Provost of King’s College, Cambridge. For some reason or
other he left his patient for a while, and the story went that, finding
pistols in the room where he was resting, he shot himself. Miss
Cotton—Mrs. Thackeray’s sister—was a friend of my mother. Miss
Thackeray, the infant who was ushered into the world by the death of
both her mother and the doctor, survived, and in her young-lady days was
particularly fond of dancing; and I have the remembrance of my first
London ball being at her aunt’s house.
[Illustration:
PLATE I.
SEDBURY PARK HOUSE AND GROUNDS, DISTANT VIEW.
]
[Illustration:
MANSION HOUSE, SEDBURY PARK; MISS GEORGIANA ORMEROD ON THE LEFT, MISS
ELEANOR ORMEROD ON THE RIGHT.
(_pp. 14, 48._)
]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAPTER II
PARENTAGE
The situation of Sedbury (plate I.), rising to an elevation of about 170
feet between the Severn and the Wye, opposite Chepstow, was very
beautiful, and the vegetation rich and luxuriant. My father purchased
the house and policy grounds from Sir Henry Cosby about 1826, and it was
our home till his death in 1873. He retained Tyldesley, his other
property in Lancashire, with its coal mines, but we did not reside
there, as the climate was too cold for the health of my mother and for
the young family.
[The original purchase was called Barnesville, and earlier still
Kingston Park, and it consisted of a moderate-sized villa with the
immediately adjoining grounds. The property was added to by purchases
from the Duke of Beaufort, and it was renamed Sedbury Park after the
nearest village. To the house the new owner added a handsome colonnade
about 10 feet wide, and a spacious library. Sir Robert Smirke, the
architect of all the improvements, was the man who designed the British
Museum, the General Post Office, &c.[3] Barnes Cottage on the property,
at one time ‘Barons Cottage,’ was kept in habitable repair because it
secured to the estate the privilege of a seat in church.]
About sixteen miles from Sedbury Park are still to be seen the
interesting ruins of the Great Roman station of this part of the
country, Caerwent or the white tower, the Venta Silurum of Antonine’s
“Itinerary.”[4] Its trade and military importance were transferred to
Strigul, now known as Chepstow, after the Norman Conquest. Sedbury Park
is believed to have been an outlying post of this chief military centre,
and it was occupied by soldiers “guarding the beacon and the look-out
over the passages” of the Severn. Considerable finds of Roman pottery
(plate XI.) were discovered about 1860, while drains about 4 feet deep
were being cut near to the Severn cliffs. They consisted chiefly of
fragments of rough earthenware—cooking dishes and cinerary urns, &c.
There was also a small quantity of glazed, red Samian cups and one piece
of Durobrivian ware and great quantities of animals’ teeth and bones,
but no coins (p. 174). After the death of my father it was found that
much of the best ware had been stolen.
My father (plate II.) is well known for the high place he takes amongst
our English County historians, as the author of “The History of the
County Palatine, and City of Chester,” published in 1818. He came of the
old Lancashire family of Ormerod of Ormerod, a demesne in the township
of Cliviger, a wild and mountainous district, situated along the
boundaries of Lancashire and Yorkshire. The varied watershed
(transmitting the streams to the eastern and western seas); the beauties
of the rocks and waterfalls; the shaded glens, and the antique
farmhouses (where fairy superstition still lingered till the beginning
of the past century), have been written about by Whitaker in his
“History of Whalley.”[5] There, in the year 1810, in an elevated
position, amongst aged pine and elm trees, and surrounded by high garden
walls of dark stone, the mansion, (plate XXVIII.)—since greatly enlarged
by the family of the present proprietor—stood in a dingle at the side of
a mountain stream, which rushed behind it at a considerable depth.
Beyond the stream, the rise of the ground to the more elevated moors
includes a view of the summit of Pendle Hill, of exceedingly evil repute
for meetings of witches and warlocks, and congenerous unpleasantnesses,
in the olden time.
[Illustration:
PLATE II.
GEORGE ORMEROD, ESQ., D.C.L., LL.D., F.R.S., F.S.A.,
OF SEDBURY PARK, GLOUCESTERSHIRE, AND TYLDESLEY, LANCASHIRE,
FATHER OF MISS ORMEROD.
_From a painting after Jackson, date circa 1820._
(_pp: 11, 14._)
]
The family of Ormerod was settled in the locality from which they took
their name, as far back as the year 1311, the estates continuing in
their possession until, in 1793 (by the marriage of Charlotte Ann
Ormerod, sole daughter and heiress of Laurence Ormerod, the last of the
generation of the parent stem in direct male descent), they passed to
Colonel John Hargreaves; and by the marriage of his eldest daughter and
co-heiress, Eleanor Mary, with the Rev. William Thursby, they became
vested in the Thursby family,[6] represented until recently by Sir John
Hardy Thursby, Bart., of Ormerod House, Burnley, Lancashire, and
Holmhurst, Christchurch, Hants. Sir John showed thoughtful,
philanthropic feeling to his Lancashire district, by presenting the land
for a public park to Burnley, and, in connection with his family, he
also gave the site for the neighbouring “Victoria Hospital.” In 1887, he
served as High Sheriff of Lancashire, and was created Baronet. Dying on
March 16, 1901, he was succeeded by his eldest son, John Ormerod
Scarlett Thursby, of Bankhall, Burnley, who, in his surname and
baptismal names, keeps alive the connection with the old family stock
and the families with which the last two co-heiresses of Ormerod were
connected by marriage. With these matters of possessions, however, the
collateral branch of Ormerod, of Bury in Lancashire (from the special
founder of which my father was descended in direct male line), had
nothing to do. From Oliver Ormerod, who became permanently resident at
Bury shortly after the close of the seventeenth century, descended his
only son, George Ormerod of Bury, merchant. From him descended George
Ormerod (an only child), who died on October 7, 1785, a few days before
the birth of his only child—my father—yet another George Ormerod. In a
mere statement of the names of the representatives of successive
generations, of whom no specially distinguishing points appear to have
been recorded, there is, perhaps, little of general interest. But
possibly some amount of interest attaches to the proofs of
representatives of one family having lived quietly on from generation to
generation in one locality since the early part of the fourteenth
century. The connections and intermarrying of the Ormerods with many of
the Lancashire families of former days give the subject a county
interest to those who care to search out the genealogical, historical
and heraldic details given at great length in my father’s volume of
“Parentalia.” Here and there some member of the family appears to have
come before the world, as in the case of Oliver Ormerod, M.A., noted as
a profound scholar, theologian, and Puritan controversialist, and author
of two polemical works—one entitled “The Picture of a Puritan,”
published in 1605, and the other “The Picture of a Papist,” published in
1606. Oliver Ormerod was presented to the Rectory of Norton Fitzwarren,
Co. Somerset, by William Bourchier, third Earl of Bath, and afterwards
to the Rectory of Huntspill in the same county, where he died in the
year 1625.
Something, however, occurred in 1784 of much interest to our own branch
of the family, leading subsequently to great increase of property, and
likewise in some degree, connecting us with the Jacobite troubles of
1745. This was the marriage of my grandfather with Elizabeth, second
daughter of Thomas Johnson, of Tyldesley. Thomas Johnson (my great
grandfather) having married, secondly, Susannah, daughter and co-heiress
of Samuel Wareing, of Bury and Walmersley, got with her considerable
estates, inherited from the Wareings, the Cromptons of Hacking, and
Nuthalls of Golynrode. On the occasion of the march of Charles Stewart
to Manchester in 1745, “Tyldesley”—to use the form of appellation often
given from property in those days—suffered many hardships. As one of the
five treasurers who had undertaken to receive Lancashire subscriptions
in aid of the reigning monarch, King George the Second, and as an
influential local friend of the cause, he was one of those who suffered
the infliction of domiciliary military visitation, and also threat of
torture by burning his hands to induce him to give up government papers
and money in his possession. I have still in my house (1901) the large
hanging lamp of what is now called “Old Manchester” glass, which lighted
the dining-room when my great grandfather stood so steadily to his trust
that although the straw had been brought for the purpose of torture (or
to terrify him into submission) extremities were not proceeded to. He
was ultimately left a prisoner on parole, in his house, until released
in December, 1745, in consequence of the retreat of the rebel army. But
disagreeable as this state of things must have been at the best, it was
to some degree lightened by kindness (or at least absence of unnecessary
annoyance) on the part of the Jacobite officers, of whom stories
remained in the family to my own time. One especial point was their
kindness to my eldest great aunt,[7] then a little child, whom they used
to take on their knees to show her what she described as their “little
guns.” The drinking of the healths of the rival princes, which probably
often led to a less peaceful ending, was mentioned by my father in his
History of Cheshire, as a notable instance of consideration.
[Illustration:
PLATE III.
FAMILY GROUP—GEORGE ORMEROD AS A CHILD; HIS MOTHER SEATED BEHIND HIM;
HER BROTHER, THOMAS JOHNSON, ESQ., OF TYLDESLEY, LANCASHIRE,
STANDING; AND THEIR MOTHER SEATED ON THE RIGHT.
_Composition from miniature, circa 1780._
]
“On one occasion when the Scotch officers who caroused in their
prisoner’s house, had given their usual toast KING JAMES, and the host
on request had followed with his, and undauntedly proposed KING GEORGE,
some rose, and touched their swords; but a senior officer exclaimed, ‘He
has drunk our Prince, why should we not drink his? Here’s to the Elector
of Hanover.’”[8]
During the disturbed time, when any one bearing the appearance of a
messenger would assuredly have been seized with the papers which he
carried, the difficulty of transmitting information was met by the
employment at night of two greyhounds trained for the service. The
documents were fastened to the animals and thus carried safely to the
adherent’s house, from which as opportunity offered they could be passed
on. The greyhounds, having been well fed as a reward and encouragement
to future good behaviour, were started off on their return journey. In
the present day this plan of transmission would very soon be discovered,
but in those times the nature of the country, the nocturnal hours
chosen, and also the deeply-rooted superstitions of the district, all
helped to make the four-footed messengers very trusty carriers.
In 1755 Thomas Johnson served as Sheriff of Lancashire. He died in 1763,
leaving a widow (who survived him until 1798), one son, and three
daughters—the only survivors of a family of eleven children, of whom
seven died in infancy, three on the day of their birth. Of the four
children who reached maturity, Elizabeth, the second daughter (plate
III.) married my grandfather, George Ormerod of Bury, at the Collegiate
Church, Manchester, on the 18th of October, 1784. He died in 1785, a
fortnight before the birth of my father, who was the sole issue of this
marriage.
My father, George Ormerod (plate II.), heir to his grandfather, was born
October 20, 1785. He was co-heir of, and successor to the estates of his
maternal uncle in 1823, and sole heir to his surviving maternal aunt in
1839. He was D.C.L., LL.D., F.R.S., F.S.A., and a magistrate for the
counties of Cheshire, Gloucester, and Monmouth. On August 2, 1808, he
married my mother, Sarah, eldest daughter of John Latham, Bradwall Hall,
Cheshire, Fellow and sometime President of the Royal College of
Physicians, Harley Street, London.[9]
My grandfather in the female line, John Latham, M.D., F.R.S. (plate
IV.), the eldest son of the Rev. John Latham, came of an old family
stock, and was born in 1761 in the rectory house at Gawsworth, Cheshire.
He was educated first at Manchester Grammar School, and thence proceeded
(with the view of studying for orders) to Brasenose College, Oxford, but
the strong bent of his own wishes towards the medical profession induced
him to alter his plans, and he took his degree of M.D. on October 10,
1788. “His first professional years were passed at Manchester and
Oxford, where he was physician to the respective infirmaries. In 1788 he
removed to London, was admitted Fellow of the College of Physicians, and
elected successively physician to the Middlesex, the Magdalen, and St.
Bartholomew Hospitals. In 1795 he was appointed Physician Extraordinary
to the Prince of Wales, and reappointed to the same office on the
Prince’s accession to the throne as George IV. In 1813 Dr. Latham was
elected President of the College of Physicians; in 1816, founded the
Medical Benevolent Society; and in 1829 finally left London, retiring to
his estate at Bradwall Hall, where he died on April 20, 1843, in the
eighty-second year of his age.”
He indulged in the practical pleasures of country life, and maintained a
home farm, on which he kept a dairy of sixty cows. He was a man of great
force of character and of decisive action. On one occasion a man who had
been told that if he returned he would be summarily ejected, came back
to crave an audience. On being reminded of the fact he pleaded, “Oh!
doctor, you do not really mean it.” “Yes, I do,” was the prompt reply as
an order was given to the butler to turn the intruder out.
[Illustration:
PLATE IV.
JOHN LATHAM, ESQ., M.D., F.R.S., PHYSICIAN EXTRAORDINARY TO GEORGE
IV., MATERNAL GRANDFATHER OF MISS ORMEROD, IN HIS ROBES AS PRESIDENT
OF THE ROYAL COLLEGE OF PHYSICIANS, 1813 TO 1819.
]
Dr. Latham married, in 1784, Mary, eldest daughter and co-heiress of the
Rev. Peter Mayer, Vicar of Prestbury, Cheshire, by whom he had numerous
children, of whom three sons and two daughters lived to maturity. My
mother, his eldest daughter, survived him, as did also her brothers. Of
these the second son, Peter Mere Latham, M.D., of Grosvenor-street,
Westminster, one of Her Majesty’s Physicians Extraordinary, was long
well known as an eminent consulting physician regarding diseases of the
chest, until his own severe sufferings from asthma obliged him to retire
to Torquay, where he died on July 20, 1875.
From our being related to John Latham and his wife, Mary Mayer (although
in point of rank the difference was so enormous between the head from
whom we could trace and ourselves), it is permissible to allude to our
connection with the family of Arderne of Alvanley, and consequent
descent from King Edward the First and his wife, Eleanor of Castile.
This gave us our claim of “founder’s kin” in the election to the “Port
Fellowship” of Brasenose College, to which distinction in my time my
brother— Rev. John Arderne Ormerod—was elected. He was the last Port
Fellow on the above foundation. The record of each generation will be
found in the genealogical table of “Arderne” in my father’s
“Parentalia,” and also on reference to the pedigrees of the many
families of which members are named in the “History of Cheshire.”
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAPTER III
REMINISCENCES OF SEDBURY BY MISS DIANA LATHAM[10]
My cousin Eleanor Anne Ormerod was the youngest of a family of ten—seven
brothers and three sisters—all clever, energetic creatures, and gifted
with a strong sense of humour. A large family always creates a peculiar
atmosphere for itself; it also breaks up into detachments of elder and
younger growth, and the elder members are beginning to take places in
the world before the younger are out of the schoolroom. Eleanor’s eldest
brother was a Church dignitary while she was still a child, teased and
petted by her young medical student brothers, and the darling of her
elder sister Georgiana. The father and mother of this numerous flock
were both remarkable people. Mr. Ormerod, historian and antiquary,
always occupied with literary or topographical research, was an autocrat
in his own family and intolerant of any shortcomings or failings that
came under his notice. He could, however, on occasion, relax and tell
humorous stories to children. The family discipline was strict; the
younger members were expected to yield obedience to the elders, and it
was said that the spaniel Guy (he came from Warwick), who ranked as one
of the children, always obeyed the eldest of the family present. My aunt
had a large share of the milk of human kindness added to much practical
common sense and a touch of artistic genius in her composition; it was
from her that her daughters inherited their eye for colour and dexterity
of touch. Mr. Ormerod was a neat draughtsman of architectural subjects,
but my aunt had taste and skill and a delight in her own branch of
art—flower painting—that lasted all her life.
Sedbury Park (plate I.) was a beautiful home; the house, a handsome
family mansion with comfortable old-fashioned furniture, good and
interesting pictures, old china, and a splendid library, afforded also
ample space for its inmates to follow their various hobbies, and many
were the arts and crafts practised there at various times. The
carpenter’s bench, the lathe, wood-carving, electro-typing, modelling
and casting for models each had their turn, and in all this strenuous
play Eleanor had her full share. Society played a very secondary part in
life at Sedbury; calls were exchanged with county neighbours at due
intervals, and there was some intimacy with Copleston, Bishop of
Llandaff, the Bathursts of Lydney Park, and the Horts of Hardwicke. But
though Mr. Ormerod attended to his duties as magistrate, and went duly
to meetings of the bench at Chepstow, he was quite without sympathy for
field sports and the pursuits of his brother magistrates. He was
absorbed in his own studies, and something of a recluse by nature.
* * * * *
[Miss Ormerod has herself written of the elaborateness of the
arrangements and the great formality which were associated with the
regular county dinner party, the chief method of entertainment at
Sedbury sixty years ago. She referred to the anxieties experienced lest
the coach should not arrive in time with the indispensables including
fish—“the distance of Sedbury from London involving twenty-four hours or
more of transmission in weather favourable or otherwise.” Miss Ormerod
continues:—
“One very important matter in the far gone past times in the arrangement
of the dinner table, was the removal of the great cloth and of two
cloths laid, one at each side, just wide enough to occupy the uncovered
space before the guests, and long enough to reach from one end of the
table to the other. The removal required a deal of care and dexterity,
and I do not think it was practised at many other houses in our
neighbourhood. When the table was to be cleared for dessert of course
everything was removed, including the great tablecloth itself—one of the
handsomest of the family possessions, and of considerable length when
there were the usual number of about eighteen or twenty guests. The
operation was performed as follows:—The butler placed himself at the end
of each strip successively, and a few of the house servants or of those
who came with guests along each side. The butler drew the slips in turn
and the servants took care there should be no hitch in the passage of
the cloths, and so each was nicely gathered up.
“But the removal of the great tablecloth which was the next operation
was a more difficult matter. The great heavy central epergne of rosewood
had to be lifted a little way up by a strong man-servant or two, whilst
the tablecloth was slipped from beneath it and the cloth was started on
its travels down the table till it came into the hands of the butler,
who gathered it up. The beautifully polished table then appeared in full
lustre. The shining surface sparkled excellently and presently reflected
the bright silver and glass and the fruit and flowers with a brilliance
which to my thinking was much more beautiful than the arrangement of
later days.”]
* * * * *
The annual visit to London was a great delight to my aunt, who enjoyed
meetings with her own family and friends, and visits to exhibitions, &c.
Her husband had always occupation in the British Museum, and her
daughters took painting and other lessons. Mary, the eldest, was a pupil
of Copley Fielding; Georgiana (plate XXVII.), and Eleanor later, had
lessons from Hunt and learnt from him how to combine birds’ nests and
objects of still life with fruits and flowers into very lovely pictures.
Both were excellent artists with a slight difference in style:
Georgiana’s pictures had great harmony of colour and composition;
Eleanor’s had more _chic_. Hunt was a very touchy little man—almost a
dwarf—and if by any chance my aunt did not see him and bow as she drove
past he cherished resentment for days after. At Sedbury driving tours or
picnic excursions to the ruined castles and other objects of interest
(plates V., XVI., XXV.), in the neighbourhood were frequent, and the
sketches that resulted were often reproduced as zincographs. Now and
then a tour abroad was achieved, but such tours were few and far
between. The beautiful copy of Correggio’s “Marriage of St. Catherine”
which ultimately became Eleanor’s property, was acquired on a visit to
Paris and the Louvre.
This self-contained family life did not lead to the marriage of the
daughters, and three only of the seven sons married—one very late in
life. Mary, the Princess Royal of the family, was the centre of the
first group—herself and four brothers; Georgiana that of the second,
consisting of two brothers older than herself, one younger, and Eleanor.
Georgiana was a most lovable person; she always believed in her younger
sister’s capacity and in her projects, which were not approved of nor
taken seriously by some of her elders, and could not have been carried
out until after the break up of the home on the death of Mr. Ormerod.
Meantime, the naturalist element in Eleanor was free to lay up knowledge
for future use, and her country life gave leisure and opportunity for
observation of bird, plant, and insect life, to say nothing of reptiles.
Any snake killed on the estate was brought to Eleanor, and if it was
remarkable for size or beauty she took a cast of it to be afterwards
electrotyped, or had it buried in an ant-hill in order to set up its
skeleton when the ants had cleaned the bones. The casts, which resembled
bronze, were sometimes attached to slabs of green Devonshire marble, and
made handsome paper weights. Wasps were at one time a subject of special
study and interest to her brother Dr. Edward Ormerod, and she and
Georgiana once conveyed a wasp’s nest to him at Brighton. I believe he
did not allow the wasps to exceed a certain number, out of consideration
for the neighbouring fruiterers.
The premature deaths of Edward and William, physician and surgeon, were
heartfelt sorrows to the two sisters nearest in age. If Eleanor’s lot
had been cast in later days she might have become a lady doctor of
renown; she had many qualifications for the medical profession and a
liking for domestic surgery; she had strong nerves and inspired
confidence and used to say that she never went a journey without some
fellow-passenger going into a detailed account of all her ailments.
Besides strong nerves she had strong eye-sight and a delicate but firm
touch. Her brothers did not encourage anatomical studies, but she could
prepare sections of teeth and other objects for the microscope as
beautifully as any professional microscopist. Some of my cousins were
strong sighted and very short-sighted, and much inclined to be sceptical
as to my long-sighted vision.
My last visit to Sedbury was in the autumn of 1853 in company with my
step-sister Margaret Roberts, then just beginning to try her powers as
an authoress. Eleanor must then have been twenty-five or twenty-six, but
was considered to be quite young by her family, and in some respects was
really so. She no longer played such pranks as embarking in a tub to
navigate the horse pond, but her fine dark eyes would shine with
mischief, and she was the licensed jester to the family circle.
[Illustration:
PLATE V.
RUINS OF TINTERN ABBEY, MONMOUTHSHIRE.
_Frith photo._
]
The routine of life at Sedbury usually began, on the part of the younger
members of the family, with a walk after breakfast prefaced by a visit
to the poultry yard and greenhouses. Georgiana was chief hen-wife, and
kept an account of the eggs and chickens. The park, lying on high ground
between the Severn and the Wye, had beautiful points of view and fine
timber, and there were lovely views beyond its precincts. “Offa’s Dyke”
ran through a corner of the estate, and the discovery of some Roman
pottery in its neighbourhood had given my cousins much occupation in
sticking broken fragments together and re-building them into vases
(plate XI.). Our most beautiful walk, rather too long for the morning
strolls, was to the “double view,” a projecting promontory above the Wye
where the river curves and from whence a lovely view is visible both up
and down the stream. From the morning walk we always brought back
something from hedge or field for my aunt to draw as she lay on her sofa
with her drawing table across it. She was then in failing health, but
still able to draw, and she used to make studies of flowers in pencil on
grey paper, touching in the high light with Chinese white. Each drawing
when finished was shut up in a large book, and there kept until some
gathering of the family took place, when the drawings were produced and
a lottery ensued, each person choosing a drawing in turn according to
the number on the ticket they had drawn. I have a book of these
beautiful drawings (plate VI.) which I greatly prize. In her youthful
days she had painted in oils, and there were some fine copies of Dutch
flower pictures in the drawing-room made by her. In later life the care
of her large family left scant time for Art, but she cherished it in her
daughters, and it was again a resource in her advanced age. The great
sculptor Flaxman was a friend of her father and had encouraged her
youthful efforts in Art. She had amazing industry and had copied many of
his designs on wood as furniture decorations.
[Illustration:
PLATE VI.
PORTION OF NORMAN WORK FROM CHEPSTOW PARISH CHURCH.
_From a drawing by Mrs. Ormerod, 1844._
(_p. 6._)
]
Georgiana and Eleanor usually had some painting or other industry on
hand, or copying to do for their father. In the afternoon we often took
a drive and were taken to see Tintern or the Wynd Cliff or some other
point of interest. After dinner we sat in the library, a fine room with
a splendid collection of books shut up in wire bookcases. Each member of
the family had a key to the imprisoned books, but a visitor felt that to
get one extracted for personal use was rather a ceremony. The beautiful
illustrated books were brought out for the evening’s entertainment and
then safely housed again. On Sundays we walked or drove to Tidenham
Church, a “little grey church on a windy hill” (plate VII.). We took a
walk in the afternoon, and in the evening Mr. Ormerod read a sermon in
the library to us and the servants. Such was the routine of life that
autumn at Sedbury. At the time of our visit, the Gloucester Musical
Festival was going on, but there was no thought of going to hear it. In
later years Eleanor possessed a good piano and studied the theory of
music, but I think that was prompted by her general cleverness and
activity of intellect rather than by any special gift for music. She was
teaching herself Latin during our visit, and as time went on she
acquired other languages. She made beautiful models of fruits by a
process of her own invention. A collection of these was sent to an
International Exhibition at St. Petersburg and she acquired sufficient
knowledge of Russian to correspond with the department of the Exhibition
receiving them.
After the break-up of the Sedbury home, consequent on the death of Mr.
Ormerod, who survived his wife[11] for many years, Mary bought the lease
of a house in Exeter and settled there for the rest of her life; the two
younger sisters took a house for three years in Torquay, where we were
then living as well as their, and our, old and beloved uncle, Dr. Mere
Latham. Wishing to be nearer London, they removed to Isleworth and some
years later to Torrington House, St. Alban’s, where they spent the
remaining years of their lives.
DIANA LATHAM.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAPTER IV
CHURCH AND PARISH
Our Parish Church (plate VII.), that is to say, the Church of St. Mary
the Virgin, Tidenham, Gloucestershire, in which parish my father’s
Sedbury property was situated, was of considerable antiquarian interest,
as, although the hamlet of Churchend in which it stands is not mentioned
in the Saxon survey of 956, the original church was in existence in the
year 1071. The fabric of the church when I knew it was of later date,
and, as shown by the accompanying sketch, chiefly in the architecture of
the fourteenth century, excepting the south doorways of the nave and
chancel and the tall narrow trefoil-headed windows in the north aisle.
The chief point of archæological interest, however, lies in its
possession of a leaden font (plate VII.) in perfect repair, referable
from its style to the transition period of Saxon and Anglo-Norman
architecture, and considered not likely to be more recent in date than
the eleventh century. The subject derives additional interest from the
circumstance of the precise correspondence of this font in Tidenham
Church with the leaden font in the church of the adjoining small parish
of Llancaut, making it demonstrably certain that both the fonts were
cast from the same mould.[12] The decorations on the fonts are in _mezzo
relievo_. These consist of figures and foliage ranged alternately, in
twelve compartments, under ornamental, semi-circular arches resting on
pillars; the design—two arches containing figures alternating with two
arches containing foliage—being thrice repeated. The details will be
better understood from the accompanying plate than from verbal
description, but may be stated as representing respectively under each
of the two thrice-repeated arches a venerable figure seated on a throne,
the first of the two holding a sealed book, the second raising his hand
as in the act of benediction, after removal of the seal from a similar
book which is grasped in his hand. Each of these figures was considered
to represent the Second Person of the Trinity.[13] On this point I am
not qualified to offer an opinion, but whatever may be the case as to
ecclesiastical adaptation in the representation in the second of the two
figures, the first of the throned figures appears to coincide with the
description of the vision of the Deity, given in the “Revelation” of St.
John, chap. V. verse 1,[14] rather than with any representation of “The
Lamb” that “stood,” as it had been slain, and “came and took the book
out of the right hand of him that sat upon the throne” (verses 6 and 7
of the chapter quoted).
[Illustration:
PLATE VII.
LEADEN FONT IN TIDENHAM CHURCH.
]
[Illustration:
CHURCH OF ST. MARY THE VIRGIN, TIDENHAM, GLOUCESTERSHIRE.
THE VAULT ON S.E. SIDE OF THE CHURCH, ABOUT 15 FT. SQUARE,
IS THE GRAVE OF MISS ORMEROD’S FATHER AND MOTHER.
_From a sketch by Miss Georgiana E. Ormerod._
]
The illustration is taken from very careful “rubbings” of the Tidenham
Font. The Llancaut font has suffered considerable damage, and likewise
the loss of two of the original twelve compartments. These had
presumably been removed to make the font more suitable to the
exceedingly small size of the little Norman chapel (plate VIII.). This
church, which in my time was almost disused, measured only about 40 feet
in length by 12 in breadth, and possessed nothing of an architectural
character, excepting one small round-headed window at the east end, with
plain cylindrical side shafts without capitals, and a small cinquefoil
piscina. The situation, on one of the crooks of the Wye, and just above
the river, is romantic in the extreme. The ground rapidly slopes down to
it from above, clothed with woodland from the level of the top of the
precipitous cliffs which rise almost immediately beside it to a great
height above the river. Access on that side is thus only possible by
boat, or by a rough way, known as the Fisherman’s Path, along the front
of the cliffs. Nevertheless, because of the exceeding picturesqueness of
the spot, it was a favourite resort on the twelve Sundays in the year on
which (I believe under some legal necessity) service was there, in my
time, performed. The scene, on the only occasion I was ever present
(when our parish church was closed), might have furnished an excellent
subject for a painting, as the congregation (far too many for the little
church to hold), in their bright Sunday dress, emerged from the sloping
glades or woodland, to the open space close by the church. Comfort was a
matter of minor importance. Those who disposed themselves on the grass,
where they had full enjoyment of the fresh summer air, and heard,
through the open door, as much of the service as they chose to listen
to, doubtless enjoyed themselves, but within it was not so agreeable.
The squire’s family were of course installed in _the_ pew, and there we
were packed as tightly as could be managed, so that we all had to get up
and sit down together. We had a “strange clergyman,” reported to be of
vast learning; and my juvenile terror, along with my physical condition
from squeezing, has imprinted the morning’s performance on my
recollection as something truly wretched.
There being no resident population the chapel has since fallen into
ruin, and the font and bell have been removed to the mother parish of
Woolastone, the bell now doing duty at the day-school there. In 1890 Sir
William H. Marling, Bart. (patron of the living) carefully restored the
font and placed within it a brass plate bearing the following
inscription:—
“Perantiquum hunc fontem baptismalem e ruinis sacelli scī Jacobi
Lancaut in comū Gloucē servatum refecit Guls̄ Hes̄ Marling Bars̄
A.D, 1890.”
The venerable relic stands in the hall at Sedbury Park.
[Illustration:
PLATE VIII.
NORMAN CHAPEL, LLANCAUT, WYE CLIFFS.
]
The history of the “Church” in our parish of Tidenham, whether
interpreted as the body of believers or the building in which they
worshipped, might be well taken, during about the fifty middle years of
the past century, as an illustration of “changing times.” In the year
1826—or thereabouts—when my father purchased the property, Tidenham
Church was no exception to many other churches in rural districts. The
interior comes back to my remembrance as dark, dingy, and very decidedly
damp, as shown by the green mould on pillars and walls. One of the first
improvements was the placing of two good stoves in the church,—one
presented by my father, and the other (rather, I believe, against local
wishes) by the Parish. I well remember the presence of the stoves, as it
was considered by the churchwardens, or whoever arranged these matters,
that the time which was most decorous for stirring the fires was during
the singing as “it drowned the noise.” What our local choir consisted of
I do not remember, but I rather think it was simply vocal, and started
by a “pitchpipe.” But at least there was nothing ridiculous about it. We
did not, as in a church at no great distance, have the violinist and his
instrument carried in on a man’s shoulders because the unfortunate
musician was without legs!
The sittings for the congregation were (I suppose as a matter of course
in those days) all in closed pews with doors—the pews of a size, form,
and respectability of appearance, likewise of comfort and fittings,
according to the social position of their holders. It could not,
however, be said that the chief parishioners had the best places, for
our two large, roomy, square seats were mounted up, side by side, a few
steps above the others at the end of the north aisle, with a good wall
between us and the chancel, effectually preventing our seeing what was
going on in that direction. Within our special pew, which had curtains
more or less drawn, we sat round with our feet at proper times on good
high hassocks. When we knelt we all turned round and faced the sides of
the pew, and my juvenile sorrows were sometimes great towards the end of
the Litany. The fatigue from kneeling on the top of my unsteady perch
produced faintness, and I well remember my anxieties increasing with the
“odd” feeling till I mustered courage to announce to my eldest sister,
whom I held in considerable awe, that I did not feel very well; and
measures were taken accordingly. The pew was said to be just over where
the soldiers were buried who were killed during the Parliamentarian war
at the Battle of Buttington, a locality in the same parish; but on an
occasion of some repairs being made, the flooring was discovered to be
laid on, or close above the live rock, which rendered this view
inaccurate. The surface of the ground was immediately below the floor,
and as the family pew had on its east side one of the great east windows
of the church, and on the north side a smaller one, both with small
panes ill-leaded, and one with a very insufficiently fastened small
window, our Sunday devotions in winter were anything but comfortable.
I believe the rural congregation behaved with great propriety, though
certainly on one occasion it struck me that a reverence during the creed
at the name of Pontius Pilate on the part of the wife of my father’s
farm-bailiff, was somewhat out of place. But we were free from such
lapses in decency of arrangement as occurred elsewhere. The pigeons did
not roost in the tower, neither did a turkey sit on her eggs in the
pulpit, which, considering that the time of incubation for the turkey
hen is four weeks, must have interfered considerably with the due
performance of service. Neither were we, so far as I remember,
scandalised by attendance of dogs in church, whether avowedly
accompanying their masters or making a voyage of discovery as to where
their clerical owner might have vanished. And certainly we did not have
the disgraceful circumstance which occurred in another church with which
I was acquainted, of two ladies of good social position in the parish
walking up to the rails of the communion table to receive the sacrament,
followed by their great Newfoundland dog!
One practice—certainly objectionable, but perhaps not unusual in country
parishes where the church was also used as the week-day schoolroom—was
putting the bags holding the provisions which the children brought with
them for their dinners on the communion table. I do not think that this
was so very shocking, for no irreverence was intended. A table was a
table in those days, and not an “Altar,” and looking back on the matter
it does not appear clear where else the food could have been safely
placed. I fancy there was no regular vestry and, excepting the floor, or
the seats of the pews, there does not seem to me to have been any other
place of moderately safe deposit. However, by and by a room was hired as
a schoolroom, and the church was freed from the presence of the children
and their dinners. I well remember our going over in form to hold some
sort of an examination, which was wound up by my father (who was
certainly better fitted to examine witnesses from the magistrate’s bench
than to probe for what information our little uncivilised urchins
possessed) electrifying the audience by desiring to know whether his
examinee knew the use of a pocket-handkerchief. My mother was a more
efficient aid by paying the schooling of all our own cottagers’
children, and also in allaying strife. On one occasion, when a woman
wished to remove her children from the parish school because they were
better taught at a recently established Unitarian school, she
dexterously overcame the difficulty by stating she meddled with nobody’s
conscience, but if the children went to the parish school she paid, and
if they did not go _she didn’t_. We heard no more on the subject.
Some of our customs were very pretty. On Palm Sunday, that is the Sunday
before Easter Sunday, sometimes known in our part and the district as
“Flowering Sunday,” it was the custom to dress the graves with flowers.
Friends of the family came from a long distance. A son of our
head-gardener would come down from Scotland for the occasion, and the
wealth of yellow daffodils and white narcissus, which grew by the Wye,
close to the little church of Llancaut, helped greatly towards the
decoration. Two Crown Imperials were a greatly admired addition which,
season permitting, appeared to ornament one special grave. The
“flowering” was a touching and pleasing remembrance of the friends whose
bodies rested below, until in after years the custom gradually arose of
placing artificial flowers along with the fresh blossoms, and then
followed the much to be deprecated practice of putting little cases of
flowers of tinsel, or anything that was approved of, which might remain
on the grave. At Christmas time we had the real old-fashioned church
decorations of good large boughs of holly, with plenty of red berries,
mistletoe, laurel, and anything evergreen of a solid sort. The squire
(_i.e._, my father) contributed a cartload of evergreen branches, and as
a matter of course, they were applied largely to ornamenting our corner
pew with more regard to appearance than comfort.
The service was performed simply, as was customary in those days,
without any music excepting the singing of the hymns, but as nothing was
omitted, and there was, I believe, no curate, it must have been rather
fatiguing to the vicar, and it certainly was a terribly long business
especially for those not always in good health, if they stayed for the
Communion Service on the rare occasions on which it was administered.
The drive from the Park to the bottom of the hill on which the Church
stood, was upwards of two miles. Then came a wearying walk up the hill
until this became so steep that in the Churchyard there were successive
little arrangements of steps to help us up the ascent. Within, it seems
to me, that the clergyman neither excused himself, nor us, anything that
might have lightened the strain, bodily and mental, to the younger
attendants. The creed of St. Athanasius was duly gone through as well as
the Litany, and addresses, which nowadays are cut very short, came at
full length. When, after the return drive, we got safely home, I will
not say but that our spiritual state might have been better had our
bodily condition been less open to the unsettling influence of a desire
for a much-needed meal.
One pleasure of the high days was having the fine old hymns for Easter
or Christmas, which no bad singing can spoil, as a variety on Sternhold
and Hopkins, but I still bear in mind the absolute depression caused by
that doleful production, the hymn called “The Lamentation of a Sinner.”
To this day it seems to me that it would be better for such a
composition to be omitted from our service.
Although it appears to be the correct thing for those who have been
before the public in later life to have reminiscences (or for their
biographer to invent them), of their precocious piety, I cannot remember
that I was ever much given that way. I think that I was as a child kept
in steady paths of proper behaviour, and amongst the items taught was
certainly scrupulous observance of the fifth commandment in all its
branches. Any deviation from truth was another point, the wickedness of
which was most sedulously inculcated; and I should say that from my
earliest days I was thoroughly well grounded in as much simple and
necessary religious information as my small head could carry.
But I did not indulge in fine sentiments, felt or expressed, and I think
that my first absolute feeling on religious matters was roused when in
one of our spring visits to London, I went regularly on Sunday morning
with the family to attend the service at the Vere Street Chapel, where
Mr. Scobell was then vicar, and some clergyman of high standing
occasionally preached. One thing that was very charming to a girl who
had not heard anything of the kind before, was the hymn singing. The
splendid hymn “Thou art the way,” imprinted itself on my mind, as
likewise a part of a sermon by Mr. Scobell, on the basis of our trust in
God. He enumerated various of the high characteristics of the Deity; His
boundless power, His holiness and other characteristics of His majesty.
With the mention of each characteristic he put the question, “Does this
give you a claim for acceptance?” until he came to the climax, “His
love,” with the words “_but His love, that_ you may trust.” Perhaps if
the good man had known how these words would abide to old age as a
comfort to one who was then amongst the youngest of his congregation, it
would have given him pleasure.
The Archbishop of Dublin, the celebrated Dr. Whately, also preached at
this Chapel, and I heard him deliver his grand sermon on “the doubts
leading to the assured belief of St. Thomas.” I suppose this time was
what in some circles would have been called my “awakening,” but we in
our family neither thought nor spoke of these things; and any allusion
to such matters would have brought on me (possibly very rightly) an
awakening of another kind, which would have entirely disinclined me to
favour the family with any religious views, beyond what might be shown
in behaving with propriety and above all doing as I was bid to the best
of my ability.
Reverting to early recollections of ecclesiastical matters, or things in
which the clergy might have been expected, _ex-officio_, to interfere,
there certainly was room for improvement, but this was not peculiar to
the olden time. Some of the curious circumstances of which accounts
reached my young ears are better forgotten. One thing that I remember
was the very different position relating to sporting, and also to the
divergence in dress from the great precision now in vogue. A clergyman
of somewhat high position, being, I suppose, pressed for time on one
occasion, performed the funeral service in his “pink” visible beneath
his surplice. Another, subsequently a favourite with all his poorer
parishioners for his kindness, when a candidate for orders, was
encouraged by his father to the necessary mental labour by the promise
that if he passed his examination he should have a double-barrelled gun!
In a locality not far from the edge of Monmouthshire, I myself saw the
incumbent of one of the small livings with his coat off loading a manure
cart! He comes back to my memory as doing the work quietly and gravely,
and with no more appearance of derogation than if he had been budding
the roses in his garden; still the work must have taken a considerable
amount of time from the purposes of his ordination.
The “Oxford” or “Tractarian Movement” of 1833-45[15] made an enormous
commotion, and perhaps for a retired locality nowhere more than in our
own parish.
After the death of the old vicar, amongst a succession of clergy the
most noted was Dr. Armstrong (presented 1846).[16] With him came the
full tide of the Oxford Movement, and as he was a highly accomplished
man, eloquent in the pulpit, of charming society manner in the
drawing-room, and with his heart fixed on driving his own views of
reform and restoration forward, the holders of differing ecclesiastical
views in the parish were soon very thoroughly by the ears. My father as
“squire” and chief resident landowner had always tried (much to his own
discomfort at times) to uphold the cause of decency and order. But with
the new arrangements came all sorts of trouble from an excess of
ceremonial, and peace seemed to have vanished. The attempted setting up
of confession caused much trouble, and difference of lay and clerical
opinion in the restoration of the Church was a fertile cause of
ill-feeling. One special point was the right claimed by the vicar to
prevent any of the general congregation entering the church by the
chancel door. We had always gone in that way, and it was not convenient
to reach the family pew by going round two sides of the church, so my
father stuck to his legal rights, and the door was not visibly fastened.
But one unlucky day when we, the ladies of the family, arrived as usual
and tried to go in, to our consternation it appeared impossible to turn
the latch. It was a remarkably pretty handle—I suppose an imitation of
mediæval ironwork—but it required more than common woman’s strength to
make this unlucky invention act in admitting us to the church. However,
we were not to be kept out by this ingenious device. Muscularly I was
remarkably strong from working in wood and stone, and I was perfectly
happy to forward my father’s wishes, so thenceforward for many a week I
went to church with a round ruler in my pocket, and slipping this into
the hanging bit of ironwork, I easily raised the latch and gave my
mother and sisters entrance to church. I did not object to my part of
the ceremony in the least—rather liked it, in fact—but looking back from
graver age it seems to me that it would have been better if the vicar
had not driven the squire to defend the rights of the congregation by
such forcible measures. After a while the latch (or the vicar’s view on
the subject) was loosened, and we obtained entrance without, like the
violent, being obliged to take it by force.
The real troubles of the times were endless. It was even possible for a
sincerely religious man to absent himself from the reception of
communion on the ground that he was not able to participate with
Christian comfort and in a charitable frame of mind. Within the church
building itself the condition of things was not satisfactory. The
openings beneath the very “open” seats, whereby was secured free
circulation for dogs and draughts, were unpleasant in various ways.
The appointment of our skilled and accomplished vicar, Dr. Armstrong, to
the Bishopric of Grahamstown in South Africa, for which he was eminently
fitted, was hailed by many of us with heartfelt gratitude. In later
years, under the kindly care of the Rev. Percy Burd (successor in 1862
of the Rev. Alan Cowburn) who, without thinking it necessary to push
everything to extremities, attended with the utmost care to proprieties
of detail of worship in church, to social friendliness, and to care of
the poor, we passed along in paths of comfort and peace, for which some
of us were deeply grateful.
* * * * *
Amongst various parish or local matters, of which the bodily presence
has, to a great degree, passed away, and the remembrance that at one
time such things were has probably faded from most of the minds in which
they ever held a place, are turnpike gates, with their adjoining
toll-houses; also the parish stocks and the parish pound.
In parochial arrangements in my day two great improvements arose, one of
which has now long been a regular part of parish work, but was new at
least to us. This was a women’s clothing club. The other was the
commencement of the plan of lending books to those who otherwise would
rarely have seen them. It was introduced by my sister, Georgiana E.
Ormerod, when little more than a girl, quite at her own expense. It was
continued by her without any pecuniary assistance (unless may be
sometimes some small co-operation from myself) to the end of her long
life.
The clothing club was set on foot under some difficulties by the wife of
one of the clergy resident in our parish, for the goods procurable at
Chepstow, the nearest town, were by no means remarkable for their
quality, and Mrs. Morgan thought herself bound to do the best in her
power for her poor subscribers. So the matter was accommodated (not
without a good deal of grumbling from Chepstow shopkeepers about money
being taken out of their pockets) by part of the goods brought from
Bristol (where excellent material was to be had) for the women to choose
from, being sent previous to “club day” to Mr. Morgan’s large and
commodious house. In those days, so far as I know, the plan of sending
the women with tickets to the shops had not been adopted, and our
method, though exceedingly laborious to the lady manager of the club,
was good for the women, for it ensured that their choice was confined to
the very best materials, all of a useful kind, and at the lowest
possible prices.
When a growing up girl, perhaps about sixteen, my sister Georgiana
thought it would be a pleasure to the children of our own cottagers to
have some entertaining books, and she began by lending them from the
small store which had gradually come down from the elders of our
generation. She chose carefully what she thought would be of interest,
and very soon the elder children took to reading, or sometimes the
fathers would read aloud to their families. My sister always either read
the books herself or knew the nature of the contents before lending
them, and when done with they were brought back and exchanged. The
borrowing rapidly spread beyond our own cottagers till it included our
farmers and their friends at Gloucester and Bristol. The books were
almost invariably treated with all reasonable care, and scarcely ever
was one a-missing. Besides the entertainment, they acted as an antidote
to the attractions of the public-house. It was a great delight to my
sister when she had a request for a book, because Jack or Dick was home
from his ship or on a holiday, and they wanted a book that would keep
him from the “public.” I attribute much of my sister’s success to the
care with which, even after her book-lending had extended to far-distant
localities, she chose the books. On one occasion when she had made a
donation of books of her own choosing to the Lending Library, Bethnal
Green, London, she was greatly pleased to hear that the boys and girls
had passed the word round amongst the factories of the entertaining
books that had arrived. Those we found suited best (for I was in some
degree her assistant) were accounts of real incidents made into
narratives. Ballantyne’s earlier books with accounts of the fire
brigade, post office, lighthouse and the like were great favourites,
perhaps none the less for the conversations being at times a trifle
vulgar; but when a writer took up some special view, as of teetotalism,
high-churchism, or any other specialism, we dropped him. Stories of
olden times, such as the Plague in London, or the Great Fire; risings in
Henry the Eighth’s time; wars of the time of Charles the First and
Cromwell; forest troubles of the time of William Rufus, and the
like—told as stories, with the facts correct although the thread on
which they were strung was imaginary—were always favourites. We seldom
lent absolutely religious books unless they were asked for, and then we
took care that they should be of a solid and interesting sort; but
whether sacred or secular the number of books lent or given for lending
in the course of the year was very great.
My sister was a highly accomplished woman, a good linguist and
historian, and a careful scriptural student. As a scientific
entomologist and a Fellow of the Entomological Society of London, she
was a co-operator with me in my work. She devoted her artistic talent
for many years to the execution of excellent diagrams, serviceable for
agricultural purposes, of insects injurious to farm and orchard produce,
some of which she made over to the Royal Agricultural Society, but the
greater number she presented to friends interested in lessening the
amount of loss through insect injury, and to Agricultural Colleges. From
girlhood to old age she unceasingly carried on her chosen work of
distribution of useful healthy literature. She asked no aid, nor made
the considerable sums she expended, and the careful cordial thought she
gave to this work, matter of public notoriety, but in her last moments
it brought a smile to her face when I told her that I purposed to
continue her work.
* * * * *
My father when living near Chester had the first news on a Sunday
morning before church time, of the Duke of Wellington’s success, and
that the battle of Waterloo had been fought and won. After service he
mounted on a tombstone and announced the glorious news to the assembled
congregation. In my early days in Gloucestershire, a neighbour, Captain
Fenton, was at times thought to be tedious in his recurrence to the
charge of the Scots Greys in which he had served, but it was a grand
memory all the same.
In a much humbler sphere and at a different stage of the same great
struggle an interesting part was played by a very decent
woman—afterwards a servant in our family—at the burial of Sir John Moore
at Corunna. She was proud to remember that she was one of those who held
a lanthorn at the ceremony alluded to in Wolfe’s poem:—
“We buried him darkly at dead of night
* * * * * *
By the struggling moonbeams’ misty light
And the lanthorn dimly burning.”
[Illustration:
PLATE IX.
MAP OF THE BANKS OF THE WYE.
SEDBURY PARK PROPERTY, THE DARKLY SHADED AREA BETWEEN
SEVERN AND WYE.
(_pp. 33 and 38._)
]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAPTER V
SEVERN AND WYE
The locality round which most of the recollections of nearly half my
life centre is in the district of Gloucestershire, between the Severn
and the Wye (opposite Chepstow in Monmouthshire, plate IX.), almost at
the extremity of the peninsula, sometimes not inaptly called the “Forest
Peninsula,” as some of the “Hundreds” comprised in the more widely
extended area stretching on to the Forest of Dean near Newnham, are
technically called the “Forest Hundreds,” although what is commonly
thought of (at the present day) as the Forest of Dean, has long since
ceased to be connected, popularly speaking, with the lower extremity of
the peninsula. This is bounded on the two sides by the Severn and the
Wye respectively; and at intervals it presents to the Wye considerable
frontage of high cliffs of mountain limestone, and to the Severn red
marl, capped more or less with lias. It terminates at the junction of
the two rivers in a small area, which is an island at high water, but
accessibly connected with the mainland at low water. Here, that is on
the rocky ground at the point of confluence of the Wye with the Severn,
were still existing in my time (that is up to 1873) the few but massive
remains of the Hermitage and Chapels, popularly known collectively as
the Chapel of St. Tecla or Treacle Island (plate X.). The name as given
by William of Worcester in full form is “_Capella Sancti Teriaci
Anachoretæ_.” He describes the locality likewise as “The Rok Seynt
Tryacle,” but not having now the opportunity of consulting his
observations, I am not able to say whether the ancient chronicler gives
any reason for the building of this little but massive knot of
buildings, or for its overthrow, which must have been a somewhat
laborious task, and from the thickness and the solidly built nature of
the walls, one that required co-operation. In the short account given by
my father in “Strigulensia” from which I borrow some part of these
notes, he says, “It would be vain to attempt identification of the
Hermit whose name is associated with the ruins, and who does not appear
in the calendar of saints, but he occurs as follows in the “Valor
Ecclesiasticus” of Hen. VIII., vol. ii. p. 501,” “Capella Sancti Triaci
valet nihil, quâ stat in mare et nulla proficua inde proveniunt.”
Whether modern skilled archæologists may have thrown light on the early
history of the anchorite and his Severn and seaweed-girt chapel I do not
know, but few places could be found less attractive for the
archæeological picnic-excursions which have become fashionable of late
years. Even to my brothers and myself, accustomed as we were to Severn
mud, and to picking our way fairly safely over and amongst the coarse
brown slippery seaweed fronds (chiefly, if I remember rightly, the
_Fucus serratus_), the passage over such parts as were not then
submerged was an exceedingly muddy progress, needing a deal of care lest
we should take a sudden slide into one of the little rock basins
concealed by the “kelp” or other coarse brown seaweed. But once arrived,
it was very pleasant to sit in the sunshine and enjoy the glorious view
down the Estuary of the Severn, the fresh salt air blowing round us, or
otherwise employ ourselves to our fancy. From careful measurements we
found the length of the chapel to have been 31 feet 6 inches, the width
14 feet 6 inches, and the thickness of the walls, wherever sufficient
remained for observation, approximately 3 feet.[17] We had to be quick
in our operations and our return had to be kept in mind, or we should
have had to be fetched off in a boat, and under all circumstances it was
probably best for the sake of appearances that our walk home should be
as far as possible by the fields or under the cliffs where minutiæ as to
condition of boots, &c., were unimportant.
The characteristics of the scenery of each of the rivers are wholly
different. The Severn above Beachley and Aust (in former days the
land-points of the much-used “Old Passage”) spreads into a wide area of
water, perhaps about a mile wide at the narrowest, and at high tide
forming a noble lake-like expanse. The Wye, on the contrary, as shown in
the map (plate IX.), takes its sinuous and narrow course between
successive promontories, projecting alternately from the Gloucestershire
and Monmouthshire banks.
[Illustration:
RUINED ANCHORITE’S CHAPEL OF ST. TECLA, ON THE CHAPEL ROCK
WHERE SEVERN AND WYE MEET.
_From a sketch by Miss E.A. Ormerod._
(p. 33.)
]
[Illustration:
SEVERN CLIFFS, SEDBURY PARK.
(p. 40.)
]
Across some considerable portion of the river a quarter of a mile or so
above Beachley, on the Gloucestershire side, a rocky ledge of limestone
called “The Lyde” projects at low tide, causing a backwater of which the
steady roar can be heard at a long distance.[18] Cormorants on the rock,
and conger-eels below it, were regular inhabitants or visitors—the
former presumably attracted by the latter, which served to some degree
also as food to the fishermen, although pronounced to be
“slobbery-like.”
The muddy colour of the Severn was not in itself picturesque—at least I
have never heard the point mentioned with admiration; but to me, born as
I was by this noblest of our rivers, it seemed to convey a comfortable
idea of homeliness and strength. Sometimes, however, in the early
morning or in certain conditions of light, the deep rosy colouring was
almost as if the whole width of water had been changed to blood; then
the effect was very splendid, and as wonderful still as it must have
been in days long gone by to Queen Boadicea:—
“Still rolls thy crimson flood in glory on
As when of old its deep ensanguined dye
Told to the warrior Queen her falling throne,
Her people’s death, the foemen’s victory.”
But, independently of other considerations, a bend in the river was of
great local service. It formed a bay of about perhaps three-quarters of
a mile across, bounded to the west by our own and the Beachley cliffs,
and further protected, or endangered, on the southern side by a low
range of rocks running out into the river. With the rising tide the
import shipping to Gloucester, which in those days was extensive, put in
here to be searched by the Custom House officials. At that time
(excepting tugs) it was entirely composed of sailing vessels mostly
laden with corn, wine, and timber, and the mixed fleet moving about in
the bay with colours flying was a very lively sight. In due time they
passed on—the three-masters, ships, and barques, or the graceful
chasse-marées, taking the lead; brigs and schooners following, and
sloops and—if weather permitted—Severn trows bringing up the rear.
These, however, as they differed very little in formation from canal
barges, required tolerably fair or at least quiet weather to allow them
to proceed in safety. The procession of shipping came along almost
beneath our cliffs, the deep channel being on that side, and perhaps it
was as well that they were no nearer, or the nautical remarks might have
been more often audible to the young people than was desirable!
A special convenience to ourselves was a little creek under the cliffs,
called in those parts a “pill” (presumably from the Welsh pwll or pool),
which allowed of coals being run in a sloop across from Bristol and
carted up to the house by a shorter road than that from Chepstow.
* * * * *
[Illustration:
FIG. (A).—PUTCHER FOR CATCHING SALMON.
]
Salmon fishing was carried on partly by nets from fishing boats, partly
by rows of baskets known as “putts” or “putchers.” The boats during the
boat fishing lay above the edge of the water on the sloping and slippery
frontage of the shore. When the tide served for fishing, the men went
down from the village above the cliffs to their boats across the flat
and precipitously-edged grass, between the base of the low cliffs and
the sloping shore. Each man wriggled with might and main at his boat
till he loosened its adhesion to the tenacious mud and started it on its
slide with its bows foremost towards the water. Once off, of course the
pace accelerated; its owner, running behind, held on and clambered in as
best he could, and the two arrived safely and with a great jolt on the
water. The boats then formed in line, secured by being tied stern to
stern at about a boat’s length from each other, and presumably anchored
also, but this I do not remember. The net of each boat was lowered, and
nothing further occurred till a fish was captured; then the net was
lifted, the fish, shining in all the beauty of its silvery scales, taken
out, and the net lowered again. These were the best fish; those that
were caught in the putts were “drowned” fish, and unless the fishermen
were fairly on the alert to secure them before the falling tide had left
the baskets long uncovered, there was a very good chance of the eyes
being pecked out or the fish otherwise disfigured by birds.
The putcher or basket fishing was carried on by means of very open
extinguisher-shaped baskets each long enough to hold, it can hardly be
said accommodate, a good-sized salmon. The frame or stand on which these
baskets were fixed was formed of two rows of strong poles or upright
pieces of wood, running down the shore, across the narrow of the river,
for many yards, firmly fixed between high and low tide level, at such a
distance as would allow the baskets to reach from one side to the other.
Horizontal poles or pieces of wood connected the upright poles, and to
these horizontal supports the baskets were attached, so as to form rows
with the open ends of the extinguishers facing up stream and all ranged
one storey above the other. The fish were drifted into the basket trap,
and of course, though they might injure themselves in their struggles,
and to some degree their market value, they were powerless to effect
their escape and withdraw backward against the set of the tide.[19]
The much larger form of basket described by Mr. Buckland as “putts,” and
as being used for catching flat fish, was of a slightly different
make—formed only of two instead of three pieces; one large piece, so
wide at the opening that I, as a girl, had no difficulty in standing
within it, and a very much smaller piece, forming a kind of nose. This
little adjunct was, I believe, taken off and searched by the fishermen
for what it contained. To my sister Georgiana and myself it was a great
pleasure to go down to where the two great eel-putts stood on clean
shore at very low tide below the longest row of salmon-putchers, and
search for anything that was to be found. My sister was a good
conchologist. We searched for seaweed, &c., &c., and thereby got a deal
of pleasant amusement. The fishermen, who knew us well, made no
objection to our investigations, though, as one of the men remarked on
one occasion, “It was not everybody they liked to see near the putts.”
In our immediate neighbourhood the fishermen were quiet—at least I never
heard of their getting into very objectionable difficulties—but about
eight miles higher up the river, near Lydney, things in this respect
were by no means all that could be wished. On one occasion they captured
the Fishery Inspector himself—whose duty it was to ascertain that the
meshes were not below a certain measurement—and secured him in the nets.
Another time somebody (who, unluckily for him, bore some resemblance to
the obnoxious inspector) got nearly sloughed up in one of the great
marsh ditches, and would have been left to live or die as might
chance—probably the latter—but for the arrival of timely help. My father
being one of the acting magistrates of the district, we used to hear
from time to time of these and other “mauvaises plaisanteries” in the
neighbourhood of the Forest of Dean.
* * * * *
On reference to the portion of the Ordnance Map (plate IX.) it will be
seen that there is a broad band marked “mud,” of about a sixth of a mile
in width at the widest part and extending for about a mile and a half by
the side of the deep channel of the Severn, between it and the cliffs of
the Beachley and Sedbury Bay.
The most remarkable capture of which I have any recollection as taking
place in the waters, or rather in the mud of the Severn, was said to be
a “Bottle-nosed whale,” or Dolphin, _Delphinus tursio_, Fabr., but it
was so many decades of years ago, that I have no means now of turning to
any record for verification of the species. The capture itself excited a
deal of local interest. It was on a summer morning that one of my
brothers, enlivening his vacation studies, as was his custom, by
watching through his telescope anything of interest that might be going
on amongst the shipping or elsewhere, saw something like an enormous
fish struggling and “flopping” on the Beachley pier of the old Passage
Ferry. As a matter of course, we young folks set off after luncheon to
have our share of the sight, and found the creature had been captured
when lying helpless, or half dead, in the mud at the Aust side of the
Ferry, and had been towed across behind a boat. At this distance of time
I only remember the whale- or dolphin-like shape of the animal, its
great size, and that it was apparently of a greyish colour; but this
item might very likely be from its being coated with Severn mud. In
Bell’s “British Quadrupeds” the greatest length recorded of various
specimens found in England is 12 feet. The colour of the back is black,
with a purplish tinge, becoming dusky on the sides, and dirty white on
the belly. This species is considered rare in England and it is of some
interest, in referring to the locality of what may be called our own
capture, that “The first account which we have of its appearance on our
own shores is that of John Hunter,” and it was taken with its young one
“on the sea coast near Berkeley”; that is about two or three miles
higher up the left bank of the Severn than the Aust Cliffs. Another
specimen was found in the river Dart in Devonshire, and, it was stated,
“was killed with difficulty, the poor animal having suffered for four
hours the attacks of eight men armed with spears and two guns, and
assisted by dogs. When wounded it made a noise like the bellowing of a
bull.”[20] In the case of the Old Passage specimen the poor creature was
also most barbarously treated, chiefly by being attacked by the running
of hay forks, pitch forks, and the like, into its body, and I remember a
good deal of chopping with hatchets or axes, but it was quite quiet and,
it was to be hoped, was past feeling pain. Immense popular interest, of
course, was excited as to the precise nature of the unusual “take,” as
to whether it was a Leviathan, or possibly the kind of fish that
swallowed Jonah—but the affair ended by the creature being shipped off
to Bristol to be turned into a little money for the boatmen who secured
it, and no other cetacean was taken during the remainder of the years in
which Sedbury was my home.
* * * * *
The most observable of the seaweeds, which grew on the rocks or large
stones, more or less in the muddy salt water between tide levels at the
mouth of the Severn, were of the genus _Fucus_, which at one time was
much used in the making of kelp. The ornamental kinds always appeared to
me to be unaccountably absent. They were not to be expected to make this
place their habitat, but, still, their almost total absence in the
masses of drift matter left by the retiring tide struck me as curious.
In my most successful searches I do not remember ever being fortunate
enough to secure even a fragment of the lovely Oak-leaf, _Delesseria_,
with its bright, rosy-veined leaves from as much as 4 inches to 8 inches
in length placed along their cylindrical stem, or the Peacock seaweed,
_Padina pavonea_, with its concentric markings. Of Iceland Moss there
might be a battered morsel. The general composition of the driftage was
composed of little except what might be grown in the neighbourhood,
mixed with sugar cane or packing material thrown from the vessels. This,
however, seemed to me of some interest in connection with the set of the
currents. Here, however, I am out of my element, but as my brother Dr.
Ormerod employed me as a collector, I am not personally responsible.
The distinct varieties of soil, and also the geographical and the
geological surroundings of Sedbury, were unusually favourable to natural
history investigations, whether of fauna and flora of the present day,
or of fossil remains of saurians and shells. These were easily
accessible as they fell from the frontage of lias, or the narrow
horizontal strip in the cliffs (plate IX.) facing the Severn, well known
to the geologists as the “bone bed.” At the highest part the cliffs were
about 140 feet, calculating from medium tide level. There the face had
been quarried back for a supply of lias limestone, used in enlarging the
offices of the house, and in so doing had laid bare a fine bed of
so-called “Venus” shells. We used to find beautiful specimens of those
shells, irrespective of this extra fine deposit, and also of “patens,”
oysters of some kind, which we sought for unweariedly, hammer in hand.
The greatest matters of interest, however, were the saurian, or the fish
remains, of which we sometimes found a plentiful supply of specimens of
little value, and now and then some of considerable interest.
[Illustration:
PLATE XI.
ROMAN POTTERY, FOUND IN SEDBURY PARK.
_From a drawing by Miss E. A. Ormerod._
(_p. 18._)
]
[Illustration:
SAURIAN FROM THE LIAS, SEDBURY CLIFFS.
(_p. 41._)
]
The Sedbury cliffs lie nearly north of the Aust cliff, and contain the
Aust bone bed, from which the Severn, about a mile wide, or somewhat
more, there divides them. Geologically, in all important
characteristics, I believe the two cliffs correspond. Of this bone bed
it is noted by Sir Charles Lyell[21]: “In England the Lias is succeeded
by conformable strata of red and green marl or clay. There intervenes,
however, both in the neighbourhood of Exmouth, in Devonshire, and in the
cliffs of Westbury and Aust, in Gloucestershire, on the banks of the
Severn, a dark-coloured stratum, well known by the name of the ‘bone
bed.’ It abounds in the remains of saurians and fish, and was formerly
classed as the lowest bed of Lias; but Sir P. Egerton has shown that it
should be referred to as the Upper New Red Sandstone.” The reasons given
are not of interest to the general reader. From the fallen _débris_ of
this we collected vertebræ, single, or sometimes a few in connection,
also bones of the paddles, and any amount of teeth, also coprolites, the
excrementitious matter of the living owners of the bones. These were in
great quantity, but I never remember that they were other than irregular
lumps, and though some of us were much given to grinding and polishing
stones that afforded hope of an ornamental result, it never occurred to
us to exercise our talents on these lumps, which might have indicated in
their undigested contents some evidence of the diet of their consumers.
The only valuable or interesting specimen of Saurian remains (that is of
an animal in moderate degree of entirety) fell from the cliffs after I
had ceased to reside there. This was a slab of Lias about 3 feet long by
2 feet broad, and about 7 to 9 inches thick (plate XI.) The history of
its fall, as given to me in a letter from Dr. John Yeats, F.R.G.S., then
residing at Chepstow, dated September, 1882, was, that “From one of the
ledges, or from the top of a slip or subsidence, a fir tree was blown
down during the autumn of 1882.... The fossil was found beneath the
roots,” and “the fossil remains were laid bare by a conchoidal
fracture.” A few detached vertebræ were collected, but unfortunately no
part of the head was secured. Of this specimen Professor Richard Owen
was good enough to report to Dr. Yeats on the 24th of May, 1883, as
follows: “From the concavity of the articular surfaces of the vertebræ,
I infer it to be part of an ichthyosaurus, and the number and character
of the ribs agree with that deduction. If any part of the jaws or teeth
should be found near the locality it would decide the matter.”
This fossil is now in the possession of Sir William H. Marling, at
Sedbury.
The surface of the cliffs was of a very mixed nature, with ledges of
stone projecting slightly in places, and from the effect of weathering,
landslips, leading at times to inconvenience, were not infrequent. As we
knew the nature of the ground we were careful about going near the edge
of the top of the cliff, where a precipice or a crack showed danger, but
it happened more than once that a bullock or calf, attracted by food to
be found amongst the trees or bushes which in some places clothed the
slanting upper part, was tempted beyond safe footing, and toppled down
to the bottom to its own destruction. On one occasion, on returning from
a walk, my sister Georgiana and I, not having noticed a fall from the
cliffs, were cut off by one of these slips from any comfortable advance.
It was not a case of danger, but a choice between much wet and dirt from
Severn mud, or very considerable discomfort of another sort, as the slip
had brought down with it brambles, &c., &c., most unpleasant to brave
for the sake of dryness. We preferred the wet passage, feeling our way
with our feet through the muddy water from one good-sized stone to
another, and presently arrived safely above the high-tide level, but to
those who did not know that beneath the muddy surface there was a sound
footing if sought for, the little episode might have been unpleasant.
[Illustration:
PLATE XII.
ROYAL MAIL STARTING FROM OLD GENERAL POST OFFICE, LONDON.
_Original lent by Arthur Ackermann & Son, 191, Regent Street, W._
]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAPTER VI
TRAVELLING BY COACH, FERRY, AND RAILWAY
In my early days much of the passenger transit of South Wales and the
south-westerly part of England passed over the old Passage Ferry across
the Severn from Beachley to Aust, and consequently the coaches all
passed our park gates. It was said there were fourteen coaches a day. On
this I am unable to offer an opinion, but there were a great number, and
amongst them were two mails. The road to the head of the old Passage
Pier, from Chepstow, was about three and a half miles in length, and
very hilly (going up one ascent, long or short as the case might be, to
go down another), with the exception of two lengths of flat “galloping
ground.” These well deserved their name, and I can still remember the
swing of violent speed at which the high, piled-up vehicle tore past us,
causing children and accompanying dogs to allow it a very free passage.
The journey was not without risk of disaster, for on one occasion in
turning a sharp angle, on the incline of a steep shore-hill, without due
care, the coach lurched to the outward side of the curve and made a
distribution of its outside passengers on the greensward by our park
gates. It certainly would have been a great help in those days if the
wish (though not exactly as he expressed it) of the driver of one of the
more old-fashioned of the coaches could have been carried out, and “a
little akyduct” made to convey the road from the top of one hill to the
next, thus avoiding the dangerous descent.
The view from the tops of the coaches as they galloped along the flat
road at the summit of the Severn cliffs down to the Ferry pier was very
beautiful. On one side was the Severn, a mile wide at the narrowest,
with the red Aust cliffs opposite, the Sedbury cliffs above; and, in the
distance, about thirty miles away up the river, the hills, near or
beyond Gloucester, could be faintly seen. On the other side, about a
field or two from the road, was the lowest part of the Wye at its point
of juncture with the Severn, and the noble estuary itself opening out
from about four miles width till it was lost to view in the distance of
the Severn Sea.
[Illustration:
TIME-TABLE ILLUSTRATING THE METHOD OF TRAVELLING 200 YEARS AGO.
]
YORK Four Days
Stage-Coach.
Begins on Friday the 12th of April 1706.
ALL that are desirous to pass from London to York
or from York to London, or any other Place
on that Road; Let them Repair to the Black Swan in
Holbourn in London, and to the Black Swan in Coney
Street in York.
At both which Places, they may be received in a
Stage Coach every Monday, Wednesday and Friday,
which performs the whole Journey in Four Days, (if
God permits.) And sets forth at Five in the Morning.
And returns from York to Stamford in two days,
and from Stamford by Huntington to London in two
days more. And the like Stages on their return.
Allowing each Passenger 14lb weight, and all above 3d. a Pound.
{ Benjamin Kingman,
Performed By { Henry Harrison,
{ Walter Baynes.
Also this gives Notice that Newcastle Stage Coach sets
out from York, every Monday, and Friday, and
from Newcastle every Monday, and Friday.
Rec’d in ‘pt.’ 05.00.0 of Mr. Bodingfold for 5 places
for Monday the 3 of June 1706.
The Old Passage, though probably as well managed as was reasonably
possible, was, in many respects, a most inconvenient necessity. On one
occasion, while fourteen passengers were crossing in a sailing boat,
every living thing, except one dog, perished in mid-transit. It was on a
stormy Sunday in September, 1838, and the boat was heavily laden with
horses as well as the passengers. How the accident happened was never
known. One of my brothers had been watching the boat from our cliffs,
and on looking again, after a minute or so, she was gone. The
conjectural cause of the disaster was that one of the horses had become
unruly. The assignment of the disaster to a judgment for travelling on
Sunday, may be looked on as a state of feeling very desirable to be
removed by changing times, which have brought a larger charitableness
and greater common sense.
[Illustration:
PLATE XIII.
OLD CHEPSTOW BRIDGE, REBUILT IN 1816, WITH POST-CHAISE CROSSING IT.
_From an old picture signed W. Williams, 1783._
]
A novel custom was associated with the Old Passage. A man suspected of
possible infection of hydrophobia, was put into the salt water, and
towed about in the Severn at the stern of a boat. In the event of a man
having been bitten by a stray dog, this operation made his village
acquaintances much easier in their minds about him. They had also the
fun, and in any case the patient would not be the worse for a thorough
good washing!
The appliances of the ferry were a steam boat and various sailing boats,
including one known as the Mail-boat, as well as on the Beachley side,
an apparatus acting as a telegraph. This consisted of an arrangement of
board which, when at rest, resembled a wooden window shutter about a
couple of yards square, fastened to one of the buildings; and, by some
code of signals of an exceedingly simple sort, requisite directions were
conveyed across the river as to the boat service.
On our side there was one solidly built pier, serviceable for shipment
of passengers or goods at all states of the tide, and accessible for all
kinds of carriage use from the good road which terminated at the top in
front of a small kind of hotel; it likewise had the desirable security,
for the greater part of its length, of strong posts with chains between
them. On the Aust side there was a high- and also a low-water pier, not
far apart, a little way below the inn, and if the tide served for boats
to reach these all went fairly well after disembarking, but it was a
different matter at half-tide. The half-tide pier was a considerable
distance from the others—a quarter or half a mile away beneath the
cliffs, and mud and stones and the roughest imaginable affairs in the
guise of road had to be got through or over on the way to the inn. The
effect of this on the springs, paint, &c., of a good Long Acre-built
barouche, when by some unhappy necessity it had to be committed to such
a method of transit, may be easily imagined. The passage for a carriage
was, at the best, not well arranged. A muster of fishermen or boatmen
was made, and the carriage was turned on the pier and dragged more or
less rapidly on board, and there, I presume, secured from movement, but,
certainly, by no means from danger, for part of the freight might
consist of half a dozen or a dozen bullocks, which shifted to one side
or the other as the vessel lurched. On the whole the transit by the Old
Passage Ferry, so well known in former days, was one link in a chain of
necessities which left much room for changing times to improve.
* * * * *
The great change in the method of travelling may be said to have been
publicly inaugurated in the spring of 1830[22] by the opening of the
Canterbury and Whitstable line of railway.
In the same year the Bill for the Warrington railway was passed by both
Houses of Parliament, and permission was also granted to construct a
line from Leicester to Swannington, Robert Stephenson being appointed
chief engineer to both lines. But the great railway event of that year
was the opening, with an imposing ceremonial, on September 15th, of the
Liverpool and Manchester Railway. This left nothing to be desired in
showing high appreciation of the importance of advance in methods of
locomotion. Although a complete success, from the point of view of
capabilities of safe and also of rapid travelling, the day was one of
great trouble and anxiety. As the train neared Manchester the mob
crowded on the lines, and while to have gone forward at any moderate
pace would have been death to hundreds, on the other hand, the slow
movement allowed the populace to swarm on the carriages and display
their political aversion to “the Duke” (Wellington) by throwing
brickbats, and by other objectional irregularities. The riot was not so
much remembered as the accident which resulted in the death of
Huskisson. I can recollect the unsophisticated story of something being
seen going along the line at such a speed that it was hardly
discernible; and also that a horn was used for train signalling in place
of the steam whistle. Carelessness of life through ignorance of the
danger was everywhere conspicuous; discipline was much needed. My father
while waiting at a station took pleasure in walking along the line to
while away the time. Tying horse-carriages on open trucks was not an
unusual practice with carriage-people who could afford to pay for the
luxury. My father long travelled in his own carriage thus attached, and
stepped from the truck on which it stood to the next, but of course at
considerable danger to his person.
[Illustration:
PLATE XIV.
A WEST OF ENGLAND ROYAL MAIL _en route_.
_Original lent by Arthur Ackermann & Son, 191, Regent Street, W._
]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAPTER VII
CHARTIST RISING IN MONMOUTHSHIRE IN 1839
The remembrance of the Chartist[23] rising in Monmouthshire of November,
1839, must have long faded away, except from the minds of the few
survivors who were concerned in its suppression, and those of the
younger generation who remember it from the anxiety it caused throughout
the district. I came among the latter number. My father was an acting
magistrate, and at the time alterations were going on in his house at
Sedbury Park. I can well remember the surly, disobedient, and generally
insubordinate behaviour of the local workmen in the week preceding
Sunday, the 3rd of November. With the return of the workmen, in the
course of the following week, the face of affairs had however changed.
The rising had taken place, and had been thoroughly crushed. Receiving a
reverse, they were there and then seized with panic, and fled. Their
chief leaders—by name John Frost, Zephaniah Williams, and William Jones,
and others not so deeply implicated—were captured, and to us the result
was exceedingly satisfactory. The men when they returned were patterns
of obedience and as meek as mice. They did not in the least desire the
distinction of being known, in a magistrate’s house, to have taken part
in an outbreak which had totally failed. They had thought that by Monday
or Tuesday the house would be in their hands and our relative positions
reversed, and, indeed, it would have been hard to find a house more
indefensible against a disciplined mob than ours. Along two sides of the
house (plate I.), ran a broad colonnade of Bath stone, supported by
pillars so wide and so placed that in many cases men ascending by
ladders put against them, would have been greatly or entirely protected
from the discharge of fire-arms from the windows; and the broad flat
surface of the top of the colonnade, 10 feet in width, by about 120 feet
in length, would have made an admirable mustering ground for scores of
men, from which to carry on their unpleasant attacks in conjunction with
their allies below. This however we were spared.
The trial of Frost and the other leaders followed speedily by special
Commission at Monmouth. It began in the following December and ended in
January (1840), with a verdict of guilty of High Treason; and sentence
of death according to the treason penalties of the time was pronounced
by Lord Chief Justice Tindal as follows:—“That you, John Frost, and you,
Zephaniah Williams, and you, William Jones, be taken hence to the place
from which you came, and be thence drawn on a hurdle to the place of
execution, and that each of you be there hanged by the neck until you be
dead, and that afterwards the head of each of you shall be severed from
his body, and the body of each, divided into four quarters, shall be
disposed of as Her Majesty shall think fit, and may Almighty God have
mercy on your souls.” A recommendation to mercy, which was mercifully
attended to, was added on behalf of the five least guilty men. The
possibility of the horrors of the details of the treason penalties
(though much mitigated from those of former days on account of their
being carried out on the dead body of the offender) created
consternation through the district, and the remembrance has remained
with me to this day. However, the capital sentence on Frost and his two
special associates was commuted to transportation for life, an act of
grace coincident with those extended on the marriage of our late Queen
of glorious memory.
Only the above disjointed reminiscences of trouble have remained in my
mind through the sixty years which have since elapsed, but the rising
was so planned that, if it had succeeded, it would have proved a match
to light the smouldering Chartism of the Midlands and the North of
England, and even under the circumstances the case was described in the
Attorney-General’s address to the Jury at the commencement of the
Monmouth trial as follows:
“There has recently been in this County an armed insurrection, the law
has been set at defiance; there has been an attempt to take forcible
possession of the town of Newport, there has been a conflict between the
insurgents and the Queen’s troops; there has been bloodshed, and the
loss of many lives. The intelligence of these outrages has caused alarm
and dismay throughout the kingdom.”[24]
When divested of the repetitions and technicalities of the reports of
the sworn witnesses, and also of the addresses of the Lord Chief Justice
and legal authorities, the story of the rising possesses much interest
as an account in many of its details of what could not happen in the
present day. The mountainous nature of the insurgent locality, the
extraordinarily stormy weather which threw the undisciplined thousands
out in their calculations, and the short, but (for the time occupied)
bloody climax would have formed under such a pen as Sir Walter Scott’s,
a narrative of interest almost equal to some of those of the Covenanting
troubles.
The part of the County in which the disturbances took place—was what is
called the “hill district” of Monmouthshire (plate XV.), which has been
described as an area of triangular form, having for its apex to the
south, Risca, a town five miles W.N.W of Newport. The base of the
triangle was at a distance of from fifteen to twenty miles in a
northerly direction, with the great Beaufort and Nant-y-glo iron works
to the west, on the edge of Brecknockshire, and to the east Blaenavon on
the Usk in its hilly, or it might be said mountainous, neighbourhood.
The area of this hill district is varied with hill and dale, intersected
in parts by deep glens, and also by mountain streams, of no
inconsiderable force after heavy rains. Picturesquely considered the
country is of great beauty, but beneath the surface are rich supplies of
coal and iron. For some years before 1839, the mines had been much
worked, and the country, instead of being merely inhabited by a small
and scattered population, was at the time of the outbreak estimated to
contain above 40,000 inhabitants, often, as it was stated, displaying
“an extent of ignorance very much to be deplored” and consequently
easily led away by the agents of seditious societies and formed into
affiliated bodies ready for outbreak when called on.
[Illustration:
PLATE XV.
MAP SHOWING THE DISTRICT OF THE CHARTIST RISING IN MONMOUTH.
NEWPORT NEAR THE LOW RIGHT-HAND CORNER ABOVE THE BEND
OF THE RIVER USK.
]
The matured plan of the rising was arranged on the 1st of November at a
meeting at a place called Blackwood, where there was a Lodge or Society
of Chartists. At this meeting deputies attended, and orders were
formulated, that the men should assemble armed on the evening of the
3rd, the following Sunday. There were to be three principal divisions,
one under the command of Frost (then living at Blackwood), the other two
to be respectively formed of men from the up-country, and men more from
the east and north. These divisions were to meet at Risca at a
convenient distance from Newport, their destination, which they purposed
to reach about two in the morning. They hoped to find the inhabitants
asleep, and to carry out their plans at their own convenience; attack
the “intended-to-be-surprised” troops at Newport, break down the bridge
over the Usk, and stop the mail. The Newport mails in those days were
forwarded over the Old Passage of the Severn to Bristol, from which
place at a given time they were sent North. The non-arrival of the mails
at Birmingham was to have been a sign of success of the Monmouthshire
outbreak, and of a general rising in Lancashire, and other parts of the
kingdom. Affairs, however, turned out very differently to what they
expected. The night between the Sunday and Monday was the darkest and
most tempestuous that had been known for years, and consequently though
Frost arrived near Risca early in the night, the other divisions were
long behind time. Meanwhile Mr. Phillips, the Mayor of Newport,
afterwards Sir Thomas Phillips, a firm and intelligent man, well
informed of what was going on, had been quietly making preparations, in
view of the intelligence received during Sunday. He had given orders to
the Superintendent of Police to have a number of Special Constables
ready on that evening. A detachment was stationed at the Westgate Hotel,
where the Mayor and another magistrate also located themselves about 9
p.m., and remained watching throughout the night. When day dawned on
Monday, November 4th, intelligence was received that the insurgents were
approaching, and the Mayor sent a request to the barracks for military
assistance. There was only one company of soldiers (of Her Majesty’s
45th Regiment of foot) stationed at Newport at the time. Of these thirty
men, under command of Lieut. Basil Gray, were sent to the assistance of
the Mayor. They arrived at the Westgate Hotel about 8 a.m. The soldiers
were placed in a room on the ground floor of the hotel with three
windows (a bow window with three divisions) coming down within a few
inches of the ground, and it should be observed that they did _not_ load
their muskets until, after being fired upon, they were ordered to do so.
Shortly after the rioters were seen advancing, the numbers being
technically stated in the indictment for High Treason as “a great
multitude ... to the number of two thousand and more,” probably more
accurately computed at 5,000, armed with guns, pistols, pikes, swords,
daggers, clubs, bludgeons, and other weapons. Amongst the miscellaneous
“weapons of offence” were scythes fixed on poles, and an instrument (of
which a specimen was produced in court) called a “mandrel,” used for
working out coal in the mines, and somewhat resembling a pick-axe in
shape. A portion of the rioters formed in front of the hotel, and at
once began the attack by firing a volley of small arms at the windows of
the room where the soldiers were placed, of which the lower shutters
were closed. They gained entrance to a passage, or corridor,
communicating with it by a door. The word was immediately given to load
with ball cartridge, but whilst the lower window shutters remained
closed, the men could not reply. Therefore, with the certainty that they
would be fired on, the Mayor and Lieutenant Gray threw back the
shutters, and stood unmasked facing the insurgents, who immediately
discharged a volley of small arms, whereby the Mayor was wounded in the
groin, and seriously in one arm near the shoulder, and Sergeant Daily
was badly hit in the head. The order to fire was at once given, and
several of the insurgents were wounded, and fell. For the short time
that the conflict lasted the rioters in the house continued to try to
force the position by rushing up to the doorway; but when they
encountered their own dead and received the return fire of the soldiers
they faltered, and in less than ten minutes the affray was over. The
passage was cleared of all excepting the dead and wounded, and the vast
mob of rioters was dispersing with all speed. In the words of one
witness, they “ran to all quarters.” Another deposed that he met numbers
of them near Newport “running back in all directions,” and though here
and there some men remained, they were without arms, and from the
quantity of weapons of offence collected afterwards, it was demonstrable
that in many cases the men must have flung them away as they fled. But
though short, the affair had been bloody. The rioters lost seven men
killed besides a number of wounded, and the casualties to their
opponents were in some cases serious, although not fatal. Hundreds
hurried from the scene of their repulse with such speed that by ten
o’clock a.m. they were passing the Lodge Gate of Tredegar Park, about
two miles from Newport. Amongst this crowd was John Frost, ex-draper of
Newport and would-be conductor of the outbreak, a man who had proved
himself as deficient in courage as he had been inefficient in
leadership. He was endeavouring to conceal his identity by holding a
handkerchief to his face as if he were crying. But on being spoken to
and recognised, he left the road and going through an archway leading to
a coppice wood, was lost sight of. A warrant was granted in the
afternoon of the same day, and in the evening, on the door being forced
open of the house of a man named Partridge (about a quarter of a mile
from the Westgate Hotel in Newport), Frost was found and was immediately
taken into custody. On being searched, three pistols all loaded, a
powder flask, and some balls were found in his pocket.
[Illustration:
PLATE XVI.
CHEPSTOW CASTLE, MONMOUTHSHIRE.
(_p. 16._)
]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAPTER VIII
BEGINNING THE STUDY OF ENTOMOLOGY, COLLECTIONS OF ECONOMIC ENTOMOLOGICAL
SPECIMENS, AND FAMILY DISPERSAL.
So far as a date can be given to what has been the absorbing interest of
the work of my life, the 12th of March, 1852, would be about the
beginning of my real study of Entomology. I fancy I attended to it more
than I knew myself, for little things come back to memory connected with
specimens being brought to me to name or look at, one in particular
regarding a rare locust. The date was some time before coaches were
discontinued, and the usual gathering of people in those days had
collected at the door of the George Hotel in Chepstow to see the coach
change horses, when, to the astonishment of all, a fine rose-underwinged
locust appeared amongst them. Chepstow is on a steep hill, and the
“George” about half a mile from the bridge (plate XVII.). Down the hill
set off the locust, pursued by a party from the George, until it was
captured at the bridge, and our family doctor conveyed it alive and
uninjured to me. On my father sending it up to Oxford to Professor
Daubeney as a probable curiosity, he identified it as being the first of
the kind which had been taken so far west. If he gave us the name, I
have forgotten it. In March I began my studies by buying my first
entomological book, and I chose beetles for the subject, and Stephens’s
“Manual of British Beetles”[25] for my teacher. Those who know the book
will understand my difficulties. It has no illustrations, glossary, nor
convenient abstracts to help beginners, and, if such things existed in
those days, they were not accessible to me. But I made up my mind that I
was going to learn, and as _palpi_, _maxillæ_, and names of all the
smaller parts of the insects were wholly unknown to me, I struck out a
plan of my own. From time to time I got one of the very largest beetles
that I could find, something that I was quite sure of, and turned it
into my teacher. I carefully dissected it and matched the parts to the
details of the description given by Stephens. The process was very
tedious and required great care, but I got a sound foundation, and by
making a kind of synopsis of the chief points of classification I got a
start. To this day (1891) I have my old Stephens’s Manual with my own
pencil markings, that started me on my unaided course. Identification
was very difficult for a long time, but I “looked out” my beetles
laboriously till I thought I was sure of the name, and then, to make
quite certain, I took the subject the other way forward—worked back
systematically from the species till I found that there was no other
kind that it could be. Killing my specimens was another difficulty. I
had been told that if beetles were dropped into hot water death was
instantaneous. I was not aware that it should be boiling. So into the
kitchen I went with a water beetle, which in after years I found must
have been _Dytiscus marginalis_—a large water beetle which has great
powers of rapid swimming—got a tumbler of hot water, and dropped my
specimen in. But to my perfect horror, instead of being killed
instantaneously, it skimmed round and round on the water for perhaps a
minute as if in the greatest agony. This was my second lesson;
thenceforward I supplied myself with chloroform.
My first experience in the use of the microscope was gained by helping
my brother William to prepare botanical specimens for examination under
his microscope. I thus had useful practice early in life, 1849 (?), in
the management of a good instrument. I bought my own about 1864, after
my brother John’s death—one of Pillischer’s—a good working instrument
with excellent 1-inch and ¼-inch lenses on a nose-piece. I first studied
with it the hairs of different animals. I also worked preparations of
teeth, showing the fluid contents when in a fresh state.
* * * * *
[Illustration:
PLATE XVII.
CHEPSTOW WITH THE ROAD BRIDGE OVER THE WYE (OPENED IN 1816), CHEPSTOW
CASTLE ON THE RIVER-BANK, AND RISING GROUND BEHIND.
_Frith photo._
]
In the number of the “Gardeners’ Chronicle and Agricultural Gazette” for
August 1, 1868, the announcement was made that “Throughout the month of
August there will be open in the Palace of Industry, in the Champs
Élysées, Paris, an Exhibition which we conceive cannot fail to be of
great service in extending a knowledge of the destructive or beneficial
habits of various species of insects.... The Exhibition is organised by
the ‘Société d’Insectologie Agricole’ under the Presidency of Dr.
Boisduval, one of the Vice-Presidents of the Horticultural Society of
Paris, and under the auspices of the Minister of Agriculture, Commerce,
and Public Works. The object of this Society (and consequently of the
Exhibition itself) is twofold: firstly, to investigate the economy and
to extend the benefits resulting from insects serviceable to mankind;
and secondly, to study the habits of those species which affect our
gardens, orchards, farms or forests, in order to arrest their ravages or
destroy them individually.”
Details were given at some length of the classes of subjects to be
represented, in the hope that it might attract the attention of the
Council of our own Horticultural Society to the desirability of
arranging some similar exhibition, and, on the 22nd of August following,
the public were informed (again in the “Gardeners’ Chronicle,” p. 893)
that “the desideratum lately pointed out as falling within the province
of the Royal Horticultural Society to supply, viz., a Collection of
Insects (and their products), is now in a fair way to be made good.” A
short sketch was given of the plan on which it was proposed to deal with
the subject, in which the “insect friends” of the horticulturist were
the division to be placed first. Following these were to be “gardeners’
enemies,” and the plants on which they feed; next to these again,
“insects beneficial or injurious to man.” Negotiations on the part of
the Council of the Royal Horticultural Society with the Science and Art
Department resulted in the agreement that, if the Society would form the
Collection, the Department would house, care for, and display it. The
eminently qualified Fellows of the Society, Mr. Wilson Saunders, Mr.
Andrew Murray (pp. 75 and 87), and Mr. M. J. Berkeley, agreed to lend
their best assistance in the matter, and Mr. Murray, at the request of
the Council, undertook the most laborious part of the task—that of
receiving, arranging, and putting in order the various specimens that
might be sent from time to time. All collectors and observers who might
be willing to help were requested to communicate with Mr. Murray, and
without delay I availed myself of the opportunity, in pleasant
anticipation of the entomological co-operation giving a use to what had
been previously somewhat desultory observation.
I was singularly well situated for the collection of ordinary kinds of
injurious insects, and for the observation of their workings, as I then
resided on my father’s Gloucestershire property. The extent was not very
great, only about 800 acres, but the nature of both the land and the
cultivation afforded wonderful variety of material for commencing a
collection. The wood- and park-land included old timber trees in some
instances dating back to the time of the Edwards, and also plenty of
ordinary deciduous woodland and coppice. The fir plantations supplied
conifer-loving forest pests; the ordinary insects of crop and garden
were of course plentiful; the woodland and field pools added their
quota; and the diversity in exposure from the salt pasturage by the
Severn to the various growths up the face of the cliffs to about 140
feet probably had something to do also with the great variety of insect
life. I had willing helpers in the agricultural labourers—when they had
made up their minds whether they would assist or not. They had always
helped, for we were on very friendly terms, and some of them or their
children, like myself, had been born on the estate. But, though I did
not know it at the time, I heard afterwards that when I asked for such
special help they held a sort of informal meeting to consult whether it
should be granted. Happily they settled that I was to be helped because
the rural counsel stated I made use of what I got. The verdict was
satisfactory in practical results, but I had my own private opinion that
what were sometimes called “Miss Eleanor’s shillings” helped the cause
of collection. From the commencement of work until my father’s death,
when I ceased to have command of the large area of ground, I collected
and sent the results to the charge of Mr. Murray. Communication was
entirely carried on by letter.
[N.B.—Miss Ormerod’s work was gracefully acknowledged by the Royal
Horticultural Society awarding her the Floral Medal (plate XXII.).]
_Family Dispersal._
My father’s last days were happy and painless, and were passed in
comfort under the attendance of my sisters and myself, whom, in the
failing condition of his powers of exertion he preferred to all other
society. We deeply felt the happiness of ministering to his welfare, for
he would not hear of our leaving him for even twenty-four hours, and he
objected to visits from my brothers excepting occasionally for a short
time. They, not being used to the gentle ways necessary for an aged
invalid, worried him. His last illness, however, was short. On the
Monday preceding his decease he was able to come downstairs to his nine
o’clock breakfast as usual, and the Thursday following—the 9th of
October, 1873—he passed gently away, at the mature age of eighty-seven
years.
He was succeeded in the property by his eldest son, the Venerable
Thos. Johnson Ormerod, Archdeacon of Suffolk, and Rector of
Redenhall-cum-Harleston, Norfolk, who had held the post of Examining
Chaplain to two bishops of Norwich, Dr. Stanley and Dr. Hinds, and had
been requested to hold it once again by their successor, Dr. Pelham.
This however, he declined, not feeling disposed in his own advancing
age to continue in the laborious though honourable office. On my
father’s death, my brother resigned his living,[26] and moved with his
two unmarried daughters to Sedbury. From his standing as a clergyman
of high position, who had long mixed in literary society, and also as
a country gentleman, it had been hoped that he would make Sedbury a
literary and county centre, as it had been in my father’s time. But
his life was unexpectedly closed at the age of sixty-five by a sudden
illness. He died on 2nd December, 1874, and the property passed to his
eldest son, the Rev. G. T. B. Ormerod, then, or shortly before, curate
of Stroud.
* * * * *
[A short account of Miss Ormerod’s brothers other than the eldest above
referred to—all men of ability and diligent workers—will complete this
chapter of family history.
“Two entered the Church; the third brother, John, was the holder of the
Port Fellowship of Brasenose and bursar of that college; and the
youngest, Arthur, spent his life in parish work as Vicar of Halvergate,
in Norfolk.
“The fifth brother, William, and the sixth, Edward, became students at
St. Bartholomew’s Hospital, to which institution their uncle, Dr. Peter
Mere Latham and his father, Dr. John Latham, had been physicians.
William’s health failing, he left London, and after a few years’
practice at Oxford, where he was surgeon to the Radcliffe Infirmary, he
retired to Canterbury, and there died at a comparatively early age.
Edward distinguished himself as a physician and as a naturalist. He too
was debarred by bad health from practising in London, but in Brighton he
became physician to the Sussex County Hospital, and was for many years
the leading consultant of the town. He wrote several excellent papers on
medical subjects, and his monograph on “British Social Wasps” brought
him the fellowship of the Royal Society.
“The second brother, Wareing, and the fourth, Henry, started as
solicitors in Manchester. Wareing left Manchester for Devonshire, living
first at Chagford, on the borders of Dartmoor, and afterwards at
Teignmouth. Geology was his favourite study. He compiled the Index for
the publications of the Geological Society, of which he was a fellow,
and he made many contributions to its journal.
“Henry Mere Ormerod continued to practise as a solicitor in Manchester
till his death in 1898. He also managed his father’s Lancashire estates,
and to him the other members of his family turned for legal and for
practical advice. He was a churchwarden of the Collegiate Church, now
the Cathedral, trustee of various important charities, active in all
good movements, proud to be of Lancashire origin and a Manchester man.
He possessed extensive knowledge and most varied interests. His
collections of books, china, and prints were remarkable; and in such
subjects as archæology, genealogy, architecture, geology, and certain
branches of natural history he was an expert. It was he who presented to
the Bodleian Library, Oxford, in accordance with the wishes of his
father, the author’s copy of the ‘History of Cheshire.’”]
* * * * *
EXTRACT FROM ORMEROD’S “HISTORY OF CHESHIRE,” VOL. III. PAGE 450 (1ST
EDITION), RELATIVE TO THE ORIGINAL OF PL. XVIII.
“_P. 238, Nantwich Hospital._ The author has in his possession a
singularly curious oak chest which he purchased at Erdswick
Hall. It had been bought by the tenant at a sale at Hulgreve
Hall (an estate of the Astons, who participated in the division
of the religious spoil at the Reformation), and it was
traditionally said to have come from this hospital. It appears
to have been one of the chests used to keep vestments and
chalices, &c., in, and is about two feet broad, by five in
length, and two feet nine inches in height; at each end are two
compartments, and in front five, all of which except the central
one are sumptuously carved in imitation of rich Gothic windows
with canopies, crockets, finials, buttresses, and shrine work.
The centre represents the coronation of Henry VI., and the
_single_ rose occurs over the _fleur-de-lis_ in the ornaments.
The chest is figured in Plate 44 of ‘Specimens of Gothic
Architecture in England,’ by Augustus Pugin, 1822; and a
description is given at page 27.
“A chest, of a description precisely corresponding with it, was
recently offered for sale at Liverpool, with the Brereton
painted glass, and described as having been formerly the church
chest at Ashton-under-Lyne.”
[Illustration:
PLATE XVIII.
ANTIQUE CARVED CHEST, AN HEIRLOOM OF THE ORMEROD FAMILY.
]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAPTER IX
COMMENCEMENT AND PROGRESS OF ANNUAL REPORTS OF OBSERVATIONS OF INJURIOUS
INSECTS
In the spring of 1877 I issued a short pamphlet of seven pages, entitled
“Notes for Observations of Injurious Insects,”[27] in which I suggested
how much a series of observations in relation to insect ravages on food
crops was to be desired; this not merely for scientific purposes, but
with a view to finding means of lessening the amount of yearly loss
which tells so heavily on individual growers, and also on the country at
large. I pointed out shortly that many insect attacks could be remedied,
if attention were directed to the subject; and also that many would
probably be found, if reliable information could be procured, to be
coincident with multiplication or diminution of insect life. On the way
in which this increase and decrease were affected by surroundings, such
as plants, &c., suitable for food or shelter; by agricultural
conditions, such as drainage, nature of the soil and of manures; and
also by the state of the weather—I gave some guiding notes, and
requested information from agriculturists and entomologists, who were
both practically and scientifically qualified to aid in the matter. I
also added some short remarks as to the nature of the entomological
observations desired; as of date, and amount of appearance of larvæ
(grubs); amount of injury caused; and any other points of use and
interest that might occur to the observer. And further (as some sort of
assistance in the commencement of the plan of campaign) I gave a list of
about eighteen of our commonest crop, fruit, and forest insects, with
short descriptions in the very plainest words I could use, in most cases
accompanied by illustrations.
As my name was then little before the public, although I had worked on
entomology for a good many years, I requested permission of two of my
scientific friends, the Rev. T. A. Preston, one of the masters of
Marlborough College, and much interested in phenology (_i.e._,
observation of natural phenomena); and Mr. E. A. Fitch, Secretary of the
Entomological Society, to allow me to add their names as referees. To
this they kindly consented, but with the stipulation from Mr. Preston
that he did not wish to co-operate further. I believe I may say with
regard to Mr. Fitch such a very small amount of communication took place
that it would not have been worth while to mention the matter, excepting
_pro forma_, on account of the names being recorded. These were soon
removed from succeeding reports as unnecessary. The pamphlet was widely
circulated and the request for observations was responded to far more
cordially than could have been expected. Notes regarding insect
appearances, together with observations of their habits, and of
practicable methods of prevention, were forwarded by observers—who were
qualified both as technically scientific and practical workers—from
localities scattered over the country as far north as Aberdeenshire in
Scotland and south to Hants and Devonshire in England. In fact the
communications were quite sufficient to show that the plan was approved
of from an agricultural point of view, and might be continued hopefully.
In after years I was told that it was very well received by the press. I
have been greatly indebted since both to the agricultural and general
press, but at the time it did not seem to me to be peculiarly warmly
welcomed, nor I think was it likely to be, until it had more to say for
itself. The pamphlet was not of many pages; the knowledge of the great
mischief caused by insect pests, and the need of prevention of their
ravages, was not spread abroad as at the present day, and I was not able
at first to utilise to the best advantage the information sent as I had
no working reports of my own to help me as to examples of the best
methods of arrangement.[28]
From the first I had excellent contributions. Various members of our
Entomological Societies were good enough to send me notes on insects to
which they devoted special study, and so also were members of the
Meteorological Society, regarding points of natural history, bird life,
weather, &c., connected with entomological considerations, and regarding
which they were special observers. Agriculturally I had good help also
from other quarters, and amongst many who assisted me, I will take leave
to especially give the name of the late Mr. Malcolm Dunn, the Duke of
Buccleuch’s superintendent at the Palace Gardens, Dalkeith, N.B. We
never met, but whenever I applied to him he was unfailing in prompt and
serviceable reply. As a commencement, the introductions with which he
favoured me to the leading foresters and horticulturists of North
Britain, were of such invaluable aid that I should be ungrateful not to
mention his name as of one to whom I owe a deep debt of gratitude.
In the report for the year 1881 I altered the plan of arrangement to one
which so far as I can judge met all that was needed for practical as
well as scientific service so conveniently that I have since adhered to
it. The information was classed under headings of (_a_) farm crops,
(_b_) orchard and bush fruits, and (_c_) forest trees, regarding which
observations of insect attack were forwarded. These headings were
arranged alphabetically, for instance: Apple, Bean, Corn and Grass, Hop,
Oak, Peas, Pine, Turnip, &c., &c. Any information as to live stock or
animal insect pests was similarly placed (that is, alphabetically)
amongst the other attacks, under the headings of Deer, Grouse, Horses,
&c., &c., as the case might be; but beyond what was absolutely
necessary, as in the case of Ox warble, I endeavoured to avoid entering
on stock infestations as leading to investigations very unpleasant to
myself either to make or to discuss, and very much better left in the
hands of veterinary surgeons. Following each heading, the observations
were placed which had been contributed during the season, and which
appeared to be of sufficient interest to be recorded, regarding the
special crop, or fruit, &c., referred to, these being given with
locality and date, as far as possible in the contributor’s words, and
over his own name, unless by request, or for some special reason. This
plan of giving the very fullest recognition possible of the source of
the information, I, for three very special reasons, most strongly
recommend to the consideration of all my readers not fully accustomed to
practical reporting:
1. That thus the information may very often carry conviction with it by
the name of some well-known agriculturist or cattle-breeder being
appended.
2. That to do otherwise is a robbery of the credit of the contributor,
and a false appropriation of it by the reporter, wholly unbecoming an
honest worker.
3. That the full recognition is a great protection to the reporter or
compiler of the reports from plagiarism of his own work. There are
people who think nothing of appropriating the credit of true workers,
and who absorb also rewards in the shape of salaries and official
position based on their own questionable conduct.
In the year 1881 it seemed desirable to change the running heading at
the top of the pages. The name of the crop, fruit, or other subject to
which the paper referred was henceforward placed at the top of the
left-hand page, and the name of each successive attack to it at the top
of the right-hand page; as, for instance, Cabbage at the left side, and
the different kinds of infestations recorded during the year which might
occur to Cabbage, as Cabbage butterfly (large white), Cabbage-root fly,
Cabbage moth, on the right-hand heading. At the beginning of each paper,
the name of the crop, or fruit, was given in large capitals, and beneath
and at the heading of each successive paper, the name of the injurious
insect to be referred to, also in English, with the scientific name, and
authority for the same following. The observations of contributors were
inserted unbroken, so that the methods of prevention and remedy noted as
successful by each observer were thus recorded in connection with the
accompanying peculiarities of cultivation, soil, manure, weather, &c.
The whole life history of the insect, so far as known or accessible, was
given, and sometimes, as in great attacks or in special circumstances, a
“summary” of the preceding recorded information; this being, wherever
possible, followed by some paragraphs or pages of “Methods of Prevention
and Remedy.”
In matters of phraseology, selection of the very plainest and shortest
words that I could choose was part of my plan, and after the first few
years I exchanged the short table of contents for a plain working index.
Illustration always appeared to me a very important part of the work, so
that readers might start with the knowledge of the appearance of the
insects under consideration, gained by a glance at the accompanying
figure, without having the trouble of trying to form a kind of “mind
picture” from the descriptions given, often very unlike the true
object.[29] At first—in the small beginning—the numbers needed were also
small, and I think the little stock of figure blocks with which I
started, and for which I was indebted to the kind courtesy of a friend,
amounted to _one dozen!_ This matter, however, I set right as soon as
possible by the purchase from Messrs. Blackie & Sons, of Glasgow, of
electros of most of the beautiful wood engravings given in Curtis’s
“Farm Insects,” under an agreement that the accommodation was granted on
condition of my using the figures only in my own publications. Some of
the illustrations I drew myself on the blocks, and as time went on, and
infestations, little or not at all entered on before, required
illustration, I engaged the valuable assistance of two brothers,[30]
which was continued thenceforward throughout the work. It appears to me
that it is hardly possible to exceed the beauty of their work, whether
in characteristic representation or in precise and accurate details. I
have had great pleasure in the entomological approval which has been
bestowed upon it. Illustrations from other sources have of course been
used, always, so far as I am aware, most carefully acknowledged; and so
far as has been in my power, I have endeavoured that the illustration of
each infestation should show the insect (where it was possible to do so)
in each of its successive stages of life, as of the caterpillar or
maggot (scientifically the _larva_); the chrysalis (_pupa_); and the
perfect insect, butterfly, beetle, sawfly, &c., as the case might be.
This matter is of great importance agriculturally, for how else (it may
be asked) in common circumstances, excepting by a good, plain
illustration, is a farmer or fruit-grower to know what the connection is
between the grubs and maggots which he finds underground or on his trees
and the moths or beetles which he may notice in his fields or orchards.
To give a single instance, how seldom the grey, cylindrical, legless
grubs of the Daddy Longlegs are known to have anything to do with the
large, gnat-like, two-winged flies which are to be seen floating over
our grass-fields in legions where the larvæ have been destroying
underground. And so the work went on, and I believe that I may say
that—from the great amount of useful information contributed, together
with my own co-operation in entomological verification, adding requisite
details, publishing the year’s communications, and distributing them to
my contributors—it answered fairly the purpose for which it was set on
foot. And year by year we gained knowledge till we possessed serviceable
information on the main points, both of habits and means of prevention
of the greater number of our really seriously injurious farm, orchard,
and forest pests of Britain.
Those who wish to investigate in detail the various kinds of infestation
noticed during the first twenty-two years of my observations will find
them in “The General Index to my Annual Reports on Injurious Insects,
1877-1898,” compiled at my request by Mr. Robert Newstead.[31] In this
index the insects are arranged alphabetically under their popular and
also under their scientific names, with references to the various Annual
Reports in which notices of their observation are recorded, or papers
given on them, and also of the pages in each paper containing
information on their habits and history and means of prevention. Lists
are also given of crops and plants, stock, &c., affected. The index thus
affords a fair summary of the advance of our knowledge of crop
infestation during the years referred to.[32]
In the year 1881 I published a digest of the information sent in up to
date in an octavo volume of 323 pages, very fully illustrated, entitled
“Manual of Injurious Insects, with Methods of Prevention and Remedy”;
and in 1890 I followed this by a much enlarged demy-octavo second
edition of 450 pages, bearing the same title. In 1898, under the title
of “Handbook of Insects Injurious to Orchard and Bush Fruits, with Means
of Prevention and Remedy,” pp. 280, I included the special observations
on fruit infestations which had been sent me. In 1900 I published a
pamphlet (also illustrated) entitled “Flies Injurious to Stock” (pp.
80), [p. 304] giving reports of observations of life history and habits,
and also of means of prevention of a few kinds of infestation. These
were given as shortly as they could serviceably be dealt with, excepting
in the case of the Warble fly, _Hypoderma bovis_. Into this it appeared
desirable to enter more fully, it having been under my observation since
the year 1884, and having been carefully written on in every detail of
habits and means of prevention, as observed by my contributors and
myself in this country.
Besides the above publications, I arranged, for gratuitous circulation,
various four-page leaflets on our commonest farm pests. Each contained
an illustration and as much information as I could manage to condense
into the limited space. Among the subjects discussed were the widely
destructive Wireworm and equally destructive grubs of the Daddy Longlegs
or Cranefly, the Mangold-leaf maggot, the Mustard beetle, the minute
Stem eel-worm (which causes the malformed growth of cereal plants known
as “tulip root” and does much harm in clover shoots), the Warble fly and
the troublesome Forest fly. Our recent investigations have proved this
last to be present in two other districts at least, besides the New
Forest and its vicinity in Hampshire, to which previously it had been
supposed to be almost limited (p. 138). For the leaflet on the Warble
fly, its history, and easily practicable methods of prevention and
remedy, there has been such a large demand that various issues have been
successively printed amounting to 170,000 copies, including 15,000
copies which the Messrs. Murray, of Aberdeen, requested permission to
print at their own cost.
The original plan (or rather that which gradually formed in the first
few years) of arrangement of the Annual Reports appeared to meet all
requirements, so long as the requirements of the case remain unaltered.
Year after year such information as had been asked for was sent,
gradually completing most of the histories of our seriously injurious
crop and orchard insects, but in the report for 1899 it was requisite to
make some arrangement for insertion of disconnected additional
observations of appearance, habits, &c., of insects, previously referred
to. These I gave accordingly in an appendix under the heading of “Short
Notices,” not to encumber the report with repetitions that could be
avoided.
In 1901, when about to publish my report of observations of the
preceding year, it appeared to me that a large proportion of the new
information contributed bore on points of scientific entomological
interest, or of occasional appearance of little observed attacks of very
little interest or use to the majority of our agriculturists and orchard
growers, and quite foreign to the broad scale consideration of pests,
which was the object of these reports. It seemed something more than
_un_necessary to continue this work, and I, therefore, inserted the
following notice in the preface of my Annual Report for 1900, thus
closing the series with the closing century:—
“_But now, although with much regret, I am obliged to say that I feel
the time has come for discontinuing this series of Annual Reports._ When
I commenced the work in 1877, comparatively little was known of the
habits and means of prevention of insects seriously injurious to our
crops, and of this little a very small amount was accessible for public
service, and I undertook the series of reports in the hope (so far as in
my power lay) of doing something to meet both these difficulties.
Firstly, by endeavouring to gain reliable information of the kind
needed; and secondly, by publishing this, with all requisite additions,
and especially with illustrations, at a price far below the publication
expenses, so that it might be accessible to all who wished to purchase,
but especially by sending a copy of each Annual Report to each
contributor who had favoured me with useful information. It seemed to be
but right and fair that those who kindly helped in the work should have
their courtesy acknowledged to the best of my power, and I have
continued the reciprocation throughout. But the work was hard; for many
years for about five or six months all the time I could give to the
subject was devoted to arranging the contributions of the season for the
Annual Report of the year, with the addition of the best information I
could procure from other sources (in every case, whether of contributors
or otherwise, _fully acknowledged_). As the consultation enquiries were
kept up during winter as well as summer, I found the work, carried on
single-handed, at times very fatiguing. But so long as there appeared to
be a call for it, I have tried to do what I could. Now, however, the
necessities of the case have (as a matter of course) been gradually
changing. Year after year information has been sent, gradually
completing the histories of most of our worst insect pests, and now
additional information is rare (as is to be expected after twenty-four
years’ observations) on points of great agricultural importance.
“I claim no credit to myself in the work; but those who will look over
the names of the contributors, given with their information, will see
how deeply indebted I am to them, and to other good friends, who have
placed their experience and great knowledge at the public service. To
them, and to all who have assisted me, and to some who have allowed what
began as agricultural communications to ripen into valuable friendship,
I offer my grateful thanks and my deep appreciation of their goodness,
and I trust they will believe that if, as I well know, much of my work
has not been so well done as it would have been in better qualified
hands, at least I have earnestly tried to do my very best.”[33]
On the publication of the above-mentioned report, I received many kind
letters from friends, and I was much gratified by the press allusions on
the matter. These, obviously, it would not be desirable for me to do
more here than just allude to generally, with my thanks.[34]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAPTER X
SAMPLES OF LEGAL EXPERIENCES
It was a good many years after my name had been before the public as an
official Consulting Entomologist that I began occasionally to receive
applications to furnish what is called “expert” evidence regarding
insect infestation of live crops, or of cargoes of flour. To work this
properly, and without risk of being confused under examination by the
host of questions, relevant or irrelevant, and, of course, made
purposely perplexing by the legal representatives of the opposing side
of the case, involved a most inconvenient amount of research and also of
mental strain. It was necessary to keep all points in any way likely to
be referred to, classed in order in the mind, and available
instantaneously without hurry or confusion; and sometimes also necessary
in helping non-entomological cross-examiners so to formulate their
questions as to admit of any answer being given.
My first experience of anything of this kind was in July, 1889, when I
received a copy of a letter written by myself on September 20th of the
previous year relative to a certain insect attack, of which specimens,
together with samples of the infested plants, had then been sent me.
This letter was accompanied by an enquiry whether I could swear to the
accuracy of my statements. This, of course, I had no doubts about. It
was a perfectly simple case, and I replied accordingly. The result was
that one morning before luncheon my sister came into my room in
perplexity, and announced that there was a “young man” in my study who
wanted to speak to me, but who he was, or where he came from, or
anything except that it was just for a minute that he wished to see me,
nobody had been able to make out. I believe I guessed pretty well the
nature of the mysterious business; but, as for explanation, the young
man was perfectly impenetrable, excepting on two points. One that he was
to give me a paper which I accepted, and next that he was to give me
some small amount of money, which I also accepted, not knowing whether
any other course was open to me. As this was the first (and also last)
case of a subpœna being served on me, I do not know whether the immense
reticence is part of the business, or whether the server is possibly in
danger of bad language or unpleasant treatment, but certainly the
visitor appeared very uneasy, and took himself off as soon as possible.
On examining the paper I found it called me to give evidence on the side
of the defendants, which was a little awkward, as after due
investigation of details I found that the entomological circumstances
would give the case for the plaintiffs. It ran as follows:—
“In the High Court of Justice between Thomas Wilkinson, Plaintiff, and
The Houghton Main Colliery Company, Limited, Defendants. Victoria, by
the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland,
Queen, Defender of the Faith, to Miss Eleanor A. Ormerod, of Torrington
House, St. Albans, in the County of Herts. Greeting.—We command you to
attend before our Justices assigned to take the assizes in and for the
West Riding Division of the County of York to be holden at Leeds on
Wednesday the 24th day of July, 1889, at the hour of ten in the forenoon
and so from day to day during the said assizes until the above cause is
tried to give evidence on behalf of the Defenders, &c.”
On the back of the document was inscribed (name and address given) that
the writ was issued by the London Agents of J. Parker Rhodes, of
Rotherham, Yorkshire, defendants’ solicitor. I felt myself very
unpleasantly situated, more particularly as one of my legal brothers
assured me that I should make myself (or be made) quite ridiculous in
Court, but I did not see the matter quite in this light, for I was sure
of my facts. I explained to the solicitor for the defendants that if put
in the witness box I must support the cause of the plaintiff. The case
was then withdrawn and costs allowed to the plaintiff.
Ten years afterwards I was employed by Messrs. Ross T. Smyth and Co.,
33, Mark Lane, London, E.C. The case was entered on March 9, 1899, and
the matter in question was alleged infestation of a cargo of flour,
transmitted from New York, U.S.A., to Durban, S. Africa. I gave evidence
on oath here, Torrington House, St. Albans, on October 20, 1899, before
Mr. E. K. Blyth (of Messrs. Blyth, Dutton, Hartley and Blyth), appointed
a Commissioner of the High Court of Natal, to take my evidence in the
cause of Smyth _v._ Findlay. On Tuesday the 24th following, Mr. E. K.
Blyth attended with depositions which I read and signed in his presence.
Subjoined is a copy of my “Report on Insect Presence,” and also an
extract from a confirmatory report made by Mr. Oliver Janson doubly
confirmed by the report of a representative of the Department of
Agriculture, Division of Entomology, Washington:—
“I have examined the contents of the box and bottle this day submitted
to me from yourselves, the bottle being under seal of Messrs. Randle
Brothers and Hudson, Durban, Natal, &c., &c. I made my examination
both with hand magnifiers and microscope and found that in the very
small amount of insect presence in the wheat flour and in the spirit
or preservative fluid, there were two kinds of beetles represented.
One of these was the _Tribolium ferrugineum_, popularly known as the
Rusty-red flour beetle (fig. 70). This is a small red-brown, or
yellowish-red-brown, beetle, about a sixth of an inch long, somewhat
parallel-sided and narrow in proportion to its length; the wing-cases
striated longitudinally, and the antennæ (or horns) with a
three-jointed club at the extremity. I found this beetle present in
all its stages of development; that is, as a comparatively long and
narrow larva (grub or maggot); in the chrysalis (pupa) state, in which
it resembles the beetle with its limbs folded beneath it until
development is complete; and the perfect beetles.
“I also found one specimen of what is called the _Cadelle_ in larval
(grub or maggot) state. This is a pitchy-coloured beetle, _Trogosita
mauritanica_ or _Tenebrioides mauritanicus_, rather larger than the kind
above named, being about four times longer. I examined the whole amount
of insect infestation sifted in my presence from the wheat flour under
consideration or taken out of the bottle of preservative fluid, and in
the very small amount of insect presence observable, I found nothing
else to which the slightest degree of importance could be attached. In
reply to the inquiry submitted to me, as to the possibility of the bags
of wheat flour under consideration having been infested when they were
shipped from New York, on or about July the 5th, 1898; I can state that
I fully believe the flour could not then have been infested, as in such
case—consequent on the well-known exceedingly favourable conditions for
multiplication of insect presence, through which the bags of flour would
pass during the voyage—there would certainly by the date of arrival at
Durban, on or about September 14th, have been so great an amount of
infestation in all stages, that it could not have been overlooked. And
by the further dates named, in the following October and November, it
would have been overwhelming. The exceedingly high temperatures through
which the shipment would pass are known to be very favourable to rapid
propagation of successive generations of _Tribolium_. It is to be borne
in mind that the infestation does not lie in a torpid state, but after
hatching from the egg (sometimes inaccurately called the “germ”), which
soon occurs in high temperatures, it passes through the changes from
larva (or grub) to chrysalis, and beetle condition more or less quickly
according to warmth of locality; and then the male and female beetles
pair, and in the ordinary course die, in the case of the female after
egg-laying. Examination of the condition of the flour, had infestation
been present, would have shown not only the living infestation, but also
the dead bodies of the previous generations of beetles, which being of a
hard and horny nature externally, would not have decayed in the flour.
“Further, not only is great warmth favourable to increase of
_Tribolium_, but also the conditions, when flour is placed in bags and
left unopened for any length of time, are especially suited to their
propagation. I can also state that the effect of _Tribolium_ infestation
on flour is such that its presence even to a small amount could not be
unobserved, and these characteristics were wholly absent in the flour
submitted to me. To the best of my knowledge and belief I consider it to
be absolutely and demonstrably impossible that the infestation regarding
which the inquiry is now before me could have been shipped from New
York, and after the most careful examination and investigation which I
am able to make, I consider that the infestation took place after the
arrival of the flour at Durban.
“May I, in addition to the above opinion, be permitted to suggest to you
that as this investigation is one of great importance, it might be
satisfactory to yourselves if you were also to submit the samples, which
I have re-secured under my own seal, to Mr. Oliver E. Janson, F.E.S., as
being a skilled entomologist, and so well qualified by personal
observation and scientific knowledge of the _Coleoptera_ (beetles), to
give ma correct opinion in the present matter, that I should consider
him to be the most thoroughly trustworthy English referee.”
* * * * *
Mr. Janson’s report was as follows:—
“Having carefully examined the specimens of insects submitted to me
under seal of Miss E. A. Ormerod, and stated to have been found in the
accompanying sample of flour, named ‘Radiant,’ ‘Strathness,’ also the
specimens of insects, &c. &c., I identify them as the coleopterous
insect, known scientifically as _Tribolium ferrugineum_, in its various
stages of larva (grub), pupa (chrysalis), and imago (beetle). I also
find a single specimen of _Trogosita mauritanica_.... In considering the
important question as to origin of the infestation, I am of opinion that
the evidence afforded clearly indicates the origin of the infestation to
have been subsequent to the arrival of the flour at Durban.”
[The case never came to trial, but the unanimity of the expert opinion
enabled Messrs. Ross T. Smith & Co. to effect a compromise on terms they
were willing to accept.]
* * * * *
The following letter addressed to us by Mr. Wm. Simpson of Messrs. R. &
H. Hall, Limited, of Cork, Dublin, Belfast and Waterford, shows a
similar satisfactory termination to a case in which granary weevils had
done serious damage to a cargo of flour from San Francisco.
“WESTPORT, _Feb. 6, 1900_. DEAR MADAM,—Perhaps you have not quite
forgotten my visit to you in early summer of last year when I submitted
for your inspection a sample of flour with weevil infestation from a
cargo landed here. It will I am sure interest you to know that we have
just settled the case out of Court by the owners of the vessel paying us
£900 and our costs. We are pleased that the matter is thus ended, but I
cannot forbear from again thanking you for all the attention and help
you gave us in the case and which was to us of the greatest value. Yours
very truly, (Sgd) WM. SIMPSON.”
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAPTER XI
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH BY THE EDITOR
The removal of Miss Ormerod and her sister, Georgiana, from Torquay to
Spring Grove, Isleworth, was primarily because Torquay did not suit
their health and secondarily because at Isleworth they were near Kew
Gardens, where they were on intimate terms with Sir Joseph and Lady
Hooker. They left again for Torrington House, St. Albans, in September,
1887, partly because Sir Joseph resigned the Directorship of Kew Gardens
in 1885 and partly because of the increase of population, and the
defective and unwholesome drainage of the house. In a letter (p. 74) to
Dr. Bethune, one of her esteemed Canadian correspondents, she refers to
her impending change of residence.
DUNSTER LODGE, SPRING GROVE, ISLEWORTH.
_August 7, 1887._
“MY DEAR MR. BETHUNE,—I have very often lately been hoping to
hear of your safe arrival, and I am very glad to hear of it; but
I am so sorry that I cannot have the great pleasure of seeing
you to-morrow, for I have to be at St. Albans to meet a number
of people on business from noon till 4 p.m. This is a great
disappointment to me, for I (we) had much looked forward to a
chat with you. I am longing to hear of my kind friends in Canada
and especially of Mr. Fletcher and Professor Saunders, and I
want much to ask you how to transmit so much of a set of my
entomological publications as I can get together for acceptance
by the Entomological Society of Ontario.[35] I cannot tell you
how much I respect and admire the working of that noble Society,
and I feel myself greatly honoured by being elected one of its
members. Hessian fly (fig. 15) is indeed becoming a scourge—and
the work is enormous—it is a different story now to when I was
so roundly sneered at last year for thinking it had come. If we
had our grand Entomological Society of Ontario here things might
have been very different. I trust you may be able to spare, if
only one hour to give us just time to confer a little on your
return. I would put aside any ordinary engagement for the
pleasure and also the benefit of an entomological conversation.
But now about my sister and myself. This place is fast becoming
very unsuitable for us—you will know all that is involved in the
rapid increase of the outskirts of London—and we have a notice
of most of our garden going to be offered for sale next year for
small building plots. Therefore we are making arrangements to
move about the end of next month to St. Albans. We have many
good friends and fellow-workers there or near, and the place is
very healthy, and very accessible both for London and the
country, and I can, I trust, do my work much more fully there.”
Of Miss Ormerod Lady Hooker has written: “When she was our neighbour
during our residence at Kew, she was a frequent visitor at our house and
often came in the morning before public hours to the Gardens, to pursue
her researches and look for the insects to be found on the trees, shrubs
and plants; on these occasions she generally lunched with us and we
delighted in her bright and intellectual conversation. She was extremely
fond of animals and birds, and could imitate the calls of the animals
and the notes of many birds so perfectly that she could collect the
creatures around her; it was curious to see the squirrels peep out from
the trees when she called to them and venture to her feet for the nuts
she scattered for them. Her observation was always on the alert and she
saw many minute things in nature that others would have passed by. She
was a fine artist—and so was her sister, Miss G. Ormerod. At one time my
husband was needing some drawings made for the _Botanical Magazine_ and
she offered her services and drew three or four very beautifully.”
[Illustration:
PLATE XIX.
TORRINGTON HOUSE, ST. ALBANS, HERTS, MISS ORMEROD’S LAST RESIDENCE.
(_p. 115._)
]
Lady Hooker made a practice of inviting Miss Ormerod and her sister to
come over and help to entertain distinguished visitors at great
functions and on the occasion of visits of official scientific parties.
On one occasion the whole Chinese Embassy, excepting the Ambassador
himself, came in Chinese costume. Miss Ormerod asked permission of Lady
Hooker to speak to the Naturalist, who talked English very well. The
information elicited however was but trifling, amounting to the fact
that in China a yellow powder (probably flowers of sulphur) was used to
dress plants to ward off disease. She suggested tea as an escape from a
disappointing position and then adjourned to the tea-room followed by
the whole Embassy. The Entomologist took tea, but another minor member
of the group, being reputed at times to indulge in potations to which
the hosts were not accustomed, gave great cause for anxiety by taking
possession of a wine bottle. Miss Ormerod was successful in spiriting
the bottle away and in substituting a cup of tea, but great was her
relief when Sir Joseph and Lady Hooker arrived on the scene.
At Kew she also met Andrew Murray, Secretary of the Royal Horticultural
Society, who did excellent work in Economic Entomology for the Bethnal
Green and South Kensington Museums. Miss Ormerod described him as a
“profoundly scientific and intellectual man.”
* * * * *
An interesting instance of the widespread benefit of Miss Ormerod’s work
and the affection with which her name and personality were revered by
her distant correspondents was supplied by Dr. Lipscomb, her trusted
medical attendant. He says:—
“My sister was talking to a small market gardener in a flower garden she
was painting near Penzance, and Miss Ormerod’s name happened to be
mentioned. The old gardener was beside himself with delight to meet some
one who knew Miss Ormerod. He said she had saved him from utter ruin.
His flowers had become infected with some injurious insect which bade
fair to devastate the whole garden. In despair, hearing of Miss Ormerod,
he wrote to her and not only received a kind letter of advice, but also
a copy of her work on ‘Injurious Insects’ with the page turned down and
the paragraphs specially applicable to the case marked. No wonder the
poor old chap with tears in his eyes said he loved his unknown
benefactress.”
* * * * *
Miss Ormerod was appointed Consulting Entomologist to the Royal
Agricultural Society of England in 1882, and for ten years retained that
honourable position to the advantage of the Members and the British
public generally.
The need of a Consulting Entomologist was forcibly brought home to the
Society, then under the presidency of Mr. J. Dent-Dent, by the
disastrous attack in 1881 of the Turnip fly, or more correctly flea
beetle, which resulted in an estimated loss of over half a million
sterling to farmers in England and Scotland. Leading agriculturists all
over the country, but more from the East than the West, supplied
information for a report, and special assistance was given by some
members of the Royal Agricultural Society, including Mr. J. H. Arkwright
of Hampton Court, Herefordshire. The results were embodied in the Annual
Report for 1881, published in 1882.
A short time after this event a request was made to Miss Ormerod to
indicate whether she would accept the post of Consulting Entomologist to
the Royal Agricultural Society. Urged by Mr. Charles Whitehead, Chairman
of the “Seeds and Plant Diseases Committee,” and by her intimate
personal friend Professor Herbert Little, another member of the Council,
she accepted, but with hesitation and with considerable reluctance,
engendered by the opposition of her sister Georgiana, who believed her
strength was not equal to the strain of additional work. The meeting
with members of the Council at the Society’s offices, 12, Hanover
Square, London, at which details were discussed, was unusually trying,
in spite of the kindly courtesy of the Secretary (Mr. H. M. Jenkins) for
whom Miss Ormerod entertained the deepest regard. She says, writing in
1900, “I was nearly frightened out of my wits in going through the
requested ordeal, and the recollections of the experiences remain as
uniquely unpleasant. On arriving, I gave my card to the attendant, who
led me upstairs, where I expected to meet but two or three people, and I
was ushered into a room full of gentlemen standing waiting my arrival,
not one of whom except Professor Little was known to me even by sight. I
advanced about two feet, my sole thought being of the awkward fix in
which I had so suddenly been landed, and how I should get out of it.
Scarcely a word was spoken when I was led down again to the Secretary’s
room, where a discussion took place with Professor Little, Mr.
Whitehead, the Secretary, and the President of the Society,—the others
remained absent. In the discussion the President attempted a slight
examination of my qualifications, but it amounted to little more than
eliciting the length of time during which attention had been devoted to
Entomology. My reply was “about thirty years,” to which he had nothing
further to say. There was a slight departure from the serious nature of
the interview when a parcel of Daddy longlegs grubs which had been
placed on the table, gave way, and the creatures crawled all over the
place. The final result was, that I agreed to take the post of
Consulting Entomologist, but I returned home very uneasy in mind and
wrote the same evening that I did not wish to accept office. I was,
however, pressed into acceptance at the first business meeting and the
first work I undertook was the making of drawings to form originals for
six diagrams illustrating some common injurious insects with life
histories and methods of prevention.[36] This would be the first Tuesday
of June, 1882, and I inaugurated my position on the way home by meeting
with a severe accident at Waterloo Station, from the results of which I
have never recovered. While doubtless rather preoccupied, crossing the
road, a rapid incline from Waterloo Road to the station, I did not
notice a carriage coming down the slope till the horses’ heads were over
mine. With no time to run or turn, I sprang and landed on the pavement,
but a sharp pain set in, in the muscle above one knee. Whether it
originated from a strain or a blow I never knew, but a little flask I
carried on the injured side was beaten in as if by a horse’s foot or the
point of a carriage pole. The injury was not properly attended to and
the affected part gradually increasing and spreading gave rise to the
lameness accompanied with severe and frequently intermittent pain which
necessitated exceeding quiet and bodily inactivity—a state of matters
which was in marked contrast to the extremely active life I had led in
my early years rambling in the country, and latterly by indulging in the
mechanical in addition to the usual æsthetical pleasures of gardening.”
She explains in a letter to Dr. Fletcher, dated August 22, 1892 (p. 212)
that she was driven by failing health to resign her honorary official
work and to concentrate her energies upon her private work, which
steadily increased in volume, and especially on the work of her Annual
Report.
* * * * *
A conception of the interesting methods adopted by Miss Ormerod in
carrying out her work may be gleaned from her own words addressed to us
in the course of a long and intimate correspondence.
“I will now try and think of something you may care to insert about
languages. So far as I can avoid it, I try not to write in any language
but my own, but I can read serviceably French, Italian, and Spanish, and
also Latin for what I need; likewise, of course, German; Russian I could
read once but not so readily now; and with the dictionary I can make
something of Dutch and Norwegian.”
“Of my very special colleagues who are now gone from us, were Professor
Westwood, Life President of the Entomological Society, and Dr. C. V.
Riley, Entomologist of the Board of Agriculture of the U.S.A.; and
Professor Huxley, in days when I sat on the Council of Education
Committee of Economic Entomology, was a valued friend. It was marvellous
to see how Huxley with his towering personality led a committee. On one
occasion he asked if any one present would express an opinion on the
subject under consideration, and he rather suddenly directed his
attention to a certain member of committee, who was so startled he
nearly got frightened out of his life.”[37]
“The regular course of my work brings me into such constantly recurring
communication with the Entomological Departments of our own Colonies,
also of many of the U.S.A. States, and various Continental Societies or
specialists, that I may venture to say that as occasion occurs we
interchange—I mean the heads of the Departments and myself—friendly
observations, very beneficial and pleasant to me. The plan of my work
has long been to reply, if I could do so soundly, to every enquiry on
the day of receipt. Often investigation is needed for scientific
purposes, but a large proportion of the enquiries may be answered at
once so far as the practical needs of the enquirers are concerned. For
further purposes my custom is to work up anything new or involved that
occurs, for use in the following Annual Report. I do not devolve on my
specialist referees the researches (so far as I can ascertain the state
of the case), but they tell me if my identification is correct, or
correct it for me, and I quite invariably, if the matter be for
publication, publish also my acknowledgment. The correspondence
continues steadily all the year round, more of course in the warm
seasons of the year than at other times, but even in winter it never
ceases. My plan has generally been to store up all the observations of
the growing (and consequently insect-attacking) times of the year till
autumn, and then sort them and prepare them for the Annual Report of
that year. If some favourite subject be under discussion the letters may
be very numerous. I once had a run of 60, 80, to 100 a day for a short
time, including on one day a total of 149—but of course on such an
occasion I was obliged to get help to keep reply at all in hand. The
steady letter work of the year I estimate at about 1,500.”
* * * * *
Referring on December 27, 1889, to a proposal which had been made to
procure an assistant to relieve her of the enormous pressure of work,
she says:—
“I need not point out that, however agreeable the post might be to my
so-called ‘assistant,’ to me the addition would be a trouble—loss of
time and other inconveniences beyond telling. It would be more trouble
to write to him than to attend myself, and as a referee he would be
almost useless. My reference work is to the leading men of the
world—those who are known, literally, as the authorities above all
others on the special points; thus I am in no way derogating from the
respect I bear to Professor Harker’s[38] knowledge, but who that knew
anything would have cared for his opinion on _Icerya purchasi_ (scale
insect of orange trees)? Dr.Signoret’s opinion carried all before it.
Again, no one’s opinion stands like that of Mr. G. B. Buckton on
Aphides, and he communicates with me whenever I ask.
“On that most important agricultural matter, _Tylenchus devastatrix_,
there is no one in England fit to form an opinion worth comparison with
Drs. de Man and J. Ritzema Bos, by whom I am favoured, through being
allowed any amount of communication. These, and men like these,
pre-eminent each in his own line, are the referees that I personally am
honoured by being allowed to ask aid from; and in my own humble way
sometimes I can reciprocate, but ‘an assistant’ would do me no good in
any of these matters. And with regard to agricultural and applied
bearings I do not want a _dictum_, but year by year by my own
correspondence with agriculturists to work out on the fields the parts
of the cases as they occur, and to give the points to the public in my
reports. I am responsible for the entomological work of the R.A.S.E.,
and unless it goes through my hands I do not know what may be going on,
and no one would know to whom to write, or, in fact, anything definite
about the matter, if there were an assistant. I have my own circle of
helpers, my own paid special referee, by whom I reach specialists out of
my circle, and my lady amanuensis in the house, besides my good sister’s
invaluable aid—always promptly and ably given. So long as I can I hope
to keep my work in my own hands, and if it were not for the great masses
sometimes sent me, which come because I have been (up to the present
time) the only Official Entomologist here, the work would not have been
so distressing. Professor Harker is, I believe, excellently qualified to
hold a good and high entomological post, but not even Professor Riley or
Professor Westwood would work a post without referees. Some day, I hope,
he may be high in office; then he will, as I do now, have his organised
corresponding staff.”
* * * * *
“As a meteorological observer, while living at Isleworth my work
consisted in taking notes on about eighteen different subjects once a
day, beginning at 9 a.m., Greenwich time precisely. These included
taking the readings of the maximum and minimum temperatures, and also
those other thermometrical conditions, as of dry and wet bulb, solar,
earth, and ground thermometers, &c.; likewise of rainfall in the past
four-and-twenty hours, of the state of weather at the time; the nature
of the clouds, with the amount and direction of them, and likewise the
direction and estimated speed of wind. The time occupied out of doors in
the observations was about twenty minutes, to which had to be added the
barometrical reading with that of the attached thermometers, with
corrections according to tables furnished for altitude of the barometer,
and such minute errors in record of the thermometers as were shown by
tables of error furnished by comparison with the instruments at the
Royal Observatory, Kew. Altogether the work required some considerable
amount of time, and also most scrupulous attention to accuracy, not to
say some amount of personal self-denial, as whatever the weather might
be at 9 a.m. the work had to be done. Perhaps there would be a
thunderstorm, or at other times cold so great that my fingers almost
froze to the instruments, as on one occasion, when the thermometer
registered nearly down to zero.”
* * * * *
[Illustration:
PLATE XX.
MISS ORMEROD AT HER METEOROLOGICAL OBSERVATION STATION,
NEAR ISLEWORTH.
]
Professor Westwood belonged to the good old academic type of scholar who
made the responses in church in Latin. He was, till his death, Miss
Ormerod’s mentor from her initiation into Entomology, and she regarded
him as the greatest living scientific authority in the broad lines of
their common subject during the whole period of her advisory work. They
“got on famously,” and as she said, he “took the privilege,” which she
highly appreciated, “of knocking her work about,” as the subjoined
letter, written at an early stage of her career as an authoress,
charmingly shows.
UNIVERSITY MUSEUM, OXFORD,
_January 10, 1884_.
MY DEAR MISS ORMEROD,—I congratulate you on the publication of
your “Guide to Methods of Insect Life”—the nicest little
Introduction to Entomology with which I am acquainted. You have
been very fortunate in obtaining such a good series of woodcuts,
many of which were new to me. Allow me to suggest one or two
improvements after a hurried glance over the contents. It would
have been well to have indicated more precisely the size of some
of the objects figured; for instance, the locust, p. 28, is
twice the size of the figure—whilst the earwig, on the same
page, is about one-half the length of the figure. In p. 98, the
Death’s-head moth, which is twice the size of the Eyed-hawk
moth, is represented smaller than it is in next page. In p. 118
the fly is the _Sirex juvencus_, not the commoner one _S.
gigas_. In p. 125 the Bee parasite has not the front portion of
the wings black, but as milky as the other part. In p. 73, line
8, for “glassy” read “glossy.” I know you will thank me for
these hurried suggestions, or I would not have troubled you with
them.
Thanks for your kind enquiries. I am thankful to say that after
two months’ attack of bronchitis I am nearly all right again,
but have been much confined to the house, although I have been
wanting to go to London. My kind remembrance to your sister. We
should be very glad if you could come and give us a visit for a
short time.—Yours very truly,
J. O. WESTWOOD.
The high terms of approval and appreciation of her work by Miss
Ormerod’s numerous foreign correspondents are shown in no halting manner
in the subjoined letter:—
_From Dr. J. A. Lintner, New York State Entomologist._[39]
ALBANY, N.Y.
_May 29, 1889._
MY DEAR MISS ORMEROD,—I must congratulate you upon your last
Report. It is excellent, and reflects great credit upon you. I
am very glad that your letters have been so appreciated that it
has been necessary to summon a lady private secretary to your
aid. It will be a satisfaction to you that you will now be able
to accomplish much more than before. I am led to think whether I
should not ask our next Legislature to provide for an assistant
for me.
Your kind letter of the 10th inst. was also duly received. How
strange, and how very interesting to me, that you should
discover _Cecidomyia leguminicola_ (Gnat midge), red maggot,
with you, as you have done, working at the root—only “infesting
the root,” and not, so far as known, attacking the head. If it
occurs on the blossoms, you should have been able to find it
there by the time that this reaches you, for, as I have
somewhere mentioned, the nearly-mature larva shows a disposition
to leave the clover heads very soon after they are picked. You
ask if I have observed this form in other cecids of the clover.
We have, so far as known, but one other clover cecid, and that
is your introduced _C. trifolii_ (Clover leaf midge). The
thought suggests itself to examine some of my dried
_leguminicola_ larvæ. I am glad to have found in my collection
examples preserved in alcohol of the larvæ which I had
forgotten. As I put up quite a little quantity of them, I can
spare you these, which I am sure will be acceptable to you.
Your investigation of the “warble” presence (p. 110) effect upon
the beef-eater will, I am sure, be of much importance. One of
our Western agricultural papers has commenced an investigation.
Probably your studies and publications have incited them to it.
_March 12, 1894._
In going carefully over several pages of your seventeenth
report, which came to me last week, I asked myself, “Is not this
the best report that Miss Ormerod has written?” You are pleased
to bestow praise on my reports, which from you is agreeable to
receive, but I think that I can judge of their true value, and
very glad indeed would I be if I could feel that they were up to
the standard of yours. These are far from words of flattery, but
are said because I believe that you need encouragement. Your
reports have high merit and value, beyond similar writings of
any of your English contemporaries—yes, far beyond.—As ever,
sincerely yours,
J. A. LINTNER.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAPTER XII
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH BY THE EDITOR (_continued_)
As a public lecturer Miss Ormerod achieved a high measure of success.
The first effort in this capacity was made at the Royal Agricultural
College, Cirencester, where as “Special Lecturer on Economic
Entomology,” she delivered six interesting and valuable addresses to
audiences of about 120 students and professors on: (1) Injurious
Insects; (2) Turnip Fly; (3) Effects of Weather on Insects; (4)
Wireworm; (5) Insect Prevention; (6) Œstridæ—Warble or Bot Flies. The
first was given in October, 1881, and the last in June, 1884. On the
first occasion Lord Bathurst, one of the Governors of the College, was
present, and Miss Ormerod was placed between Principal McClellan on the
one hand and Professor Harker (biology) on the other, as her sister
Georgiana humorously remarked afterwards, “for fear her courage should
fail and she run away.” Her anxieties in the new capacity knew no
bounds.
Although extremely nervous and anxious she succeeded in concealing this
from an attentive and appreciative audience, and made an excellent
appearance.[40] She declared that while walking from the drawing-room to
the large lecture theatre at the opposite corner of the college
quadrangle she could not utter a word, and on this, as on other somewhat
similar exciting occasions, she experienced a drumming in her head which
she failed to moderate by any attempted remedial measures. After about
three years’ experience as a supernumerary member of the college staff,
it was found that the preliminary preparation of the lectures was
robbing her steadily increasing general work of time which was
inconveniently spared, and, although it was considered an honour to be
invited to give special lectures, she felt it to be a duty to her main
work to retire.
During this period one lecture was delivered before the “Institute of
Agriculture,” at South Kensington, in April, 1883, in the Lords of
Council lecture hall, where as usual she was in a state of trepidation
as to what might happen. The audience numbered about five hundred—two
hundred and fifty of whom were Government students. The subject was
“Insect Injuries to Farm Crops, and their Prevention.” A number of minor
incidents were nevertheless disturbing. To begin with, the driver who
had been engaged to take the lecturer first to South Kensington and
again in the evening to Isleworth, started on the wrong journey first,
but the mistake was discovered before he had gone very far astray. Then
a chairman had failed to appear and another had to be anxiously watched
for at the door. A most suitable person was at last found in the
President of the Entomological Society. All went well for a time until
Miss Ormerod’s sight on the left side wholly failed. Being subject to
attacks of migraine from overwork, she thought one of these had come on,
but on moving a little to the right she discovered that a brilliant
light had been arranged to fall on the diagrams, and that to her great
discomfort she had got into the line of it.
A rather amusing incident occurred as the last distraction. The object
was to place the elements of Entomology before the students in the
simplest form possible, but a few definitions were first necessary. They
were told to realise in the words of Professor Westwood that insects
were “Annulose animals, breathing by tracheæ, having the head distinct
and provided in the adult stage with six articulated legs, and antennæ,
subject also to a series of moultings previously to attaining
perfection, whereby wings are ordinarily developed!”
The audience burst out cheering, thinking, as Professor Tanner[41]
explained afterwards, that the scientific terms were being used as a
joke.
Apropos of this experience she wrote on October 14, 1890, to Mr. Robert
Newstead, “If I could find time I would like to form an instructive
book, on the plan of which I enclose a few lines—so as to proceed
gradually from a foundation well known to the pupils—thus:—
“_Q._ What is an insect? _A._ A fly is an insect, so is a moth or a
butterfly, or a wasp, or a grasshopper, or a cricket.
“_Q._ Is a spider an insect? _A._ No.
“_Q._ Why not? _A._ Because it has eight legs, and never has any wings.
Insects in their perfect state have six legs, and usually either one or
two pairs of wings.
“_Q._ Why do you say in their perfect state? And so on.
“I believe that it is an absolute mistake to begin with a definition of
an insect such as is usually given—half the words of which are utterly
without meaning to the student.”
* * * * *
Under strong pressure at a later date, Miss Ormerod delivered in the
same hall a course of ten lectures in five consecutive days, on the
“Orders of Insects,” and these were reproduced in full in her “Guide to
the Methods of Insect Life.”
The organisation was defective, and very small audiences assembled.
Professor Axe and others who gave special lectures in the same course
had the same experience. Only £10 was paid to Miss Ormerod for her share
of the work, a sum which did not cover outlays, and apart from the
annoyance of the bungling the fatigue was great.
About this course, Professor Huxley wrote on November 11, 1883:—
“Dear Miss Ormerod,—I am very glad to welcome you as a
colleague—and I wish I could come and hear your lectures, being
particularly ignorant of the branch of Entomology you have made
your own. I shall be very glad if any of my students can find
time to profit by your teaching—but I suspect that their hands
are pretty full. We shall be very glad to have your sister’s
work and thank her for the trouble she has taken.—Ever yours
very truly,” &c.
When a copy of the book reached him in the following January he
again wrote:—“Many thanks for your ‘Guide to Insect Life.’ I
know enough of your portion of work to be sure that it will be
clear, accurate, and useful, and I hope that the public will
show a due appreciation of it. With best wishes, &c.
“T. H. HUXLEY.”
Sir Joseph Hooker also wrote as follows:—
ROYAL GARDENS, KEW,
_January 11, 1884_.
DEAR MISS ORMEROD,—Pray accept my best thanks for the copy of
your “Guide to Methods of Insect Life.” I have read the first 50
pages at intervals of my work with great pleasure and interest.
I was an Entomologist before I took to Botany, as was my father
before me, and I do enjoy in my old age the account you give of
the forgotten habits of the friends of my early youth. I think
it is capitally well done and suited to its purpose, and I shall
hope to interest my children with it in the holidays. With
united sincere regards to you both, most truly yours,
JOS. D. HOOKER.
In March, 1882, a paper on “Injurious Insects” was read at a meeting of
the Richmond Athenæum. The hall was so crammed that the Council were
crushed up on the platform. “At the close of the lecture” (Lady Hooker
writes) “Miss Lydia Becker, at that time a vigorous upholder of ‘Woman’s
Rights,’ rose to speak, and while praising Miss Ormerod’s able lecture,
instanced her work as ‘being a proof of how much a woman could do
without the help of man.’ Miss Ormerod, in her reply, thanked Miss
Becker, but begged to say that she had no right to the praise accorded
to her on the ground of her work being so entirely that of a lone woman,
for, she said, ‘No one owes more to the help of man than myself. I have
always met with the greatest kindness and most generous aid from my
friends of the other sex, and without their constant encouragement my
poor efforts would have had no practical result in being of benefit to
my fellow men.’”
In the discussion which followed the lecture Sir Joseph Hooker “referred
to the great benefit they had derived at Kew Gardens from Miss Ormerod’s
researches, remarking that to her and her sister (Georgiana) they owed
some of the best illustrations they had of insect ravages upon plants.
He could not but allude also to the elegance and clearness of the
language employed by Miss Ormerod in her paper as an illustration that
scientific matters might be put in a clear and simple form, so that all
might understand them.... In conclusion he thanked Miss Ormerod and her
sister for their services to science.”
About 1888 an entomological “At Home” was given at Torrington House, St.
Albans, when some sixty people assembled in the drawing-room and
listened to a most interesting dissertation on the “Hessian Fly,” given
by the hostess in a friendly and informal conversational manner.
The Farmers’ Club lecture in 1889 was felt by Miss Ormerod to be the
most important and most gratifying of all similar public appearances.
She prepared it with infinite care and, as the time fixed for its
delivery approached, the state of nervous tension was great. Leading
agriculturists were present, and a number of ladies came to make
inquiries about all sorts of things, but probably the lecturer would
have been equally well pleased had none of her own sex put in an
appearance.
* * * * *
In 1882 Miss Ormerod was invited by the Lords of the Committee of
Council on Education to become a member of a committee to advise in the
improvement of the collections relating to Economic Entomology in the
South Kensington and Bethnal Green Museums. The other members of
committee were Professor Huxley, Mr. W. Thisleton Dyer, Professor J. O.
Westwood, Mr. F. Orpen Bower, Professor Wrightson, and Mr. Moore—Colonel
Donnelly and Sir Philip Cunliffe Owen being present officially. After
serious consideration and a good deal of pressure from influential
quarters, Miss Ormerod accepted the invitation and was a most useful
member of committee till her withdrawal from it in April, 1886. She
continued, however, to assist the supervision of the work, which went on
for some time after. At the first meeting she was asked to prepare a
scheme for a series of illustrations of Economic Entomology, and her
suggestion of classifying injurious insects by the name of leading plant
affected, and not by the Natural Orders of the creatures, was accepted.
A collection of cases containing natural specimens in all stages of
development, as well as accurate drawings of them, though never
completed, was made, at first mainly under Professor Westwood’s
direction, but later on, under Miss Ormerod’s supervision. Many of the
specimens were taken from Mr. Andrew Murray’s earlier contributions.
The collection was in 1885 removed from Bethnal Green to the Western
Exhibition Galleries, South Kensington Museum. The value of Miss
Ormerod’s services and the esteem in which she was personally held by
her associates in connection with the work of the committee, may be
gathered from the subjoined letter sent to her by Professor Huxley.
_March 12, 1883._
DEAR MISS ORMEROD,—Many thanks for the trouble you have taken.
Your suggestion about utilising the figures which are not
specially wanted for our purpose, for schools, seems to me
excellent, and I hope you will bring it forward at our next
meeting.
I hope our first discussion has convinced you that we want
nothing but to achieve something useful. And as I have at any
rate learned how to recognise practical knowledge and common
sense, when I meet with them (they are not so common as people
imagine) you will find me always ready to do my best to aid in
carrying out your views. You really know more about the business
than all the rest of us put together.
Yours very truly,
T. H. HUXLEY.
While Miss Ormerod was associated with the Bethnal Green Museum she was
asked to look at the proofs of a series of insect diagrams illustrating
“Gardeners’ Friends and Foes” being prepared for publication by the
Science and Art Department. She found that an official of the Museum had
been guilty of wholesale plagiarism, both in the coloured figures and
the descriptive letterpress, and moreover that a number of figures of a
popular kind had been introduced which were not drawn with scientific
accuracy, that she felt conscientiously impelled to report the
irregularities and deficiencies to the authorities. The results were
that the diagrams were withdrawn (only a few sets having been presented
for private use to certain fortunate individuals); and the removal of
the official from the position of trust became a wholesome lesson to
those who lightly make use without acknowledgment of the work of others.
* * * * *
At a later date she arranged the descriptive matter of a series of
beautiful insect diagrams, the originals of which were drawn and
coloured by her sister, Georgiana, for the Royal Agricultural Society,
and referred to in the appended facsimile page of a letter addressed to
the present writer, and again at p. 210 of her correspondence.
* * * * *
AN EXCELLENT SPECIMEN OF MISS ORMEROD’S CLEAR AND CHARACTERISTIC WRITING
IN WHICH SHE CONDUCTED HER VOLUMINOUS CORRESPONDENCE.
[Illustration:
May 12^{th} 1891.
Torrington House St. Albans.
Dear Prof Wallace
Your letter was a great
pleasure to us, and my sister
was delighted to hope that
her diagrams may be of such
general use
I have now written to
Mr. Newman begging him to
write to you replying to
your enquiries,—and also
to send (to your kind acceptance
from my sister) by Parcel post
samples of the diagrams, so
far as they are printed
completely. That is with
the exception of the fly which
you have.
You ought I am sure to
see for yourself just what
it is that we are about
]
To Miss Anne Hartwell, Miss Ormerod’s private secretary and confidential
companion, I am indebted for many of the following incidents in the home
life. The two sisters, though they were never robust, enjoyed
comparatively good health, when Miss Hartwell, in May, 1888, went to
reside with them, and were at all times very busy. Miss Ormerod
(Georgiana) usually sat in the dining-room working at her diagrams and
Miss Eleanor in the study. They generally worked all the morning, and in
the afternoon they would walk out together, take a drive, or pay calls.
They frequently had visitors for a few days, and nephews and nieces
would come and go—which was always a pleasure to them. They were devoted
to each other and spent much time together. Miss Georgiana’s death, on
August 19, 1896, was a sad blow to Miss Eleanor, who missed her sister’s
companionship and sympathy dreadfully. To a casual observer time seemed
to heal her wounded feelings and she appeared cheerful and bright, but
in reality she was never again quite the same person—they had been such
lifelong friends and companions.
In a letter to the Rev. C. J. Bethune she wrote on October 12, 1896:—
“I thank you gratefully for your kind comforting letter; believe
me such words as yours are a great consolation and support to
me, for I do miss my dear sister exceedingly.
“For her I fully hope that she is safe, and happy, and I love to
think of her as without fears or doubts serving the Lord she so
humbly trusted—but we were so completely one that I scarcely
feel the same person without her. It was not only our sisterly
affection and colleagueship, but she had such a good judgment
that I am constantly longing for her sound sense to help me.
There is no use in idle grief, and I am fairly well again. I
have not at all put aside work through all my sorrow, for I felt
this would answer no good purpose, and now I am working on my
next Annual Report and am arranging to have a good portrait of
her as a frontispiece (plate XXVII.). I think she would like it,
and I am sure she would have been deeply grateful for the kind
respect paid by the good friends whose friendship she so
exceedingly valued. I scarcely know how to write about it—there
is so much I should like to say. Perhaps I had better not write
more, but indeed I value your beautiful words of comfort which I
have repeatedly read.”
A touchingly sympathetic notice of the death appeared in Miss Ormerod’s
Annual Report for 1896.
* * * * *
Miss Ormerod rose early, breakfasted at eight o’clock, and then read the
“Times.” On getting to work she made a special point of replying to
inquiries first, saying it served no good purpose to keep people waiting
for an answer; and, as a matter of fact, delay or hesitation found no
place in any of her actions. Frequently there were specimens to examine
and report upon, and probably to put aside in a place of safety to
permit of maturation or further development and to undergo subsequent
examination.
After the entomological work was finished—work which was a real
pleasure, but proved a severe strain as the Annual Report was taking
form—her personal correspondence was attended to. She wrote with great
facility and with extraordinary rapidity and accuracy. She had many
colonial and continental correspondents who held standing invitations to
pay her visits, when in this country. Many came, and graciously she
received them, and courteously and royally she entertained them with
much pleasure to herself. None so honoured can ever forget the
cordiality of the breezy welcome which, accompanied by her hearty and
genuinely natural and friendly laugh, were merely harbingers of the
intellectual treat and the other good things that were in store for
them.
Among her most intimate immediate friends were Lord[42] and Lady
Grimthorpe, the Bishop of St. Albans (Dr. Festing) and his sister, the
Dean (Walter John Lawrence, M.A.), General and Mrs. Bigge, Colonel and
Miss Cartwright, Dr. and Mrs. Norman, and Dr. Lipscomb and Miss
Lipscomb. She was always pleased to see friends who called, and she was
very witty and cheerful with them. It was not at all necessary that they
should be scientific. One of the little group mentioned, simply and
perhaps too modestly explains, “I always think that when Miss Ormerod
sent for me, she descended to my level, and our conversation was
generally on the most homely subjects. She would be most interested in
the little events of our everyday life and thoroughly enter into our
pleasures and enjoyments.”
* * * * *
The lively sense of humour which has already been mentioned as a family
characteristic remained with her throughout life. The following little
anecdote told by Mrs. Evans of Rowancroft, Dorking, is also illustrative
of the personal coolness and power of action in times of difficulty
which were conspicuous among Miss Ormerod’s attributes, and it shows
also “the quietly determined manner in which she did some things.”
“My poor little story was told to me a good many years ago. My
aunt was lunching with some friends, and the peace of the
entertainment was suddenly disturbed by the arrival of a large
and lively hornet. No one else ventured to interfere with the
enemy, but Miss Ormerod waited quietly till the insect came
close to her, caught it in her hand, and forthwith deposited it
in one of the little chip boxes which she generally carried in
her pockets. I leave you to imagine the astonishment and
admiration of the other guests, and the quiet chuckle with which
my aunt wound up her story with the remark, ‘Of course I knew it
was a “drone,” by the length of the antennæ.’”
Miss Ormerod was not the least nervous in the sense of being afraid.
When just a girl living at Sedbury she became the centre of admiration
of the workmen on her father’s estate by fearlessly seizing a farmyard
dog by the back of the neck and hauling him off her own dog, who had
been rudely assaulted. Great was the applause of “Miss Eleanor’s
sperrit.”
[Illustration:
PLATE XXI.
AP ADAM OAK, SEDBURY PARK.
]
[Illustration:
HEDGEHOG OAK, SEDBURY PARK.
]
Another incident with a dog of a much more dangerous character is best
given in her own words: “I only remember one instance of rabies. The
animal attacked was one of two beautiful Clumber spaniels which had been
left one day at our house with a message that the sender, a friend of my
brother, desired him to select one of them, and accept it as a gift. The
two pretty creatures, named Cæsar and Pompey, were introduced into our
establishment, and one of them—Cæsar—became a great favourite with my
father. How long it was after their arrival I do not remember, but one
day Cæsar vanished, and in the course of the afternoon, although he was
not one of the house dogs, he came to me as I was standing in the front
hall. To my astonishment when I noticed him as usual, he gave a kind of
scream, or extraordinary howl, such as I had never heard before, and I
saw that the expression of his eyes was wild and distressed to an
entirely unnatural degree. The strange scream made me suspect what might
be wrong, and I called one of the head men. We took the dog, who was
perfectly gentle, into the butler’s pantry and shut the door so that he
might not escape, whilst we tried to find out what was amiss. I did not
much like the business, but it happened I was the only one at home,
excepting a lady relation, who, thinking “discretion the better part of
valour,” mounted herself _pro tem._ out of harm’s way, on the top of a
very large stone table, and awaited results in safety. I knew that
offering water was a very partial test, but I had some poured out. The
effect was instantaneous. The moment the poor dog heard the sound he
almost flew to me, as if for protection, and tried to wrap his head in
my dress so as to exclude the sound, calling out as if in great trouble.
I had no right to have my father’s favourite dog destroyed on a
suspicion in his temporary absence, and the dog so far was not violent;
it appeared to me that the only reasonable course to adopt was to have
him chained securely and led away to an empty stable, where he was
fastened to a pole and the door shut. By this course no harm could
happen, except in prolonging the poor creature’s sufferings. These,
however, though increasingly violent, were not endured for very long. By
the time my father returned, in about an hour, the dog was tearing the
woodwork all around him to pieces. He was at once destroyed, the attack
being pronounced, by those better versed in the matter than myself,
undoubtedly a case of rabies.”
* * * * *
Miss Ormerod’s brother, Dr. E. L. Ormerod, of Brighton, author of
“British Social Wasps,” testified to the courage and skill with which
she assisted him in taking the hanging wasps’ nests from trees. The “Ap
Adam” oak shown in plate XXI. which she climbed after a hornet’s nest by
means of the library folding ladder, was one of the very ancient hollow
oaks in Sedbury Park, about one-third of a mile from the house. She had
a sick headache next day about which her brother John made the
sympathetic (?) remark, “If young ladies will play at lamplighters they
must take the consequences!” The Hedgehog oak, at the root of which in
plate XXI. Miss Ormerod is seen sitting in rather an uncomfortable
position, was another hollow remnant of the primeval forest. She had
remarked that she thought she was sitting on a wasps’ nest when Waring,
her second brother, promptly admonished her in the interests of the
safety of the party to “sit tight”! The two hollow shells of what must
have been at one time splendid timber trees, were historically
interesting, having been boundary marks of the country referred to in
the time of Edward III. Both trees have been cleared away and the
ancient oak now known as that of “Ap Adam” stands only a few hundred
yards from the original tree, within the moat which formerly surrounded
old Badam’s Court. There are several other very ancient oaks in the
park. Two on the left of the carriage drive, going in the direction of
the mansion house, were christened “Darby and Joan” by Miss Ormerod.
On one occasion the eldest sister, Mary, had the misfortune to run a
crochet hook through her hand. The mother fainted away. Miss G. S.
Ormerod, who supplied this information, concludes, “My Aunt Eleanor
fetched her forceps, nipped off the hook and drew out the stem without
waiting for the doctor’s arrival, showing not only her courage but her
presence of mind.” The same authority goes on to say:—
“She was very fond of children and young people. When staying at
Sedbury, we always enjoyed our walks with her. She made
everything interesting. She taught me a great deal about
insects, helped me to begin a collection of butterflies, &c.,
showing me how to destroy them mercifully and how to set them
out properly. I remember stuffing a splendid dragon-fly under
her superintendence.
“Fully occupied as her life was up to the time of her last
illness, yet she was always full of sympathy and interest for
her poorer neighbours, always ready to assist in any good work
that came before her.
“You may like to hear how my aunt was beloved by the servants
for her practical kindness and for the keen interest she took in
all outdoor surroundings. Any curiosity discovered by them,
whether animal or vegetable, was always carefully brought in for
her inspection. Many were the snakes, birds, nests, insects,
fungi, &c., handed to her, especially at the time when she did
so much modelling.”
She maintained throughout a practical interest in the survivors of her
mother’s old servants, and she extended her kindness and thoughtfulness
to those of her own household. Her strong loyalty was curiously
instanced on one of these occasions, on the King’s accession to the
throne, when she summoned all her household, including outdoor servants,
and produced some rare old white port in which they drank the King’s
health. She subscribed liberally to St. Albans’ charities and other
public objects in the Abbey parish in which she lived, as well as in St.
Michael’s, where she attended church. Dr. Lipscomb gives, in a few
words, “An instance of her great generosity, so well known to all who
were intimate with her, though she ever did such deeds by stealth and
blushed to find them fame.” He goes on: “I may mention a day she asked
me to see her. Being rather late I apologised, telling her that the
annual meeting of the governors of our local hospital detained me. She
said she hoped we had had a successful meeting, and on my saying ‘Yes,
with the exception that the accounts showed a deficit of some thirty odd
pounds,’ she immediately produced her cheque book and gave me a cheque
for the amount.” She also extended personal sympathy and practical help
to many of her poor neighbours by whom she was loved and esteemed.
* * * * *
She never lost taste for the pastime of modelling in plaster of Paris,
and at leisure moments, when unable to go out of doors, she would occupy
spare time in this way. She modelled some beautiful specimens of common
fruits and made the cast of her own hand. In the evening, when tired of
writing, she would read or crochet. Her great skill in what is generally
regarded as exclusively woman’s work is independently testified to by
Miss Emma Swan, niece of Professor Westwood, who is so well able to
speak with authority, in the following words: “What particularly struck
me as a young girl at the time I visited her was the very beautiful
needlework she found time to do, and pleasure in doing. Whatever she
did, she seemed to do well!” From the same source we learn that “she
sang and played the piano very well indeed.” She also composed music
with facility and might have developed musical tastes, but for the
overpowering love of science which was the absorbing interest of her
life.[43]
We have it on excellent authority that the very greatest pleasure of all
her public recognitions was experienced on April 14, 1900, in the McEwan
Hall, Edinburgh, when the LL.D. of the University was conferred upon her
in company with a group of distinguished recipients of that honour[44]
before an assemblage of about 3,000 people. The trials of the occasion,
which are described in her letters, were greatly lessened by the
courtesy and kindness and whispered words of encouragement of his
Excellency, the American Ambassador, who was placed beside her during
the ceremonial, and preceded her in undergoing the ordeal of capping. In
presenting her to the Vice-Chancellor (Principal Sir Wm. Muir) the Dean
of the Faculty of Law (Sir Ludovic Grant) said, with his usual
eloquence:—
“A duty now devolves upon you, sir, which has devolved upon none
of your predecessors, and of which the performance will render
the present occasion memorable in the annals of the University.
Our roll of Hon. Graduates in Law contains the names of many
illustrious men, but you will search it in vain for the name of
a woman. To-day, however, a new roll is to be opened—a roll of
illustrious women; and it is matter for congratulation that this
roll should begin with a name so honoured as that of Miss
Ormerod.
“The pre-eminent position which Miss Ormerod holds in the world
of science is the reward of patient study and unwearying
observation. Her investigations have been chiefly directed
towards the discovery of methods for the prevention of the
ravages of those insects which are injurious to orchard, field,
and forest. Her labours have been crowned with such success,
that she is entitled to be hailed as the protectress of
agriculture and the fruits of the earth—a beneficent Demeter of
the nineteenth century. It would take long to enumerate her
contributions to Entomological and Phenological literature, but
I may select for mention the valuable series of reports
extending over twenty years, the preparation of which involved
correspondence with all parts of the world. Remarkable, too, is
the list of the honours which she has received. She was the
first lady to be admitted a Fellow of the Royal Meteorological
Society, and she has been awarded the Silver Medal of the
‘Société Nationale d’Acclimatation’ of France. To these
distinctions the University of Edinburgh, sensible of her
conspicuous services, and not unmindful of her generous
benefactions, now adds its Doctorate in Laws.”
The honour referred to, conferred by our cultured neighbours across the
channel, was publicly announced in the press in the following words:—
“At the Annual Meeting on the 25th of June, 1891, of the Société
Nationale d’Acclimatation de France, M. Le Myre de Vilers,
president, in the chair, the large silver medal of the Society,
bearing the portrait of Geoffrey Saint-Hilaire, was decreed to
Miss Eleanor A. Ormerod, of St. Albans, England, for her work in
Economic or Applied Entomology.”
To a confidential correspondent she wrote, “You will believe that this
pleases me very much.”
Plate XXII. shows this medal with three other silver and two gold medals
that were presented to Miss Ormerod between the years 1870 and 1900 by
home and foreign institutions.
* * * * *
Miss Ormerod preserved very few letters except those necessary for
scientific or business purposes, and these she classified and fastened
into books for convenience of reference. Nothing else, and especially
nothing which if returned to the writer, would hereafter lead to
unpleasantness, escaped ordeal of fire. After keeping letters on general
subjects for a few days, she would tear them up. The result is that, of
the mass of interesting contributions on many subjects, which poured in
to the oracle, first of Isleworth and latterly of St. Albans, from all
sorts and conditions of men and women, the few sample letters written by
prominent public men and reproduced in these pages, are almost all that
remain. To some of her relatives she wrote very amusing letters, but—no
doubt inspired by the desire to avoid all possible danger of hurting the
feelings of people referred to—she exacted the promise that they should
not be preserved.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
KEY TO MEDALS PRESENTED TO MISS ORMEROD AND SHOWN ON PLATE xxii.
Royal Horticultural Society,
Victoria Medal of Honour,
1900.
(Gold Medal.)
Royal Horticultural Society.
For Collection of Economic
Entomology.
1870.
(Silver Medal.)
Société Nationale d’Acclimatation
de France.
Entomologie Appliquée.
1899.
(Silver Medal.)
University of Moscow, 1872
Emperor Peter I., 30th May,
1672.
Emperor Alexander II., 30th May,
1872.
(Gold Medal.)
International Health Exhibition,
London, 1884.
(Silver Medal.)
Moscow Polytechnic Exhibition,
1872.
(Silver Medal.)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Illustration:
PLATE XXII.
MISS ORMEROD’S MEDALS, RECEIVED BETWEEN 1870 AND 1900, AS RECOGNITION
BY SCIENTIFIC BODIES OF HER SCIENTIFIC WORK.
(_pp. 96, 304._)
]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAPTER XIII
LETTERS TO COLONEL COUSSMAKER AND MR. ROBERT SERVICE
Surface Caterpillars—Leopard and Puss Moths—“Hill-Grubs” of the Antler
Moth.
The letters in this the first chapter of correspondence (dealing with a
number of moths, the caterpillars of which are destructive to
vegetation), were written while Miss Ormerod was resident at Isleworth,
and after she had issued seven of her Annual Reports. Apart from the
Entomology discussed, the letters show how ready she was to recognise
and to commend the meritorious scientific work of others.
_To Colonel Coussmaker, Westwood, near Guildford._
DUNSTER LODGE, SPRING GROVE, ISLEWORTH,
_August 1, 1885_.
DEAR SIR,—Perhaps the best way I can reply to your inquiry about
the coloured sheets is to enclose the short description, on the
wrapper of one of my reports.[45]
I should mention, though, that they are the property of the
Royal Agricultural Society; I only drew them. The insects are
drawn greatly magnified, with a view to hanging the sheets on
walls of schools. The history, and the simplest means of
prevention are given in the very plainest words I could find.
Have you my current report? It contains a good deal on that
great pest the Ox warble fly (fig. 5)—contributed by practical
men—cattle owners, veterinary observers and the like. I would,
with the greatest pleasure, ask your acceptance of a copy if you
would permit me to do so. If you have studied its habits in
India, I should greatly like to be in communication with you on
the subject. The Colonial Company procured me a few estimates of
damage to hides—which were of much service as showing
comparative amount of injury in different parts of the globe,
but I much want to find whether in India the larva is found to
penetrate below the subcutaneous tissue into the flesh. I am
aware from one of my contributors connected with inspecting army
supplies in India, that at one time meat for the troops was apt
to be so damaged from what he considered to be this attack, that
it was to some extent useless. The locality was not far from
Kurrachee. If you, as a student of insect life, could give me
any information on this point, I should be thankful for the
addition to the notes I am still collecting.
_August 4, 1885._
Many thanks to you for so kindly taking the trouble to write
about the injury to flesh possibly caused by the Warble maggot;
it would be of great service to know about it. Doubtless your
care of your cattle had a great deal to do with their being free
from injury—if we could but get even the moderate amount of care
applied which is needed to put on a dressing when attack is seen
it would make an enormous difference.
The Dart or Turnip moth caterpillar is doing damage now—and I do
not believe there is a better remedy than scraping out the
grubs, but this is very troublesome till they are larger. I see
in a report on the “Cutworms,” as they call these creatures in
the U.S.A., that there is very much less injury from them on
ground which has been well salted. It is thought that the salt
drawn up into the plant makes it distasteful to the
caterpillars. I do not know how this may be, but in a district
of the Eastern Counties reported from last year—where previously
they had been quite set against anything “artificial”—they were
finding the turnips on salted lands answered very much the best.
I should much like to try the effect of watering with salt and
water, at a safe strength, but from my own garden being so
perpetually used for trial ground it is getting free of regular
pests. I have found watering with soft soap and a little mineral
oil (pp. 66-67, eighth report, 1884), act well on these
caterpillars. The application appeared to paralyse the creature
so that it could not get away from the poisonous effects of the
mixture, which is a very important point.
I found this mixture act well on Cabbage green fly, and if you
should try it I shall be very much obliged for any observation.
The great point is to mix the ingredients at boiling heat. I
would try whether the strength noted was safe for any special
plant. I rather think it is for cabbage, but certainly not for
young leafage of roses. I shall be very glad if I can be of any
help in the matter.
[Illustration:
(_a_) 1, Turnip moth; 2, caterpillar.
]
[Illustration:
(_b_) 1, Heart-and-dart moth; 2, caterpillar; 3, chrysalis in
earth-cell.
FIG. 1.—SURFACE CATERPILLARS: OF THE TURNIP OR DART MOTH, _AGROTIS
SEGETUM_, OCHSENHEIMER, AND OF THE HEART-AND-DART MOTH,
_AGROTIS EXCLAMATIONIS_, LINN.
]
TORRINGTON HOUSE, ST. ALBANS,
_January 26, 1888_.
Many thanks for your note received this morning. I shall hope to
add some of it to my Turnip Caterpillars paper, which is not yet
gone to press. Thank you for the offer of the specimens, but I
do not quite see my way to showing live ones yet. My lecture [at
the London Farmers’ Club] is a terribly anxious prospect to
myself, but I can but do my best, and I am endeavouring with the
utmost care to form something that may be acceptable, but I am
sure you will believe me that to address such a skilled audience
is rather anxious work. I should much like to lay before the
members of the Club some ideas for their consideration as to how
some reasonable amount of plain serviceable information might be
got abroad. I do not believe in all this lecturing, examining
and talking of classification. To my thinking it is beginning at
the wrong end, and that the learners need first to make sure of
their facts in the field and classify them when they have got
them, if they do it at all.
[Illustration:
Female, head of male, and caterpillar.
FIG. 2.—WOOD LEOPARD MOTH, _ZEUZERA ÆSCULI_, LINN.
]
_February 17, 1890._
I have examined your caterpillars carefully, and I find that of
the oak stem to correspond exactly with the larva of the Wood
leopard moth, the _Zeuzera æsculi_. This is commonly found in
(or at least it is usually sent me from) wood of fruit trees,
but it attacks oak as well as forest trees of various kinds.
Your specimen has also one of the characteristic habits of
ejecting brown fluid from its mouth on disturbance. I think you
have my “Manual,” and there you would find a figure of the moth
and larva. Your specimen is rather full coloured, but they vary
greatly in this respect.
Your other caterpillar is a Lepidopterous larva, but I cannot
name it with certainty. It is quite possible that it is the
larva of the “Hornet Clearwing,” the _Trochilium_ (= _Sesia_)
_bembeciforme_, but I have never seen a specimen, although the
attack is said to be common, especially to _Salix caprea_. The
attack is stated to be mostly in the lower part of the stem. I
think that you very likely have Loudon’s “Arboretum” in your
library, and if so you would find some good notes and fair
figures of the hornet-like moth and its larva and pupa _in situ_
in the wood at pp. 1481 and 1482, vol. iii. The larva is nearly
dead now, so that the form is altered, but I do not see any
reason against it being this kind; still I cannot say it is.
I have a very curious report of much damage attributed to Puss
moth caterpillars at a locality in Lincolnshire, and am waiting
with much interest for specimens to see what the cause can be. I
rather expect it will be rabbits!
Yours very truly,
ELEANOR A. ORMEROD.
[Illustration:
Male and caterpillar (life size).
FIG. 3.—PUSS MOTH, _DICRANURA VINULA_, LINN.
]
[The following notes by Mr. Robert Service[46] are explanatory of
subjoined correspondence.
“THE ‘HILL-GRUB’ (the caterpillar of the Antler moth, _Charæas
graminis_). Sheep-farmers are threatened with another plague.
The ‘hill-grub’ has often done considerable damage to the upland
grass-lands, notably in the years from 1830 to 1835. Just now
complaints are rife from farms in many parts of the wide
districts ravaged by the Voles[47] (in 1891-92-93). As usual the
farmers look on these ‘hill-grubs’ as very sudden arrivals, but
this is not the case, for last autumn the moths which these
larvæ produce were in extraordinary swarms, and far in advance
of their normal numbers. I remember noting at the end of last
September when coming down from the neighbourhood of Loch
Dungeon one evening in the twilight, how unusually abundant the
Antler moths were flying. The evening was mild and very moist,
and just as we got on to the level ground at the outside of a
moss of perhaps six acres in extent, we found Antler moths
flying in countless myriads in every direction. The time was
6.40, and there was still enough of the gloaming left to see the
moths quite distinctly on every side, flying just below the
level of the grass-seed heads.
“On August 23rd I happened to be going across the farm of
Townhead, in Closeburn parish, Dumfriesshire, and about 10.10
a.m. the Antler moths appeared in myriads. Thousands upon
thousands of them were flying in all directions, most of them
just amongst and over the flowering heads of the spret, _Juncus
articulatus_; but many were flying higher in the air, and some
mounted up out of sight. It was a wonderful scene, and one that
I would not have cared to miss. The effect was altogether
different to that presented by the evening flight I saw near
Loch Dungeon in the previous autumn.
[Illustration:
FIG. 4.—ANTLER OR GRASS MOTH, _CHARÆAS GRAMINIS_,
AND CATERPILLARS.
]
“A party of gentlemen fishing from near the Holm of Dalquhairn
for some five or six miles down the Ken found all the trout they
caught perfectly crammed with these ‘hill-grub’ caterpillars.
Old shepherds will tell of times when they were so numerous that
after sudden thundershowers the sheep-drains have been
completely dammed up with their bodies. The moth deposits its
eggs, which produce larvæ that descend to and feed mostly about
the roots of grasses during the autumn and early winter. After
hybernation they commence in March and April to feed again with
redoubled energy, and they turn to pupæ at the end of June and
during July, producing the moths again in a few weeks (the
perfect insect flies during August and September). Thus their
cycle of existence in these various stages extends the whole
year round. Their worst natural enemy is the common rook at the
season when these birds betake themselves and their young broods
to the hills, and I have reason to believe that many other birds
devour them. The blackheaded gull, _Larus ridibundus_, and the
common gull, _L. canus_, are very fond of the larvæ. Curlews
take a good many, golden plovers and lapwings pick them up in
numbers. Cuckoos also feed upon them, and I have found the
stomachs of snow buntings, shot on the hills at midwinter,
filled with these grubs” (R. S.).
* * * * *
Miss Ormerod says: “The caterpillars, when full grown, are about
an inch or rather more long, with brown head, and the body of a
deep bronze colour, exceedingly shiny on the back and on the
upper part of the sides. The bronze colour is divided lengthwise
by three pale lines, the back and side stripes meeting or almost
meeting above the tail, and another narrower pale stripe or line
runs lower down along each side.”]
_To Robert Service, Esq., Maxwelltown, Dumfries._
TORRINGTON HOUSE, ST. ALBANS,
_August 1, 1894._
DEAR SIR,—It is many years since you gave me any of your good
observations, but indeed I would gladly have profited by them,
and it was only lately that I knew you were continuing them.
Perhaps Mr. Bailey, the editor,[48] may have mentioned to you
that I was so struck with the paper which he sent me, in which
you mention _C. graminis_, that interpreting the _nom de plume_
(“Mabie Moss”) literally, I wrote to him expressing my
admiration and asking if I might be put in communication with
the writer; and now may I prefer the request to yourself that,
if you please, you will kindly tell me anything you are inclined
to favour me with about this recent outbreak of the _C.
graminis_. Would it not be of great interest if we could make
out something more about the parasites? There are, firstly, the
threadworms—_Mermis_. Do you chance to have identified them? I
have got no further than the specialist to whom I sent
specimens, thinking they were most likely _Mermis albicans_—but
this he was going to investigate. Then there is the bacterian
infestation—the “flacherie,”[49] as they call it in silk-worms.
This seems to me of great practical interest; and, thirdly, the
larval parasitism of the _C. graminis_ larvæ. I had so
exceedingly few specimens that I could not work up the matter,
but, whilst one cocoon sent to me appeared to be that of an
Ichneumon, the only large larva which I found certainly in many
respects resembled that of a _Tachina_ fly. I should greatly
like, if agreeable to yourself, to hear from you again on
entomological matters. Besides the pleasure, it is a great
advantage to me to have contributions of skilled and experienced
information, and I would indeed most scrupulously acknowledge to
whom I was indebted.
_August 3, 1894._
I am much obliged to you for taking the trouble to send the
morsels of _C. graminis_ caterpillars. As you say, I am afraid
we could hardly get results from them, but still with bacteria
presence I do not know but dried bits may show something when
moistened, so I am keeping them for the present. That enormous
appearance of the imagos must have been a wonderful sight; I
should have liked to see it—and what (I wonder) will be the
result?
Pretty surely I suppose there will be egg-laying and a
consequent presence of larvæ? But if your convenience allowed
you to inspect say two months hence, would it not be very
interesting to ascertain—absolutely make sure—whether there is a
presence of the “hill-grubs” or whether the parasitism of their
parents has been transmitted, to the weakening or destruction of
their descendants? If we found no grubs, nor grubs with
“flacherie” present, what a very interesting discovery this
would be!
_September 14, 1894._
I am writing a few lines at once on receipt of your letter,
first to thank you for your geographical note, which helps me
very much. [These attacks of “hill-grubs” were more or less
general over the hill country of Kirkcudbrightshire and over the
adjacent sheep-farms in Ayrshire, the Dumfriesshire hills, and
the contiguous sheep-farm districts in Lanarkshire, Peebles,
Selkirk, and Roxburgh. Seven counties were affected to my
knowledge. R.S.] What a widespread outburst this has been! But I
also write to beg you not to suppose for one minute that I see
any reason to doubt what we have had laid down for such a length
of time about date of hatching of larvæ of _C. graminis_. Mr.
Wm. Buckler[50] “lumped” his observations of this and two other
species, and it seems to me that what happened to caterpillars,
which I gather he observed in captivity, in no way militates
against correctness of other people’s out-of-door observations.
With many thanks for all the information you give me.
_November 20, 1894._
I am very much obliged to you for the very interesting note you
have let me have about these dipterous parasites[51] of the _C.
graminis_. How fortunate you have been to secure them, and in
such good order too! As you have been kind enough to give me two
of your specimens, I think I will presently send one of them to
Mr. Meade, of Bradford. I am sure he would value it very much,
and would doubtless identify it, which would be a help to me,
for as you know I do not like to rest without verification on my
own dipterous identifications. You would not mind about this
part, as doubtless if you have not yourself identified, Mr.
Percy H. Grimshaw, Museum of Science and Art, Edinburgh, would
see to it (pp. 149, 185).
Do you ever come across the so-called “Turnip Mud-beetle,”
_Helophorus rugosus_, in your country? I had the beetle some
years ago, as doing harm to turnip leafage, but we could not
find the larva. Lately we found a larva doing a deal of mischief
in the same neighbourhood by burrowing galleries in the top of
turnips, and it struck me we might have what we wanted to
complete the history. So I sent it to Canon Fowler, and he
identified as beyond doubt _Helophorus_ and being found where
_H. r._ resorts, it is hardly open to doubt that we have got
parent and child. Please excuse a short letter, for I am working
as hard as I can manage.
Yours very truly,
ELEANOR A. ORMEROD.
[The parasitic and other enemies of the “hill-grub” are so effective in
their attacks that in the year following a great increase in numbers a
normal level of occurrence is invariably restored.]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAPTER XIV
LETTERS TO MR. WILLIAM BAILEY.
The Ox warble—Its destruction by the Aldersey Schoolboys—Annual gift of
prize money—The Royal Party at St. Albans’ Show.
In addition to the entomological value of the next group of letters
dealing chiefly with Ox warbles, Miss Ormerod’s unselfish interest in
promoting a wider knowledge of her subject is well shown in her words of
appreciation and encouragement to Mr. Bailey in connection with his work
(especially in relation to the success of correspondence with the Duke
of Westminster), and the practical inducements, as well as sympathy,
extended to his pupils.
_To Wm. Bailey, Esq., Aldersey, Grammar School, Bunbury, Tarporley,
Cheshire._
TORRINGTON HOUSE, ST. ALBANS,
_November 24, 1887_.
DEAR MR. BAILEY,—I am very much obliged to you indeed for kindly
letting me see the documents which I now return, after most
careful perusal, with many thanks. It is indeed satisfactory
that the good work of our boys (destroying warbles), should have
given such valuable help in this matter, which is so important
to all who have to do with cattle, and consequently to the
nation. The approval of His Grace the Duke of Westminster (so
kindly given, too) will add great weight, and I am heartily glad
also to see the Hon. Cecil Parker’s confirmation from personal
experiment and knowledge of the soundness of the plan and its
success. I think if I can get time that I will write to him, to
mention how strongly the many letters which I have received this
year confirm the good effects of removal of the maggots (2 of
fig. 5, and fig. 7), and likewise the prevention (in almost
every case mentioned) of summer disturbance of the cattle.
I thought you would not object to my keeping a copy of your
letter to his Grace.
The Committee of the “London Farmers’ Club” which I daresay you
know more about than I do, but which I believe to be the great
Farmers’ Club of England, has sent me an urgent request to read
them a paper on Injurious Insects, at their meeting place, the
Salisbury Square Hotel, London, in next April. Professor Herbert
Little, one of the Council of the Royal Agricultural Society,
brought me the message, and at first I felt fairly frightened at
the idea, and tried to “make excuse,” for it is a somewhat
anxious prospect (in the words of old John Knox) for a
gentlewoman to look in the face of so many “bearded men and not
be over much afraid,” but I got such serious remonstrance,
almost rebuke, from various quarters that I have consented to
endeavour to prepare as good a paper as I can, and read it
myself. Now if you permit me—I think that in the portion about
warbles it would be very useful (and much more telling than any
words of my own) to give your terse, clear and attractively
worded account of what really has happened.
[Illustration:
1, Egg; 2, maggot; 3 and 4, chrysalis-case; 5 and 6, fly. 3 and 5,
natural size, after Bracy Clark; the other figures after Brauer, and
all magnified.
FIG. 5.—OX WARBLE FLY, OR BOT FLY, _HYPODERMA BOVIS_, DE GEER.
]
* * * * *
[Illustration:
FIG. 6.—PIECE OF YEARLING SKIN WITH 402 WARBLE-HOLES.
(_Greatly reduced by photography._)
]
The following extract is the chief part of the letter by Mr. Bailey to
the Duke of Westminster (October 28, 1887):—
MY LORD DUKE,—I was very thankful to see by last Saturday’s
Chester _Chronicle_, that at the Chester Dairy Show you drew the
attention of our farmers to the enormous loss caused by the
presence of ox warbles in our cattle. During the past three
years, I have been directing the notice of my pupils to the
mischief done by these warbles, and, as we have now nearly
stamped out this pest in Bunbury Parish, it has occurred to me
that your Grace might be interested in learning the course which
we have taken, and also in seeing how very easily our farmers
might get rid of this enemy. The great majority of the boys in
this school are either sons of farmers, or of farm labourers.
After the boys had received from me a short lesson on the Warble
fly, they were asked to examine their cattle at home, and to
bring to school as many specimens as they could collect of the
maggots of this fly. Hundreds were squeezed out and brought in
the course of a few days. One boy alone destroyed 230 of these
warble grubs in the spring of 1885 by the application of common
cart grease and sulphur to the spiracle in the black tipped tail
of the maggot or by squeezing out the maggots. [_Vide_ Miss
Ormerod’s ninth Annual Report on Injurious Insects and Common
Farm Pests, p. 92.] Last Easter I desired my pupils, during the
week’s holiday, to examine carefully the live stock at home for
ox warble and to report to me. I enclose a copy of the first
list which I received, and I am sure it will satisfy your Grace
that this pest may easily be stamped out, if our farmers, their
sons, or their labourers would apply the smear, or press out the
maggots and destroy them. School boys can do this work, and feel
a pleasure in the task. What has been accomplished by Bunbury
boys can be equally well done by the boys of any other village
school.[52]
[Illustration:
FIG. 7.—PIECE OF UNDER SIDE OF WARBLED HIDE; WARBLES ABOUT
HALF SIZE.
_From a Photo by Messrs. Byrne, Richmond, Surrey._
]
[Illustration:
FIG 8.—BREATHING TUBES OF MAGGOT (TO WHICH THE SMEAR IS APPLIED),
MAGGOT, AND PRICKLES OUTSIDE SKIN OF MAGGOT (ALL MAGNIFIED).
]
[A leaflet which Miss Ormerod circulated widely says:—From £3,000,000 to
£4,000,000 are lost annually through these pests. One-half the fat
beasts killed in this country are afflicted with this grub. The farmer
loses on his stock from poorer condition, and from death; from less
yield of milk, and damage to all, especially to fattening beasts, and
cows from their tearing full gallop about the fields, besides loss to
the butcher of from a halfpenny to a penny per pound on warbled hides.
Look at the under side of the newly flayed hide of a warbled beast and
see the grub cells (fig. 7). Maggots may be squeezed out, or easily
killed by putting a dab of cart grease and sulphur, McDougall’s Smear,
or anything that will choke them in the opening of the warble, and the
fly may be prevented from striking by dressing the beasts’ backs in
summer.]
May I add that during the past five years I have been drawing the
attention of the boys to insects, which are injurious to food crops.
They are quite familiar with such pests as the leather jacket, wireworm,
turnip and mangold fly, caterpillars of the magpie moth, and the
gooseberry and currant sawfly, &c., &c., for hundreds of living
specimens have been brought to the school, bird’s-nesting having to a
very great extent been superseded by this new pursuit. The boys, having
become well acquainted with the pests, were instructed as to the best
methods of prevention and remedy. These boys will, in the course of a
very few years, be the farmers and farm labourers of this district, and
I am satisfied that even the little instruction which I am able to give
them in what I may call “Practical Entomology” will then be found to be
of considerable use to them.—W. BAILEY.[53]
[Illustration:
Moth at rest, and with wings spread; caterpillar walking.
FIG. 9.—MAGPIE MOTH (CURRANT AND GOOSEBERRY), _ABRAXAS
GROSSULARIATA_, LINN.
]
_November 24, 1887._[54]
DEAR MR. BAILEY,—The Farmers’ Club meeting will be an
exceptionally rare opportunity of pushing forward this, and some
other important matters, as well as of laying before some of our
leading agriculturists some important facts about a few of the
pests of the corn crops of last season’s notoriety. You will
think my letter endless, but I want to congratulate you most
heartily on your good success in the examinations (which must be
a weary work to prepare for), and also on that of your assistant
master and teacher, which is indeed encouraging, and to say how
sorry we are to hear of your illness. I trust, if it please God,
that you may have comfortable health again—it makes such a
difference.
Since my sister and I came to St. Albans we are almost like
different people. We have a beautiful house (plate XIX.) with
such thick walls that we do not feel the changes of temperature,
and a lovely country view along the valley. We have also met
with a most kindly reception, and, last but not least amongst
blessings and comforts for which we are deeply grateful, is that
educated earnest clergy form a decided element in the Society.
But now I ought only to add thanks and very kind regards from us
both.
_December 11, 1887._
I must tell you the pleasure with which I heard your letter to
the Duke of Westminster read at the “Seeds and Plants Diseases”
Committee of the Royal Agricultural Society on Tuesday, and
recommended for report to the Council, and I am glad to see it
on the Society’s report sheet sent me this morning, as being
recommended for publication. I think this will do a great deal
of good, and it cannot, I think, fail to be a great satisfaction
to yourself that the excellent work done under your guidance and
direction should thus be of such extended service throughout the
land. I also figure to myself how pleased the good lads will be!
Will you accept the enclosed photo of my new and most
comfortable home (plate XIX.); it gives a good idea of it,
excepting in not quite showing the very rapid slope down from
the terrace flower beds.
It would be a great and very true pleasure if when you can spare
time you would look in on us here for a couple of nights; I am
sure that with our old Abbey and the many things of interest
here, and some chat which you would let us have between whiles,
the time would not lag. There are both pleasure and benefit in
the work you allow me a part in. Pray believe me always, with
kind regards and good wishes from us both.
Yours sincerely,
ELEANOR A. ORMEROD.
[On the warble question Miss Ormerod wrote on April 22, 1899, to Dr.
Fletcher[55]:—
“Just now I am working hard on Warble affairs. The butchers
(that is, leading men among them) very much wish that what is
called ‘licked’ beef should be inquired into. I do not know
whether you are troubled by this in Canada, but it is an
alteration that takes place on the outside of the carcass of the
animal beneath a badly warbled part of the hide. This part
becomes soft and wet and blackish, and is popularly supposed to
be soaked with moisture from the unlucky animal licking itself
to soothe the irritation. Really it is the result of the chronic
inflammation of the badly warbled hide. This causes much loss to
butchers, and if I can get it well brought forward I think we
shall through this rouse the farmers to better attention. The
authorities at our Royal Veterinary College are most kindly
helping me, and I hope before long to have enough sound
information to be able to publish a paper on it.”
To Mr. Medd[56] Miss Ormerod also wrote in Nov., 1900:—
“Do you chance to have noticed that the Warble fly of the United
States, the _Hypoderma lineata_, is considered to be quite a
distinct species to our _H. bovis_? I believe that investigation
has proved that our bovis is very rarely found in the U.S.A.,
just as their _lineata_ is very rarely, indeed, found here.
Practically (that is, so far as injury to the hide is
concerned), the trouble is similar, both in method of operation
and in the frightful amount of damage caused; but it has been
laid down by good U.S.A. authorities that in the case of their
Warble fly, _lineata_, the attack is commenced by the quite
embryo maggots making their way by the mouth to the gullet and
there hanging on until it pleases them to make their way onward,
by piercing through the coat of the œsophagus and onward through
the tissues of the beast until they arrive after their long and
curious journey beneath the ribs, whence they proceed to work
beneath the hide like ours. The matter seems to me very curious,
but I was not called on to enter into discussion, excepting
giving my reasons why I felt wholly certain, and considered the
evidence in our hands proved, that our _H. bovis_ did not start
on its travels in this way.”
[Illustration:
1, Male; 2, curved extremity of abdomen of female; 3, maggot; 4, mouth
hooks; 5, spiracles at extremity of tail of maggot—all greatly
magnified (after Brauer).
]
[Illustration]
Eggs attached to hairs Maggots or horse bots attached
from a horse’s fore-leg to the membrane of stomach
magnified and natural (After Bracy Clark.)
size. (After Bracy
Clark.)
FIG. 10.—HORSE BOT FLY, OR HORSE BEE, _GASTROPHILUS EQUI_, FAB.
On May 14, 1900, she addressed another correspondent thus:—
“I have another formal application from the authorities of S.
Australia;—(this time from our friend Mr. Molineux) relative to
Horse botfly—and very especially to make them sure regarding the
precise differences between Bot, Warble, and Gad flies. I have
explained that Gad flies, _Tabanidæ_, may be distinguished by
being blood suckers, and by their maggots feeding in the ground,
and that ‘Bot’ or ‘Warble’ are only two convertible names for
_Œstridæ_, but that ‘Bot’ is usually most specially applied to
internal feeding maggots, and Warble to those that live in the
hide, notably in Warbles. But such difficulty continues to arise
from haphazard use of the words, I have suggested that if
possible the scientific name—(_Gastrophilus equi_) should be
insisted on. An entomologist (?) had absolutely called this
attack or kind of attack inside a horse that of ‘Gad fly’! But
as the attack has been well studied in the Department of
Agriculture, Cape Town, I have suggested they should communicate
with the Government entomologist, Mr. C. Lownsbury. For their
practical needs, I have suggested clearing the Horse botfly, _G.
equi_, eggs from the hair by dressing, and very especially that
they should take care all droppings (in which the maggots pass
from the horse, and where, or in the ground beneath, they go
through their changes to the perfect state) should be so treated
as to kill the maggots. It may possibly turn out that the
_Gastrophilus_ may be some other species than _equi_—I have not
had specimens. When you are about to devote so much attention to
Colonial Agriculture [in the “Garton” course of Colonial and
Indian Lectures], I wished very much to tell you what I am
about, lest I should, as this is sent me officially, go on other
lines than you approve.”]
_June 9, 1891._[57]
DEAR MR. BAILEY,—I have now much pleasure in asking permission
once again to place in your hands a cheque for £5 5s., to be
used exactly as you may judge fit, in purchase of prizes for the
encouragement of serviceable study of habits and means of
prevention of ravages of injurious insects by your scholars. I
have real pleasure in doing this because I believe the
importance of those who are in any way connected with
agriculture being serviceably acquainted with the causes of loss
to crop or stock, and means whereby this may be lessened, cannot
be over-estimated. I offer my hearty congratulations to yourself
and your pupils on the satisfactory work achieved in my own
department of agricultural entomology in one more year.
I do not like to offer views of my own on these matters now that
what is called Technical Instruction is receiving such
widespread attention throughout the country. Still I should
like, for the encouragement of any of your boys who may think
themselves behind in the simply scientific race, to observe that
instructions given (let them be conveyed in what terms the
teacher will) must be founded to start with, on facts,
trustworthily observed and trustworthily recorded; and the pupil
who leaves your school with the knowledge of the appearance of
the common crop pests, as the wireworm, the turnip flea beetle,
the warble fly maggot for instance, and, as I am well aware is
the case with many of your boys, adds to this a practical
knowledge of how to lessen their powers of mischief, goes forth
holding in his mind what will save him many a pound in the
future, and be a benefit wherever he goes. It is a foundation on
which as much as he pleases may be built, but the solidly learnt
field knowledge will always be serviceable.
_June 5, 1893._
I thank you very much for your kind letter. If I were nearer it
would be a great pleasure to me to be present on your prize day,
when I might have the gratification of making personal
acquaintance with many of those whom I know by name as taking
much interest in this important school as well as yourself, whom
I should much like to meet; and also our “Aldersey boys,” whom I
have known and worked with, or they with me, for so many years.
It is a very great pleasure to me that they are continuing their
attention, under your skilled help and guidance, to observation
of farm pests, and their work stands first as a proof of what
can be done in getting rid of one insect pest.
When careful search only produces twenty warble grubs, in a
district[58] where a few years ago they were counted by
hundreds, to my thinking we—that is, the boys, you and I—may
fairly be proud of a thoroughly useful work. If I might venture
on a kind of little moral reflection I should say that I should
like the little prizes which I have so much pleasure in
offering, to remind them sometimes of how much can be done, in
many other things also, by even moderate attention given at the
right time and under the guidance of sound knowledge. I trust
they will continue their field work. With the increase of area
under cultivation or occupied by stock so may their insect pests
be expected to increase, and on sound knowledge of what really
happens, and what at a paying rate can be brought to our aid,
our hope rests of coping with the farmer’s enemies. What I can
do to help them by advice, or by reply to inquiries, will be
gladly at their service. Whilst I congratulate those who have
won my little tokens of goodwill, and beg to offer the same for
the next prize day, I must say to all that in the information
and benefit they have laid up in their working and observations
they have each gained a prize far better than anything I can
offer them.
_May 29, 1894._
It is with most sincere pleasure that I hear from you once again
this year of the good success of the Aldersey boys in their
studies and of their steadiness in work. The methods by which
serviceable instruction on this subject, namely, Agricultural
Entomology, can be given is often a matter of difficulty and
doubt, and I certainly think that the plan you mention to me is
so good, and meets the points of combining practical knowledge
with so much scientific information as is requisite, so well
that I shall gladly draw the attention of those who apply to me
for suggestions on these subjects to its serviceableness. You
mention arranging the observations of the boys who take up the
study of crop and fruit pests on a system which, though so
simply worked, really forms an excellently complete course. You
say that one week the boys bring samples of infestation
injurious to fruit; in a second week attacks on garden
vegetables; in another week on field crops; in another on
timber; in another living examples of the subjects figured in
the insect diagrams which my sister and I have had the pleasure
of contributing to your school collections, and in yet another
week you receive notes of serviceable means of prevention and
remedies. This plan appears to me so sound and good that I hope
I may be forgiven for intruding a few minutes on your time in
greatly desiring to draw the attention of the influential
visitors who will be present at your meeting to how excellently
this plan meets many difficulties. A boy so taught knows his
facts.
_June 2, 1895._
Many thanks for your letter received yesterday morning, which is
very interesting indeed to me, and which I hope to reply to very
soon, but now I am replying to your note accompanying the
caterpillars from the Peckforton Hills, though not so fully as I
could wish, for disasters befell the letter, and it arrived by
special messenger from the Post Office, with the announcement
that the things had got loose, and were creeping all about! Any
way but little remained to judge by, so I report on what was
visible. Most of the caterpillars were loopers (fig. 30), and
the largest proportion of these, though differing so much in
colour, appeared to me to be the _Cheimatobia brumata_. As you
know there may be every variety of shade in these Winter moth
caterpillars, from pale green down to smoky brown or almost
black. Another kind of which I only find two specimens (small
and very small, respectively), look as if when grown they would
be the Mottled Umber moth, which is so injurious this year.
There are just single specimens of a few other non-looper kinds,
but at this present time all the kinds come under only one
method of (feasible) treatment, and I am afraid this (even if
feasible) would be much too costly on such a great scale.
Washing with Paris-green or London-purple, or with kerosene
emulsion, would be the right thing, or our British form of the
emulsion, made by Messrs. Morris, Little and Son, Doncaster, and
sold, I believe, at a very low price (consequent on the large
demand for it), under the trade name of “antipest.” This only
needs diluting. But when we come to dealing with great areas
like the Peckforton Woods, I believe that the only really
practicable way of, in some degree, lessening the evil, and
counteracting its effects, is throwing water from some large
engine. If a fire engine and a supply of water were available
this might do a great deal of good.
I was consulted by the late Sir Harry Verney about “an ancestral
oak” at Clayden, which appeared nearly cleared of leafage, and I
advised playing the house fire engine on it—and the plan
succeeded. The moisture falling around the tree pushed on the
second leafage and (conjecturally) saved the tree. But with
woods it is most difficult to manage application. I am afraid I
am only able to say what would be best, if it could be done.
For the future it is a grave consideration, and consultation is
very desirable, as to what means could reasonably and safely be
employed to destroy the caterpillar in the ground. They will
probably be very soon leaving the trees, and burying themselves
just below the surface, and will most likely reappear, in moth
form, and ascend the trees, beginning in the early winter, and
thus eggs will be laid to start next year’s attack. I do not
know whether the ground growths would permit of anything like
paring being done under the trees. The best way would be “sticky
banding” in October. At the Toddington fruit grounds one year
120,000 trees were sticky banded, but still this is work on an
enormous scale. These are the main points to work on, and I
should be very much pleased to enter on any of them more in
detail, but just now I am writing as soon as I can (before going
to church), as with Sunday and Bank Holiday posts I am afraid
this letter will not, at the earliest, reach you until Tuesday
morning, so please excuse such hastily written lines.
* * * * *
SAMPLE OF THE SCRAP NOTES LEFT BY MISS ORMEROD RELATING TO THE GREAT
WATER BEETLE RECOGNISED BY THE PRINCE OF WALES, NOW KING EDWARD VII., AT
ST. ALBANS’ SHOW.
[Illustration:
It was a great pleasure to me to
notice the appreciative interest that
their Royal Highnesses now our
gracious King & Queen took in the
habits of injurious insects. Her
Majesty’s discriminating observation
made me permit myself to say
that she should have been an Entomologist.
And our King recognised
at a glance the great water
beetles the Dytiscus marginalis
as a kind which he well
knew as injurious to fish spawn.
]
_April 6, 1896._
Now I am working on my Exhibit of Economic Entomology for the
Bath and West of England Society Show at St. Albans. I think you
will perhaps like to look at the enclosed set of labels for the
cases.[59] There are only a few lines to be fixed outside each.
In the catalogue there is a fuller account, with prevention and
remedy. Is it not a triumph of condensation to get a little life
history and prevention and remedy of Wireworm into about half a
dozen lines? But really there is enough if people would mind it.
I try to give injured material wherever I can, and there are
upwards of sixty infestations. Georgiana helps me with twenty
diagrams—more beautiful than any of her previous ones—and the
Council, who are very kind, have awarded us all the privileges
of stewards and members of Council for the Show, so that we may
have every convenience of transit there.
It gave me great pleasure to be appointed External Examiner in
Agricultural Entomology at Edinburgh University—for besides
enjoying such a great compliment it will help my work.
_May 30, 1896._
N.B. _Confidential._ I want to tell you how kind and nice the
Prince and Princess were at the Show. T.R.H. shook hands when
they arrived, quite heartily, and when I had explained my own
and my sister’s exhibit I thought I was to retire, but I found I
was to attend round the other exhibits in the building, so I
walked on by the Princess—just think, at the head of the Royal
party, before the Prince and all of them! When we had gone round
the Prince said, “Now, I think we must be going,” and he shook
hands again, and the Princess, who was a little ahead, turned
back and shook hands also. I was told by one of the officials
that the Prince expressed himself afterwards as much interested,
and my informant had told the Prince that I was doing work in
this country which was done in other countries by the State.
H.R.H. was so interested about the warbles that he called up
Lord Clarendon to look at the great photo of the warbled
red-deer’s hide too, and we had quite a chat together.
[Illustration:
FIG. 11.—WATER BEETLE, _DYTISCUS MARGINALIS_, LINN.
]
_June 15, 1899._
I had great pleasure in receiving your very kind letter, and I
thought a great deal of you, and your flock, on the prize day.
But now I am troubling you (the idea occurred too late to be of
use at the time), to ask whether you would at all care to have
(say) ten copies of my “Manual of Injurious Insects,” to give
just as you may think fit as an encouragement to the boys—or
perhaps a present here or there to one who might be leaving
school and taking up farming. I should like it very much. You
have it yourself and (I think?) one for the school library, and
Mr. D. E. Byrd must have his father’s copy, but if you cared to
have some copies it would really give me very great pleasure.
Though fruit-insect prevention has made great advances in the
last few years, this is not a special Cheshire interest, the
agricultural observations are very correct still.
Mr. D. E. Byrd has kindly given me some very good information
about Cheese-fly maggot attack, just precisely what I was
wishing for, and also something of the principle of prevention.
Mr. Ward [Organising Secretary of the Cheshire County Council]
was kind enough to procure me some good information from Miss
Forster [of the Cheshire Dairy School], and I hope to form a
good paper by and by. All I really want now in this matter are a
few of the “hopping” maggots, which most likely will turn up
soon. Curiously enough, just at the time, I had an application
from a bacon-curing Co. and I think we have on both sides
benefited.
[Illustration:
1, Fly; 2, pupa; 3, pupa-case; 4, maggot—all magnified, with lines
showing natural length; 5, tail extremity, still more magnified,
showing spiracles, tracheæ, and caudal tubercles.
FIG. 12.—CHEESE AND BACON FLY, _PIOPHILA CASEI_, LINN.
]
_August 5, 1899._
I now, with many thanks for the clearness with which you have
been good enough to note precisely the form of the presentation
labels, enclose twelve, only altering by adding to the slips for
the three boys, the prefix of “Mr.” I am sure they will like it.
I fancy I see them surreptitiously turning to the donatory slip,
to enjoy their rise! Very many thanks to you indeed. I hope it
may give the recipients pleasure, but I am very sure you give
great pleasure to myself by allowing my little remembrance to
these kind helpers.
I am sure you will be interested to know that the Meat Traders
Associations—at the Royal Lancashire Show—are distributing
thousands of my Warble leaflets, with free leave to write up to
London for more.
_March 2, 1900._
Many thanks to you for your very kind letter. Indeed it is a
trouble to me that I am not able to write oftener, but nobody
knows better than yourself (who are so burdened with work for
the good of others) how hard work can be, and if I quite
overwork I am ill, so I am afraid to do all I wish.
Thank you for your kind congratulations. I take it as a very
great honour for the University of Edinburgh to give me a Doctor
of Laws Degree, &c., &c., &c. I am a little anxious about making
such a very public appearance, but I dare say it will not be so
alarming when it comes to the point. But I do not wish to go out
of my own quiet lines, and I do not certainly wish to be called
“Doctor.” Would not the right thing be for me to just put LL.D.
after my name where desirable?
TORRINGTON HOUSE, ST. ALBANS,
_April 26, 1901_.
MY DEAR MR. BAILEY,—I have postponed replying to your kind
letter partly because I have had a long exhausting illness, and
partly because I am sure that you will regret the subject of my
letter, as I do myself. Still I think I ought to tell you that I
am purposing quite to discontinue my regular entomological work.
You would notice what I said about the Annual Reports, but the
attention to insect inquiries and (almost worse) the requests
for co-operation in philanthropic literary schemes had become a
burthen so very injurious to me that I was warned both by my
doctor and literary colleagues that without rest the
consequences might be very serious. All last year my health was
failing, and (though this is temporary) an attack of influenza
early in March, followed by what are called “effects,” has
caused me great suffering.
But it is in reference to our long, kindly colleagueship that I
am writing to you. Natural history is on a very different
footing now from what it was in 1884, when with your good help
our good lads started the investigations regarding Warble, which
have proved to the whole world the possibility of checking this
wasteful attack, and I may add they have carried the work on
with their own steady, patient, long-continued energy. To this I
must add my great appreciation of their useful work in real
serviceable Economic Entomology, and the kindliness and
heartiness of their work.
But now yourself, your school and your scholars have a
world-wide name, and as you will fully appreciate that to
continue, however much I may wish it, publicly attached to any
one philanthropic economic work throws me open still to whole
hosts of applications, I am sure you will understand my wish to
withdraw. You have I think my subscription for your next great
June day, and after that I, with much regret, purpose to
discontinue it. I look back on many years’ kindly communication
from you, but if you could have any idea of the labour which has
been thrown on me from other quarters, I am sure you would think
I am right. I earnestly and sincerely beg you to believe me with
feelings of the highest esteem and friendship and every good
wish,
Yours sincerely,
ELEANOR A. ORMEROD.
P.S.—Please to excuse handwriting, as I am on my sofa.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAPTER XV
LETTERS TO MR. D. D. GIBB
Great Tortoiseshell Butterfly—The Forest Fly—Numerous other fly-pests
and fly-parasites—A few Moths.
The subjoined letters to Mr. Gibb are unique in that they deal with a
wider range of subjects than any of Miss Ormerod’s letters to other
British observers. She recognised and appreciated her correspondent’s
accuracy of observation, and gratefully acknowledged the assistance she
received through the numerous specimens he so promptly collected for her
when in need.
_To D. D. Gibb, Esq., Assembly Manor Farm, Lymington._[60]
TORRINGTON HOUSE, ST. ALBANS,
_June 26, 1894_.
DEAR SIR,—I am very much obliged to you for kindly sparing time
to let me have your careful observations received this morning,
together with the specimens of the Great Tortoiseshell
butterfly, _Vanessa polychloros_, infestation. I have been very
carefully noting, measuring and counting, so as to secure
details, and presently I think with your own observations these
will form a very serviceably interesting paper. That patch of
eggshells contained over three hundred eggs, as near as I could
count by taking numbers in length and breadth. Your two
caterpillars had been over hasty in their arrangements, and
changed to chrysalis on the journey, and consequently made not a
good business of it, but one of those you sent me previously,
having better surroundings had done its work thoroughly well,
and is a very beautiful specimen which I hope will develop. I
propose to have a good figure engraved of the butterfly,
chrysalis and caterpillar.
All your other notes I have also read with much interest,
especially those on turnip management, and your remarks about
“warble,” and in due time I shall be much obliged by being
allowed to use these in my next Annual Report.
[Illustration:
Caterpillar and chrysalis, natural size; branched spine from
caterpillar, magnified.
FIG. 13.—GREAT TORTOISE-SHELL BUTTERFLY, _VANESSA POLYCHLOROS_, L.
]
_July 27, 1894._
I am very much pleased to hear that you have hatched two of the
Large Tortoiseshell butterflies from your specimens. This is
very interesting as completing your previous observation, and I
am particularly glad of this note of date of development for I
am afraid that the only really good chrysalis which I secured
from your larvæ does not seem likely to develop. However, it
gave me an opportunity of seeing the beautiful colours and the
six bright mother-of-pearl-like spots on the back. Many thanks
for kindly offering me a specimen, but I should not like to take
it—for it is of special interest with you to illustrate this
rare attack, and also it is very difficult to ensure safety in
transmission. Many thanks all the same, and also for your
Hessian fly specimens received a short time ago, and for the
further notes now. I am sorry not to have acknowledged them and
the information in the letter accompanying them sooner, but I
had a deal of work, and some temporary difficulty from breaking
a blood-vessel in one eye. However I am thankful to say that is
all right again.
I have no doubt you are right about the weather making a most
important amount of difference in extent of injury both from
Hessian fly and Diamond-back attack. If it had been hot I am
afraid _Plutella cruciferarum_ (Diamond-back moth) would have
done a deal of mischief. The little Charlock weevil,
_Ceuthorhyncus contractus_ (see my seventeenth, 1890, report),
has been doing a great deal of mischief to young turnips at some
places on the east side of the country.
[Illustration:
In usual position, and also with wings expanded—magnified; also
natural size.
FIG. 14.—CHARLOCK WEEVIL, _CEUTHORHYNCUS CONTRACTUS_.
]
_July 30, 1894._
The _V. polychloros_ specimen came to hand little, if at all,
injured by its journey, and in beautiful order for figuring. I
am very glad to have it, for besides proving the caterpillars to
be of the “great tortoiseshell,” I had the opportunity of seeing
the row of long bristles or stout hairs about a third along the
lower part of the front edge (the costa) of the fore-wings. This
row of hairs is the structural difference between this “great
tortoiseshell,” and the “small tortoiseshell” (which is without
them), but otherwise the two species are so much alike that
there used to be doubts whether they were not merely varieties
until this point was noticed by a Dutch entomologist, Mr.
Snellen. I shall be glad to refer to this point, for it is
important and was observed after our chief manuals of
_Lepidoptera_ were published.
On referring to your letter accompanying the Hessian fly
puparia, “flax-seeds,” in which you notice some of them being
within the stalks, I remembered I had not precisely replied to
this part, so I do it now. I think this position, though not
characteristic, is not very uncommon, and is caused by a
weakness of the stem. I have from time to time found the stem
cracked longitudinally and the “flax-seed” partly slipped into
the cavity.
[Illustration:
Natural size and magnified.
]
[Illustration:
1, Anchor-process of larva of _Cecidomyia destructor_; 2, of
_Cecidomyia trilici_—magnified; “flax-seeds,” or puparia, in
different stages of development, natural size and magnified.
FIG 15.—HESSIAN FLY, _CECIDOMYIA DESTRUCTOR_.
]
_August 22, 1894._
I have to-day had a request from Dr. Ritzema Bos for some
specimens of Hessian fly puparia _in situ_ or otherwise. If you
could do it without inconvenience, could you oblige me with some
“flax-seeds” if you come on them at threshing time; and you will
be good enough to let me have also a few pieces of barley or
wheat stem just three or four inches long with the flax seed
still adhering.
I hope you are having good harvest weather, but indeed this is
the first really good bright summer’s day we have had for a long
time, and to my eye the wheat round here has a grey look instead
of the bright colour.
[Illustration:
FIG. 16.—YOUNG WHEAT, WITH HESSIAN FLY MAGGOT AT “_a_.”
(After Prof. Webster.)
]
[Illustration:
1, Straw bent over;
2, showing “flax-seeds.”
HESSIAN FLY ATTACK ON BARLEY.
]
[Illustration:
Nos. 1-6 and 11 and 12, Gout fly, grub, and pupa—natural size and
magnified; with infested stem; 7, 8, 9 and 10, parasitic ichneumon
flies, natural size and magnified.
FIG. 17.—GOUT FLY, RIBBON-FOOTED CORN FLY, _CHLOROPS TÆNIOPUS_,
MEIGEN.[61]
]
_August 28, 1894._
Your packet of infested straw came safely to hand this morning
and I am very much obliged to you for kindly taking all this
trouble. I have repacked the Hessian fly straws, winding a
thread over the place of deposit of the puparia on the barley
straw for fear they should get from under the sheathing leaf and
be lost. I am sure Dr. Ritzema Bos will be very grateful for the
help, and also for its coming so promptly.
Thank you also for the _Chlorops_ (Gout fly) specimens; they
were particularly acceptable just now, for, if all is well,
Professor Riley means to look in early next week before he
returns to the U.S.A., and I think he would like to see them.
_April 26, 1895._
If I am not troublesome I should be very greatly obliged if you
would tell me anything as to the methods commonly used for
keeping off attacks of the Forest fly, _Hippobosca equina_,
which is such a special pest in the New Forest to horses not
used to it. I mean the thick made fly of which I enclose a
figure (18), natural size and magnified, which deposits an
egg-like puparium or chrysalis case in the hair of the horses,
from which case the fly presently comes out. I believe you will
know exactly the infestation I refer to, and any information
which you may be good enough to give me, as to how to prevent it
coming at horses and settling on them, I know would be quite
sound and reliable. I am receiving so much application for
information about the habits, &c., &c., that I feel sure my best
plan will be to issue a leaflet as soon as possible with figure
included at the heading. I have, I think I may say, far more in
the way of description and nature of the fly than can be needed,
but it would help me very much indeed to have a recipe for any
application which was really known to answer in keeping the
attack off riding horses. I am sure you would allow me to add
this to my leaflet, acknowledged to you. I make no doubt
quantities of things, especially of the nature of soap or soft
soap (not caustic) or lard, and a little paraffin or sulphur,
would with careful attention keep the flies from congregating
permanently, but the thing in hand is to prevent them coming at
the horses and causing dismal downfalls! I have heard lately of
a plan of rubbing horses with paraffin—very efficacious, I
should expect, but not the thing to benefit the clothes of the
riders!
[Illustration:
1 and 2, natural size and magnified from life; 3, pupa removed from
puparium (after Réaumur); puparium, natural size and magnified,
before complete coloration.
FIG. 18.—FOREST FLY, _HIPPOBOSCA EQUINA_.
]
_Wednesday night, May 1, 1895._
I am exceedingly obliged to you for your most helpful letter and
the live specimen, which I learnt a great deal from, before we
re-captured it, and stopped its activity with some benzine. It
slipped out of my fingers somehow, out of your careful packing,
and kept flying at my light woollen shawl, varied by taking a
promenade (which I was very conscious of) on the top of my head.
It struck me as suggestive that it selected me (not my sister or
our housekeeper) for this purpose, because I never use any kind
of pomatum. I like my hair as smooth as can be, so the creature
did not establish itself, but judging by feeling, it had much
pleasure in its survey. I noticed the set of the wings, and
perhaps I can get a figure.
When the flies are more plentiful, so that it would not give you
too much trouble to secure some, I certainly should like two or
three very much, but please do not let me intrude too much on
your good nature and time. I will write again presently to say
how I am getting on with the leaflet, but I did not like to
delay thanking you heartily longer than I could.
[Illustration:
Fly, with wings expanded; also viewed sideways. Larva and pupa, after
De Geer.
FIG. 19.—GREAT OX GADFLY, _TABANUS BOVINUS_, LINN.
]
_May 10, 1895._
I am very greatly obliged to you for all the information in your
letter, and also for the four live and hearty flies. These have
been very valuable to me, and I cannot help thinking I have
discovered a point not previously observed in the structure of
the feet which may prove of importance practically. However it
may have been known, so I have written to-day to our great
English authority, Mr. Meade, to ask him what he thinks about it
and will write you again. I fancy that your specimen’s being so
fresh allowed me to make out the point. Still I may be wrong.
P.S.—I was told yesterday that a worse trouble in the forest
than the Forest fly is the “Great Gadfly” the _Tabanus bovinus_.
Do you think this is so? This fly is such a very large creature
indeed, see figure (19) of it with wings laid at rest and
expanded. I should have expected to hear of it before now.
[Illustration:
Magnified (after Railliet).
(_a_) CLEG, OR SMALL RAIN BREEZE FLY.
(_b_) AUTUMNAL BREEZE FLY.
(_c_) SMALL BLINDING BREEZE FLY.
FIG. 20.—BREEZE FLIES: (_a_) _HÆMATOPOTA PLUVIALIS._ (_b_) _TABANUS
AUTUMNALIS._ (_c_) _CHRYSOPS CÆCUTIENS._
]
_May 20, 1895._
I received the first copies of my Forest Fly leaflet late on
Saturday and now enclose you a few with great pleasure. Please
tell me if more would be acceptable, as you know how gladly I
would send them, and you have helped me most importantly. I have
only had a moderate impression struck in order that I might be
able to alter or add as seemed desirable.
I thought a deal of what I could manage, as the flies came at me
and I could watch them, but I did not see my way at all to
making a more useful figure than that by Dr. Taschenberg, which
tells little. Mine is after the figure by Professor Westwood
drawn for the plates of “Insecta Britannica—Diptera,” and these
are regular standard reference plates.
_July 1, 1895._
We have really captured some of the _Hippobosca equina_ in North
Wales. The account will be in next number of the “Veterinary
Record.” I have identified them with quite absolute certainty,
but I suppose I must not forestall the “Veterinary Record,” as
it sent me the flies.
[Illustration:
Red maggot attack on a stem of barley; and a saddle, magnified.
FIG. 21.—SADDLE FLY, ? _CECIDOMYIA (DIPLOSIS) EQUESTRIS_.
]
_July 11 or 12, 1895._
I am very much obliged for your further consignment of the
_Tabanidæ_ (Horse gadflies), and especially for the liberal
supply of the Great gadfly (fig. 19). What a very grand fellow
he is, and how very painful the attack must be. I have to-day
written to Mr. R. H. Meade about this great variety of Gadflies
which you are letting me have, and offering to send him
duplicates.
Many thanks also for first, and as yet only, note of presence of
Hessian fly this season. About these curious markings on the
side of the straw—are they not very like those of the maggots,
“red maggots,” of the _Diplosis equestris_, the _Cecidomyia_ or
Great midge, mentioned in my thirteenth Report, at p. 30? I
think you have this report, and if you chanced to have leisure
to compare some specimens with my sketch, you would see what you
thought. The workings do not seem to me as regular, but yet
there is a strong resemblance.
I am working up the Gadflies as well as time allows, and through
courtesy of Mr. Janson have had a loan of a volume published in
1842 of a serial called “Isis” so as to be able to study the
very special paper in it by Zeller, which is the authority on
some of the important points, and which cannot now be bought by
itself. I thought this was a kind help, for the whole book is
very costly.
_July 31, 1895._
I have a promise from Professor Mik, who is a special authority
on flies, that when he returns to Vienna he will let me have
such duplicates of the _Tabanidæ_ as he has, which will be a
great help. I have had an artist down from London who has made
most beautiful drawings for engraving of the fly’s foot (plates
XXIII. XXIV.), but I greatly want some dissections made of it,
and I have only this morning heard where I could get this minute
work done. Would you mind the trouble of once again letting me
have two or three Forest flies? I should be very much obliged,
for though I keep the specimens most carefully that you let me
have, some quite fresh would answer much better for dissection.
It is very curious that until Mr. Goodall (a highly accomplished
veterinary surgeon) noticed the long bristle attached to the _H.
equina_ foot, no one except that wonderful observer De Geer
appears to have noticed it, or what is perhaps still more
astonishing, repeated De Geer’s observation and figure.
[Illustration:
PLATE XXIII.
Horace Knight ad nat del West. Newman lith. Foot of Forest Fly
(Hippobosca equina, _Linn._) _Side view greatly magnified_
]
[Illustration:
PLATE XXIV.
Horace Knight ad nat. del. West, Newman lith. Foot of Forest Fly
(Hippobosca equina, _Linn._) _Seen from above greatly magnified._
]
_August 13, 1895._
I am much obliged by your letter of the 8th inst. with
observations of the effect of temperature and weather on
presence of Forest fly, and now again this morning, and very
much, for the supply of Forest flies, which were alive I should
say by the grumbling in the corn-stem, until I chloroformed
them.
Your “black ants” appear to me to be _Formica fuliginosa_, of
which it is stated in Frederick Smith’s British Museum Catalogue
of British Fossorial Hymenoptera [burrowing four-winged
insects], p. 11, that “this species is at once recognised by its
jet-black colour; its usual habitat is the vicinity of a
decaying tree or old post.” I only twice met with this kind in
my father’s woods, each time, curiously enough, one of my
brothers who had a great fondness for ornithology saw the
Hoopoe. As this rare bird is stated to have a fondness for this
special kind of ant I conjectured its presence was caused by the
_fuliginosa_ being present. Their workings were wonderfully
destructive in the felled stump which they chose for
headquarters. I certainly think you need no advice from me on
the head of dealing with them, but it just occurred to me that,
if they come in a definite line still, and you could not run
them up to their starting point, it might answer to put a couple
of half-decayed stumps across their line of march. Might they
not adopt the suggested new settlement?
I am getting on with the Forest fly and lately I have been
studying the claws. I have only just discovered that along the
lower part of the large-curved claw is a saw-toothed edge, and
to this the slanting grooves which I had previously noticed run
down one furrow to each notch so as to give an enormous power of
holding and tearing. I think the thumb claw is also to some
degree furnished both with saw- and file-like markings (fig.
22).
P.S. I can only see the saw and file mark with a good side
light, when the claw is examined in natural state, not in
balsam.
[Illustration:
Much magnified.
FIG. 22.—FOOT OF FOREST FLY, _HIPPOBOSCA EQUINA_, SHOWING DOUBLE
CLAWS, CENTRAL PROCESS, AND LONG PRICKLY BRISTLE; ALSO PORTION OF
SIDE OF CLAW OF _HIPPOBOSCA MACULATA_, SHOWING PARALLEL GROOVES AND
SAW-EDGE.
]
[Illustration:
1, Leg and base of wing; 2, base of wing; 3, abortive wing; 5, female
fly, with base of wings—all much magnified; 4, puparium, much
magnified, and line showing natural length.
FIG. 23.—DEER FOREST FLY (FEMALE), _LIPOPTERA CERVI_, VON SIEBOLD AND
LOEW.
]
_June 20, 18096._
I was very glad to have your note of first capture of
_Hippobosca_ (Forest fly) on May 6th. I wonder whether on your
Red-Deer (or Roe Deer, if you have them) you find the Deer
Forest fly, the _Lipoptena cervi_. I am having a deal of
communication about it as having been observed as a very
noticeable infestation on Deer in one locality in the North of
Scotland. I believe it is troublesome to people moving in the
parts it frequents, but the odd thing about it is, that whilst
the females are considered (or conjectured, for it is not quite
certain) to be always wingless, yet the male flies are developed
with wings and drop them, something like ants, on settling on a
host animal. It would be very interesting if you found any of
these; they come very near the so-called “Sheep tick” in their
nature, only neither male nor female of the “Sheep Forest flies”
is ever winged. It is also very curious that from some
unaccountable confusion the generic name has gone wrong; it
seems obvious it should be _Lipoptera_, “without wings,” but—it
is supposed by some error in printing—_Lipoptena_, which has no
meaning connected with the fly, has got substituted. I think it
would be well presently to try to get this put right.
[Illustration:
With wings thrown off; also still retaining wings; and wing—all
much magnified. Line shows natural length.
FIG. 24.—DEER FOREST FLY (MALE), _LIPOPTENA CERVI_, VON SIEBOLD AND
LOEW.
]
[Illustration:
Fly, magnified, with line showing natural length; puparium, magnified
(showing incrustation), also natural size.
FIG. 25.—SHEEP SPIDER FLY, “KED,” OR “KADE,” _MELOPHAGUS OVINUS_,
LINN.
]
_August 29, 1895._
I am writing a few lines to mention that Mr. Meade has verified
my identification of the New Forest _Tabanidæ_ for me as being
all correct, with one exception. He thinks the _glaucopus_ is
more like _cognatus_, but Brauer of Vienna says the latter is
only probably a variety of the former, so this is no great
matter. Mr. Meade is not only an eminently skilled dipterist
himself, but he also possesses a collection of the _Tabanidæ_
(our British kinds) named for him by Dr. Brauer, the great
continental authority. So now we stand on a very firm footing
(thanks to the trouble which you and Mr. Moens were good enough
to take in supplying me with fresh specimens) as to the species
of these bloodsucking pests which you have in the Forest. Would
you tell Mr. Moens about this when you see him, with my
compliments and thanks? I think you meet sometimes. I am longing
to hear something of the military experiences.
[Illustration:
1 and 2, young and full-grown larvæ; 3 and 4, larvæ magnified; 5,
female beetle flying; 6, male beetle, slightly magnified.
FIG. 26.—BEET CARRION BEETLE, _SILPHA OPACA_, LINN.
]
_October 8, 1895._
I am very much obliged to you for your letter received this
morning, and (as you kindly allow me) I will just say what I
should particularly like, but please believe me I should be very
sorry to be really troublesome. First, about the Hessian fly
straw. If you came on some that had been infested this would
answer excellently. I have got some “flax-seeds” and I could
slip some in. But really the “elbowed” straw (bent over) into an
angle (fig. 16) is what I want to show. I have excellent Gout
specimens. One thing I should particularly like is a little bit
of Mangold-leaf (say two or three inches square) showing Mangold
maggot blister. I could dry this in blotting paper (like my pea-
bean- and clover-leaf injuries from _Sitones_) and with a good
supply of Mangold fly and pupæ which I have got, I think this
would be very nice. I have good grubs of Carrion Beet beetle,
which would be difficult to get, and I think plenty of the
beetle (or at hand), but, for the mangold, if I could get them,
I should very much like some of the Spotted or Black millepedes
which were such pests earlier in the year. I am afraid though it
is too late now. The only other thing which I am very much
wishing for is a good specimen of apple twig, injured by
American blight. A bit from six to nine inches long, which I
could split down, would suit me very nicely.
I may mention that I am preparing an exhibit for the Bath and
West of England Agricultural Society Show next May, but I am
collecting beforehand to be sure. This afternoon I have arranged
a nice case to show Bean and Pea seed and Leaf weevil injuries.
[See Appendix C for list of cases and contents.]
_October 22, 1895._
I am greatly obliged to you for the very acceptable parcel of
specimens, which arrived in excellent order this morning. Indeed
I feel very much indebted to you, for I know the trouble it
takes to collect and pack in this careful way. The Hessian fly
wheat was particularly acceptable as I had just two or three old
straws, but this to freshen them up (with the insect and
figures) makes a beautiful exhibit. The mangold leaves are also
a great help; and nothing could be more characteristic than the
American blight. I have not fully examined the contents of the
bottles, but I see some nice _Julus guttatus_ (Snake millepedes)
and also a few of the long, thin, yellow, electrical centipedes,
which I shall hope will keep their colour nicely in spirits.
Indeed it is a very welcome contribution.
I have been ill with rather a bad quinsy, followed by something
going wrong with my mouth and tongue, but I have nearly
recovered now, and as I was directed to keep indoors, I have
been getting on with the cases.
Besides the more customary crop and other attacks, I thought
such things as liver-flukes (in spirit) and a good number of the
little “water snails,” _Limnæa truncatula_, (such tiny shells!),
which is their host in the early stage, with figures of the
intermediate conditions, would be of useful interest; also a
couple of bottles with contents of sparrows’ crops, showing the
great amount of corn they eat, as well as a number of locusts in
the condition in which they are imported in lucerne from Buenos
Aires.
[Illustration:
1, Julus londinensis; 3, Julus guttatus (pulchellus, Leach); 4, Julus
terrestris; 5, horn; 7, Polydesmus complanatus—all magnified; and
2 and 6, natural size.
FIG. 27—CENTIPEDES AND A MILLEPEDE.
]
[Illustration:
Infested apple spray, natural size; wingless viviparous female and
young clothed with cottony fibres above; and small egg-bearing
female beneath the spray; pupa with little cottony growth—all
magnified.
FIG. 28.—AMERICAN BLIGHT, WOOLLY APHIS, _SCHIZONEURA LANIGERA_, HAUSM.
]
_November 26, 1895._
This sort of brickdust-like deposit is, I think, eggs. I had a
quantity of it sent me about six weeks ago by a fruit salesman
and auctioneer who had got 10,000 apple trees infested. It
agrees in measurement and colour, &c., with the general
description given by Mr. Frazer Crawford (of Adelaide) of the
eggs of the Red spider, _Bryobia ? speciosa_, (fig. 52) found
on apple in South Australia, but I do not think we can be
quite certain of its nature until the contents hatch. About
ten days ago I thought that I found fungi developing in the
patches, so I sent a good supply to Professor M. C. Potter
(Botanical Professor of Durham College of Science), for I was
sure whatever he would say would be trustworthy. He wrote me
that there was fungus amongst the red spheres. He did not
believe that they were fungoid; but thought, like me, that
they were eggs. Certainly you are right in considering them
not American blight, although on one of the twigs you have
sent me there is a swelled cankered piece that looks very
much, to general observation, like that attack. I wish I could
give you a plain straightforward answer, but the above is the
best I can tell you at present. Mr. Nixon, whose name you will
remember in my yearly reports connected with Red spider, says
that he knows this “red deposit” well and does not think it
does harm, but I should think it would be but prudent to have
some soft soap mixture or antipest at hand, against hot
sunshine in late winter days.
Many thanks for your good wishes, which I heartily reciprocate,
to you and to your young people. I cannot say I have been well.
However, I am much better, but we are anxious, for my only
remaining brother (who is nearly eighty) had a stroke of palsy
last year, and on Sunday he had a second, but he is not
suffering, which is a great comfort.
[Illustration:
Moth; caterpillars hanging by their threads, slightly larger than
life; rolled oak-leaf.
FIG. 29.—OAK-LEAF ROLLER MOTH, _TORTRIX VIRIDANA_.
]
_July 3, 1896._
I thank you very much for taking the trouble to send me this
good supply of _Tabanidæ_, and still more especially for the
Forest flies. I thought these were all dead, but whilst I was
opening the bit of straw in which you pack them so cleverly,
they began to tear out headlong—luckily I thought of catching
the whole affair together in my closed hand, and then, pouring
some chloroform in between my fingers, I got them all safe.
I am very much interested about this poor young woman’s death
from poisoning by a fly or insect attack.[62] I wish it had been
possible to secure the pest, it would be so really useful to
make out whether the evil was from the nature of the bite or
sting, or whether from ill health or other cause the sufferer
was unusually susceptible.
[Illustration:
(_a_) Male; and wingless females. (_b_) Male; and wingless
female; caterpillar.
FIG. 30.—LOOPER CATERPILLARS, (_a_) WINTER MOTH, _CHEIMATOBIA
BRUMATA_, LINN.; (_b_) MOTTLED UMBER MOTH, _HYBERNIA DEFOLIARIA_,
LINN.
]
_December 14, 1896._
I am troubling you with a few lines to ask whether you would
kindly tell me if the caterpillars which did so very much harm
to the oak leafage in your neighbourhood in May, were mostly
“loopers”—or the dull, dirty green, or leaden-coloured larvæ of
the _Tortrix viridana_ (Oak-leaf roller): you just noted the
very great amount of attack to me, in your letter of the 12th of
May. I conjecture they would be loopers (? Winter or Mottled
Umber moth), for you note that “the moths appeared unusually
early, and as soon as the bud began to open, the little
caterpillars were upon them,” and I think you would be referring
to the early appearance last autumn of the Winter moth. But a
note from you would be very valuable. I am wanting to make a
really good paper on “Leafage Caterpillars”—people seem not to
understand that though the remedies we know of can be used at a
paying rate on orchard trees that we can get at, yet, for a mile
of avenue “ancestral timber!” or for woods with their trees
touching, and no passage for machines, the expense of treatment
could not be met.
_August 5, 1897._
I am greatly obliged to you for your very interesting and
valuable observations, and for the accompanying specimens of
corn attacks. What a collection to find in one field! I do not
remember having had wheat attacked by _Chlorops_ before, though
it is subject to the attack, and it is years since I have had
the Sawfly attack. In one stem the grub had spun itself a
beautiful case just within the lowest part of the stem, and
being kept steady in the transparent covering, it gave me an
excellent opportunity of examining it.
I am very glad also of your definite observation of presence of
Diamond-back moth. I should not much wonder if we saw more of it
next year, for I have just had a very few specimens sent from
widely distant localities.
[Illustration:
1, 2, Corn sawfly, magnified, and line showing natural length; 3,
infested stem; 4, 5, maggot, natural size and magnified; 6, parasite
fly, _Pachymerus calcitrator_, magnified, and 7, line showing
natural size.
FIG. 31.—CORN SAWFLY, _CEPHUS PYGMÆUS_, CURTIS.
]
_August 7, 1899._
I am very much obliged to you for your letter of the 3rd with
notes of Hessian fly (fig. 15),and Corn sawfly presence. I have
examined the specimens, and it seems to me that those of the
Hessian fly attack close to the root are of the same nature as
some I have had before. I think your notes would be interesting
for my next Annual Report. I was very much pleased to notice
some time back, that in an official U.S.A. report, attention was
markedly drawn to the great importance of destroying puparia of
Hessian fly as a means of keeping attacks in check. My name was
given as having upheld the plan in England. I am truly glad that
the States people have taken this improved view of preventive
measures.
The weather has been quite distressingly hot here, with often a
glare of sunshine on this exposed south-west slope that was very
painful, and with the heat quantities of the Cabbage white
butterflies came out. I got my gardener to syringe the
brassicaceous plants with “antipest” as an experiment, and I
certainly think that afterwards there was not nearly as large a
proportion of the butterflies on the cabbage as in the adjacent
flower garden.
Believe me,
Yours very truly,
ELEANOR A. ORMEROD.
D. D. Gibb, Esq., Barton, Marlborough.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAPTER XVI
LETTERS TO MR. GRIMSHAW, MR. WISE, AND MR. TEGETMEIER
The Red-bearded Bot fly—Deer and Ox Warble flies—Caddis flies—Black
Currant mites—Crusade against the House Sparrow—Miss Ormerod’s
pamphlet and Mr. Tegetmeier’s book on the Sparrow.
The grouping of the letters to three correspondents, so differently
interested in Entomology and other branches of Biology, was more a
matter of dates than of any scientific relationship in the subject
matter. (1) Mr. Grimshaw, the well-known authority on Scottish Diptera,
was also the first investigator to show that the so-called “frosted”
condition of heather was caused by a beetle larva; (2) Mr. Wise was one
of Miss Ormerod’s most interested correspondents in questions relating
to fruit-growing and market-gardening; and (3) Mr. Tegetmeier was her
colleague through the trying days of the Sparrow controversy, in which
Miss Ormerod was subjected to bitter personal attacks by her opponents.
He was always ready to lend assistance in relation to questions dealing
with birds and the four-footed animals.
_To Percy H. Grimshaw, Esq., F.E.S., &c., Museum of Science and Art,
Edinburgh._
TORRINGTON HOUSE, ST. ALBANS,
_August 14, 1895_.
DEAR SIR,—I write at once to thank you very much for the copy of
your paper on the _Cephenomyia rufibarbis_ (Red-bearded botfly),
in the “Annals of S. Nat. Hist.” Will this be the attack figured
(in its effect on the deer) in Dr. Brauer’s spirited
frontispiece to his “Œstridæ”?[63]
[In the last few days I have had sent a nice specimen of the
Throat Deer botfly, _C. rufibarbis_, which I alluded to in my
nineteenth Report. It is a very handsome fly, more than half an
inch long, and of very broad make (three-eighths across the
abdomen), thickly clothed with very dark hair (but much either
mixed with or tipped with orange), and on each side of the
thorax a good-sized pale patch, and beneath the chin the red
beard from which it takes its name. I scarcely think it would
occur in the New Forest, but, if it did, it would be quite a
rare prize.][64]
Have you (if I may venture to ask) extended your researches to
the _Hypoderma_ (Warble fly), of our British deer? It would be
usefully interesting, I think, if we could work this up. I am
doing what I can, with help from some of the head-keepers, &c.,
and when deer-stalking is going on I am promised a warbled
red-deer’s hide for examination.
[Illustration:
Rather larger than life; line showing natural length.
FIG. 32.—RED-BEARDED BOTFLY, _CEPHENOMYIA RUFIBARBIS_, MEIG., BRAUER,
AND SCHINER.
]
_August 17, 1895._
I had much pleasure in receiving your letter this morning, and
only wish I had a duplicate of the _Hypoderma bovis_ (Ox warble
fly, fig. 5), to spare—I would most gladly offer it, but now I
have only one. I never had many, and with my best endeavours I
cannot get people to rear them. I quite hope to have a hide of a
red-deer presently, and I think one might make out the larva of
the _H. diana_ (Deer warble fly), at least, by reference to fig.
6, tab. viii.—what do you think?
May I ask you to do me the pleasure of accepting the enclosed
copy of the “Œstridæ,” lately come rather curiously to my hands.
It was sent through a mistake instead of the separate impression
of Dr. Brauer’s “Tabanidæ,” and as I knew how difficult it was
to procure (especially with the plates), I kept it, feeling sure
it would be useful to some friend. I have a copy which I have
worked with for years, so I hope that you will not hesitate to
give me the pleasure of making this copy as useful as I am sure
it will be in your hands. I wish it were in better order. I see
that beneath the frontispiece of this copy is a reference to p.
186 in the “Biologie von Cephenomyia, &c.,” but I suppose my
frontispiece is a “proof before letters,” for there is no
reference or description. The two are the same edition.
_January 9, 1897._
My _rufibarbis_ was sent to me by Mr. Dugald Campbell from
Strathconan Forest, Muir of Ord, Ross-shire. I received it on
June 8th, then quite fresh—and such a beauty! With its long
thick coat it almost might be called furry, and the “glance” on
the hairs was lovely. It was rather darker in some parts (that
is, ran to rather more foxy red on the centre of the upper fore
part of the abdomen), than is noted by some observers, so that
it was very richly coloured, and its red beard was very
handsome. I have had a figure taken of it, with great care, and
if when you see it (for of course I hope you will accept a copy
of my next Annual Report, on publication), you think you would
like to borrow it any time for one of your papers, I should be
only happy to lend it you.
Yours sincerely,
ELEANOR A. ORMEROD.
_To Charles D. Wise, Esq., Estate Office, Toddington, Winchcombe,
Gloucestershire._
TORRINGTON HOUSE, ST. ALBANS,
_April 16, 1896_.
DEAR MR. WISE,—If it would not give you too much trouble I
should be very glad of some information about the case of Caddis
worms attacking water-cresses. You will know these grubs quite
well as the creatures that go about in shallow ponds or ditches
with a case formed round them. Sometimes this is of very little
shells, but at home the commonest kind was made of little
morsels of rush or stick, with little leaves webbed up with it.
There is a very large trade in water-cresses from the little
river here, but there are such quantities of trout in it, that
probably these keep the Caddis worms in moderate limits, and I
only now and then see their flies, the so-called “Water moths”
in the summer. Mr. Richard Coe, Weston Farm, Guildford, has
kindly sent me some excellent specimens of Caddis worms and
cases, which I am very glad to have. The chief natural helpers
against over-presence of Caddis worms appear to be fish of
various kinds, but the increase of birds which naturally feed on
fish—herons, &c.,—destroys the balance of nature, and Caddis
worms increase.
[Miss Ormerod, quoting Mr. Coe in her Report for 1896, says (p. 156):—
“Whenever we find a bed of cresses attacked, we clear away all
the plants, drain off the water, and leave the bed perfectly dry
for two or three weeks in the autumn, previous to the winter
planting. If afterwards we find traces of the worm, we wait
until the plants are well established, then we increase the
volume of water and swim the bed, and pass the backs of wooden
rakes over the tops of the plants very thoroughly. This process
brings the bulk of the worms to the surface, and they are let
off down-stream with the surplus water.”
[Illustration:
Water moth, magnified, and lines showing natural size (after
Westwood); Caddis worm “cases” of _Limnephilus flavicornis_,
magnified.
FIG. 33.—CADDIS WORMS, LARVÆ OF CADDIS FLY OR WATER MOTH, _MORMONIA
NIGROMACULATA_.
]
To Dr. Fletcher she also wrote as follows:—
“Did I tell you about the Caddis worm attack on water-cresses?
So much harm was being done that the unlucky grower was in much
trouble, and on running the matter up it appeared that formerly
there were numbers of trout in the water, but lately the
landlord’s wife had a fancy to encourage herons, and so came the
curious sequence. The herons cleared off the insect-loving
trout, so the vegetable-eating insects got ahead, and the
watercress grower could not pay the rent of his half acre of
cresses. I suggested that as the herons were encouraged by the
lady, perhaps she, if applied to, might to some degree make good
the damages!”]
_March 5, 1897._
DEAR MR. WISE,—You asked my views about moles at Strawberry
roots. I should say it would be quite worth while to spare them
as you are doing, and see what comes of it. If they take the
_Otiorhynchus_ grub (of Orchard and Hop weevils) this would meet
a difficulty which we hardly know how to fight at present, and
if the moles took these grubs one might hope that they would
take other underground kinds, which are kitchen garden pests,
almost unconquerable by other remedial means. I should doubt,
however, whether they would be of much service against Winter
moth chrysalides (fig. 30). Very likely I am not right, but the
mole seems to me to prefer more open ground and a larger scope
of operations.
_April 8, 1897._
So far as I know the only treatment for Black Currant Gall mite,
_Phytoptus ribis_ (fig. 65), which has been in a measure
successful, is that reported by Mr. J. Biggs, of Laxton, East
Yorkshire, in my seventeenth Annual Report, p. 93. There, if you
will turn to it, you will see we have treatment to clear the
pest from all localities, whether straying on the twigs or on
the ground; or in the buds, this by breaking them off. Mr. Biggs
observed, writing on the 20th of April, 1892: “You will, I am
sure, be interested in knowing that I have, to a certain extent,
prevented the _Phytoptus_ utterly ruining my black currant
trees. As you suggested in a letter of last March, we syringed
the bushes twice with the solution of Paris-green, which I
procured from Messrs. Blundell, and gave the soil all under the
bushes a good coating of caustic lime; I also gave the bushes
another dressing of the Paris-green. Just when the buds appeared
this spring I had a boy gathering all the little knobs off the
trees. The result has proved as satisfactory as I could expect,
considering the condition of the trees last year, and I have
every prospect of securing a good half crop. Our neighbour’s
trees in this village are utterly ruined, scarcely a leaf to be
seen, and the trees completely covered with the affected knobs.”
But with regard to the life history of the pest, I believe it
breeds entirely in the infested buds, and I believe also breeds,
_i.e._, lays eggs, there at any time during the winter. I know
that the nearly allied nut-_Phytoptus_ does, for I have seen
them. Outside the buds, so far as I know, the life is wholly
spent in sheltering in crannies or straying about, on the stems,
or on the ground. What we want, appears to me to be, to clear
the mite by syringings from the stems when the buds (of which we
have now the galled growth) are first beginning to form. But I
do not see how we could do this, for we should ruin the fruit.
My only hope for real prevention where black-currants are grown
on this large scale, is in an alteration of the method of
cultivation. As it stands now, the mites can convey themselves,
or be carried by wind-borne leaves, or may creep from one bush
to another on the ground, but if there could be a mixing of some
field crop in strips with the black-currants, I believe it would
do a deal preventively. If the ground between the rows were
occupied by some crop that the _Phytopti_ would not pass, it
could not fail to lessen their presence. Even strips of
strawberries or of gooseberries would be beneficial. I wonder
whether kainite would be a good remedial application? It might
kill all the mites that are about, but it is quite plain to me
that, as nothing that has been tried for so many years answers
thoroughly, we are on the wrong lines and need a new plan. I
wish you would, at your leisure, tell me what you think of
mixing crops, and if you could let me have just a few little
bits of galled twigs for figuring, I should be very much
obliged. I wish I could help better about the matter, but so far
the attack appears to have fairly baffled us all.
_April 13, 1897._
I am very much obliged for these remarkably fine specimens of
Currant galls, which reached me safely this morning. About the
life history of the _Phytopti_, I do not think that anything
more is recorded than what both you and I know. But as we know
well that the mites are in the galls (such as you send me), it
seems to me that what we have got to act upon is their condition
(or locality, rather) in the time between their leaving these
galls and when they are starting new attack in the embryo buds.
I wish I could tell you more, but I do not see how to get at the
point of locality, excepting by watching shoots with a hand
magnifier. I really am quite at a loss as to what can be done.
_April 19, 1897._
I wrote out to Vienna to Professor Dr. A. Nalepa, who is the
great authority on the _Phytoptidæ_, and he is much interested
in hearing about this great spread of attack, but is not able to
give us better advice, as to practical remedies, than what we
are already trying. (See also p. 248.)
He says very truly, that looking at the winter quarters of the
mite pests being most especially in the buds, such measures as:—
(1) Breaking off and destroying the infested buds.[65] (2)
Cutting off the infested shoots just above the ground, and so
getting new shoots. (3) Only using uninfested pieces for
propagation—could not, he thinks, fail to be of service, if
carried out carefully. I quite agree with Dr. Nalepa so far as
that, without these measures, infestation would be worse than it
is. In a small amount of growth (such as bushes in a private
garden), I can speak from my own personal experience of having
sometimes satisfactorily checked the spread of these or similar
causes of injury by employing dressings. But it is a very
different matter where blackcurrant bushes are grown by acres
together; and I greatly doubt whether, even if consideration of
cost were put aside, it would be within possibility to get this
wood (or grove) of bushes, so examined and so expurgated of
evil, as not to leave centres for spread.)
It always strikes me as a very curious circumstance that (so far
as I am aware) the black currant is not affected by this
_Phytoptus_ on the Continent, or at least in the large part of
it in which the attacks are noted by Kaltenbach or Taschenberg.
Do you think it can be that the black currant is there of a
somewhat different kind which repels _Phytoptus_ attack, just as
some kinds of American vines are not as subject as others to
_Phylloxera_? It occurs to me that it may be well worth while to
import some hundreds of plants and plant them, of course on what
is considered clean ground, and see what comes of it. I should
like your views after you have well thought the matter over. I
cannot expect the expense of an experiment of mine to be borne
by any Company, but I should much like it trustworthily tried,
and if you could give me some guidance as to where to apply on
the Continent, and cost (a rough estimate), I might be able to
get the plants, and with your permission send a good consignment
to yourself.
_April 27, 1897._
I have to-day heard from Dr. Ritzema Bos about the _Phytoptus
ribis_, and he tells me that in Holland he knows many localities
where this infestation is a scourge to fruit-growers, but it is
always the black currant which is attacked. They do not have it
there in the red currant, _Ribes rubrum_. He says that he is not
acquainted with any better remedies than those mentioned in my
letter, but that he considers it an excellent idea to seek for
varieties or families of black-currants, _Ribes nigrum_, which
may be “_Phytoptus_ proof.” He does not himself know positively
whether there are districts in Holland not attacked by the
_Phytoptus_, and whether in attacked districts there may be
varieties that do not suffer. Therefore he is going to ask for
information on this head from horticulturists and fruit-growers,
and will write me again. I think it is very kind of him to take
so much trouble to help us, and from his position I expect he
will easily obtain whatever information is to be had, and I will
be sure to let you know. It is very curious about the red
currant being attacked in some parts of the Continent and not in
others.
_November 30, 1897._
I have this afternoon heard from Professor J. Jablonowski,
Assistant at the State Entomological Station, Budapest, that he
“sends now the promised black-currants.” I expect these will be
supposed “mite-proof” plants, as he says that he hopes they will
be serviceable for the proposed experiment—but he does not
explain; only that they have been given to him by his friend,
the Director of the Horticultural Institute, Desiderius Angyal
(I do not know what prefix I should write). When the plants
arrive I propose to divide them (if you please) between yourself
and Mr. John Speir—it would be exceedingly interesting if there
really should turn out to be a mite-proof black currant. But
meanwhile Professor Jablonowski would very much like to have a
specimen of the mite galls, for he has never seen them. If it
would not be too much trouble, I should be very greatly obliged
if you would be kind enough to let me have two or three bits of
twigs with galls, if any are showing enough now to be
noticeable, and I would send them on.
_December 4, 1897._
Many thanks for the supply of galls, which I shall duly send to
the Professor, and I earnestly hope that he will not infest
Hungary with them! The consignment came to hand from him
yesterday evening, but it is in the form of shoots as cuttings,
so I now send you about half in a registered letter. If the
pieces root properly I should think it would be best to plant
them amongst the infested currants—as they are so few it would
not be much trouble—and there is just a chance that they may be
mite-proof. I do not myself (much as I regret it) think that
there is any safety in washes and that sort of treatment, but as
I write the idea comes into my mind whether, as with us, the
_Ribes rubrum_ (red currant) seems mite-proof—anything could be
done by grafting black on red. Would they graft? or is my idea
quite chimerical? The black currant shoots are var. “bang-up,”
which suggests England as their original country.
I do not know whether you have to do with importing apple fruit,
but I see from Dr. Fletcher’s (Canadian) Entomological Report
that there is a newly observed fruit maggot in, I think (without
special reference), the District of Columbia.
_December 17, 1897._
I cannot be sure of your bulb attack without developing the fly,
but I should conjecture that the mischief was most likely caused
by the Narcissus fly. This is now known as the _Merodon
narcissi_, Fab., but from the varieties in colour to which it is
subject, I believe it has been known under all the following
specific names: _ephippium_, _transversalis_, _nobilis_,
_constans_, _ferrugineus_, _flavicans_, and _equestris_.
It is a fair-sized two-winged fly, and appears to be (in grub
state) a severe plague to Narcissus and Daffodil growers in
Holland, &c., especially in bulbs imported from the South of
Europe.
In Verrall’s list of British Diptera I only find one species of
_Merodon_ named and that is _equestris_, which on the principle
mentioned on the preceding page, might be synonymous with all
the other (?) species. The grubs feed in Narcissus and Daffodil
bulbs and turn to chrysalides in the ground, but I do not find
anywhere that there is any known remedial measure. It seems to
me that the only way if a bed were much infested would be
literally to trench it, and so turn down the chrysalides. You do
not mention whether your bulbs are home grown. If they are
imported, could not you suggest to your “consigner” that unless
he sent you bulbs without maggots in them, you purposed applying
elsewhere?
_May 12, 1898._
Excepting one specimen your caterpillars are not yet nearly full
grown! If you will turn to “Lappet moth” in my Annual Reports
for 1893 and 1894, you will find “the brutes” figured—perhaps
get a hint where they may have come from.
It was about this attack amongst others that I gave so
much annoyance to “Entomologists” by recommending that,
notwithstanding their beauty and rarity, it would be
highly desirable to make them yet more rare!
[Illustration:
Male and female; and caterpillar; also apple twig with leaves eaten
away—all from life.
FIG. 34.—LAPPET MOTH, _GASTROPACHA QUERCIFOLIA_, LINN.
]
_December 5, 1900._
Do you happen to have seen the Woburn Report containing, amongst
a good deal of information, an account of results of experiments
_re_ Black currant mite? I would with pleasure lend you my copy,
if you please; there is a little in it, as to their views about
hydrocyanic acid—the very great difficulties of applying it to
broadscale treatment—and a politely expressed hope that further
experiment may lead to useful results. The experiment of moving
cut down plants, even if steeped in methylated spirit and water,
has not succeeded. Mine had a charming little crop of mite galls
on those only moved to my clean ground, and even the steeped
plants were not quite without them. In this case four of the
twelve plants died, the others were sickly, and all of the two
dozen sent me flowered profusely but did not produce one
currant!
Yours very truly,
ELEANOR A. ORMEROD.
_To W. B. Tegetmeier, Esq., F.Z.S., M.B.O.U._[66]
TORRINGTON HOUSE, ST. ALBANS,
_July 3, 1897_.
DEAR MR. TEGETMEIER,—I am greatly obliged by what you tell me
about your intentions as to publishing a book on “The House
Sparrow,” _Passer domesticus_. My idea is this—that for popular
use (farmers and gardeners)—the evidence of what the food of the
house sparrow really is, needs to be put plainly before them by
means of records of trustworthy investigations of the contents
of their crops. For this I have been taking the returns of Mr.
Gurney, and some of Colonel Russell, who used to help me; an
abstract of the U.S.A. Board of Agricultural Investigations,
&c., &c.; also from my own Annual Reports, some lists, and
observations of birds which are named as destroying insects—this
to show that we do not wholly rely on _Passer domesticus_! With
other material I propose to make a sort of 8 or 12 page
“leaflet” or small pamphlet, and send it out gratuitously. I
believe it would have an enormous circulation, and would not
interfere with your much more valuable standard book. But I am
exceedingly desirous to act completely in conjunction with you.
To me it would be a very great advantage. I quite reckon on
being violently attacked, but it did me no harm before to be
threatened to be shot at, also hanged in effigy, and other
little attentions. Still it was disagreeable!
[Illustration:
FIG. C.—HOUSE SPARROW, _PASSER DOMESTICUS_.
]
[Miss Ormerod’s case against the House Sparrow or avian rat is briefly
given in the following summary, appended to the aforementioned leaflet,
of which nearly 36,000 were printed and issued to applicants:—
“We find, in addition to what all concerned know too well
already of the direct and obvious losses from sparrow
marauding, that there is evidence of the injurious extent to
which they drive off other birds, as the swallows and martins,
which are much more helpful on account of their being wholly
insectivorous; also that, so far from the sparrow’s food
consisting wholly of insects at any time of the year, even in
the young sparrows only half has been found to be composed of
insects; and of the food of the adults, it was found from
examination that in a large proportion of instances no insects
at all were present, and of these many were of kinds that are
helpful to us or harmless. It is well on record that there are
many kinds of birds which help us greatly by devouring
insects, and that where sparrows have systematically been
destroyed for a long course of years other birds have fared
better for their absence. Attention should also be drawn to
the enormous powers of increase of this bird, which under not
only protection, but to some extent absolute fostering, raises
its numbers so disproportionately as to destroy the natural
balance.
“Here as yet we have no movement beyond our own attempts to
preserve ourselves, so far as we legally may, from Sparrow
devastations; but in the United States of America (of the
evidence of which I have given a part) the Association of the
American Ornithologists gave their collective recommendation
that all existing laws protecting the sparrow should be
repealed, and bounties offered for its destruction; and the
law protecting the sparrow has been repealed in Massachusetts
and Michigan. Dr. Hart Merriam, the Ornithologist of the
U.S.A. Board of Agriculture, also officially recommended
immediate repeal of all laws affording protection to the
English sparrow, and enactment of laws making it penal to
shelter or harbour it; and Professor C. V. Riley, Entomologist
to the Department, similarly conveyed his views officially as
to it being a _destructive bird, worthless as an insect
killer_. In Canada, on October 6, 1888, at the Annual Meeting
of the Entomological Society of Ontario, Mr. J. Fletcher,
Entomologist of the Experimental Farms of the Department,
strongly advocated the destruction of the sparrow; and in
reply the Hon. C. W. Drury, Minister of Agriculture (who
attended the meeting as head of the Agricultural Department of
Ontario), stated ‘that this destructive bird was no longer
under the protection of the Act of Parliament respecting
insectivorous birds, and that every one was at liberty to aid
in reducing its numbers.’ Reasoning on the same grounds as to
procedure in this country, we believe that similar action is,
without any reasonable cause for doubt, called for here. The
amount of the national loss, by reason of ravaged crops and
serviceable birds driven away, may be estimated, without fear
of exaggeration, at from one to two millions a year. Much of
their own protection lies in the hands of farmers themselves;
and sparrow clubs, well worked, and always bearing in mind
that it is only this one bird that is earnestly recommended to
their attention, would probably lessen the load to a bearable
amount; and we believe that subscriptions, whether local or
from those who know the desirableness of aiding in the work of
endeavouring to save the bread of the people from these
feathered robbers, would be money wisely and worthily spent.”
[Illustration:
FIG. D.—TREE SPARROW, _PASSER MONTANUS_
]
In his little book, “The House Sparrow,”[67] Mr. Tegetmeier
writes:—“There is no species with which _Passer domesticus_ is likely to
be confounded except the Tree sparrow, _P. montanus_ (the only other
species indigenous to this country) which is less numerous and which is
readily distinguished by its smaller size, being only 5½ instead of 6
inches in length, and by its having black patches in the middle of the
white feathers on each side on the neck, and two distinct bands of white
across the wing in place of one.” “The so-called Hedge-sparrow or
Dunnock, _Accentor modularis_, is wrongly named. It is a purely
insect-eating bird, and neither in its structure, habits nor food is it
closely related to the House sparrow. It does not occur in large
numbers, and is highly beneficial as an insect destroyer.”]
_July 10, 1897._
DEAR MR. TEGETMEIER,—Your letter received this morning is a very
great pleasure to me—in fact, a great relief to my mind, for I
was truly sorry to feel I might be trespassing on far more
authoritative work. I should like to shorten my work if I could,
but when we meet, I hope you will set me right as to condensing
and all other matters. If we could rout _P. domesticus_ it would
be a national benefit. Much looking forward to our meeting on
Tuesday.
_August 4, 1897._
I think “House Sparrow” shapes up nicely altogether, and I have
this morning received a letter from Dr. M. E. Oustalet,
President of the “Comité Ornithologique permanent,” at Paris, to
say that he has not been able to find any indication of
destruction of sparrows having taken place by order of
Government in the districts that I inquired about.
_August 16, 1897._
Application for our leaflet is very satisfactory. The
Staffordshire County Council has taken up distribution, and the
farmers and parish authorities are again encouraged to begin
sparrow clubs. I have experienced tremendous denunciations of my
own brutality from the Rev. J. E. Walker. I enclose the second,
as he purposes to relieve his mind further in the “Animal’s
Friend.” Please not to return it. I returned his book with my
compliments and thanks for sight of the same, and requested that
should he desire to make any further remarks relative to the
leaflet that he would not address them to me, but to you as my
colleague in the work.
_August 21, 1897._
In very little more than a week a new impression was needed to
keep up to demand—and we are making way well with this second
5,000. Many of the applications are from centres—and great
satisfaction is often expressed at the information being made
available. The Agent-General for New Zealand asked for a supply,
and Mr. Morley, Lord Spencer’s agent, is taking up the matter
well; and as Lord Spencer appears to steadily set his face
against sparrows, I hope that when he comes home we shall get
some support there. A fair proportion of clergymen want copies
for distribution to parishioners, or for sparrow clubs, which is
satisfactory—and amongst all the great mass of applications
there have not, I think, been more than five or six at all
upholding _P. domesticus_, and these have been mostly quite
trivial observations.
Mr. Morley was in a difficulty about how to keep the birds for
counting, as in warm weather they got unpleasant. I suggested
preserving their heads in salt and water—if I remember rightly
this was how they managed the difficulty in South Australia.
Altogether I think we are doing well—there are a good many
inquiries as to the best methods of destroying the bird—but I
always say that you will deal with this in your work. The good
folks have not attacked me again personally by letter.
I should have liked to write just a short note to the “Field” to
mention how well the matter has been taken up, but I did not
feel sure whether you would wish me to do it? Would you think
well of just mentioning the large demand yourself? On several
days the applications ran to above a hundred letters. I am
keeping the letters, for in some there is very practical
observation as to the great injury done by sparrows—especially
attacking corn on allotments.
_August 22, 1897._
I am trying—if the thing be possible—to rout people out of the
time-honoured old holes that they creep into—as the emigration
of the sparrows—also the Maine and Auxerre story. These, I
think, we have managed.
* * * * *
[The following is an extract from the “House Sparrow” pamphlet:—
“For many years mention has been made, by those who consider
sparrow preservation desirable, of great disasters following on
some not clearly detailed methods of extermination, or expulsion
of the sparrow in the countries of Hungary and Baden, and also
in the territory of Prussia; and, nearer our own time, in Maine,
and near Auxerre in France. With regard to the three first
named, a record will be found in our own ‘Times’ for August 21,
1861, p. 7.
“This gives a translation from the French paper, the ‘Moniteur,’
of a report on four petitions relative to preservation of small
birds which had been presented to the French Corps Législatif.
The report contains much information, but in respect to the
emigrations of the sparrow because the bird was aware of the
plots that were being laid against its safety, the statements
cannot be said to carry any weight. The following extract is
inserted, as it is important to agriculturists to have a correct
copy of the baseless statements they are sometimes called on to
believe. The passage is as follows:—
“‘Now, if the facts mentioned in the petitions are exact,
according to the opinion of many this bird ought to stand much
higher than he is reputed. In fact, it is stated that a price
having been set upon his head in Hungary and Baden, the
intelligent _proscrit_ left those countries; but it was soon
discovered that he alone could manfully contend against the
cockroaches and the thousand winged insects of the lowlands, and
the very men who offered a price for his destruction offered a
still higher price to introduce him again into the country.’ ...
‘Frederick the Great had also declared war against the sparrows,
which did not respect his favourite fruit the cherry. Naturally
the sparrows could not pretend to resist the conqueror of
Austria, and they emigrated; but in two years not only were
there no more cherries, but scarcely any other sort of fruit—the
caterpillars ate them all up; and the great victor on so many
fields of battle was happy to sign peace at the cost of a few
cherries with the reconciliated sparrows,’
“With regard to the destruction and consequent results stated to
have occurred in Maine and near Auxerre, at present our very
best endeavours have failed to find that the statement of this
having occurred rests on any authoritative basis; and the only
definite notice of the subject which we have found is, that in
the neighbourhood of Auxerre there was an injudicious
destruction of small birds generally, not only of _Passer
domesticus_.” See ‘The House Sparrow at Home and Abroad,’ by
Thomas G. Gentry, p. 26, Philadelphia, 1878.”]
_August 22, 1897._
DEAR MR. TEGETMEIER,—But there is a third story—though I name
this with more reverence than they always do—the New Testament
allusions translated in our version, the “sparrow.” I find in a
copy of the “Ecclesiastical Slavonic” Scripture which I have
here (the authorised edition of the Russian Greek Church) that
the word is _bird_; in the ordinary modern Russian it is
sparrow. Unfortunately I do not understand Greek—but this could
easily be looked up in the Greek Testament. I am trying to find
a scholar who knows what the respective words for bird and
sparrow are in Aramaic, which I believe was the dialect of
Palestine in the time of our Lord. Mr. Rassam, the explorer,
can, I believe, talk a number of these Eastern dialects, but he
always told me that he did not enter on them grammatically or
technically.
_September 3, 1897._
I see by a local paper that Miss Carrington’s leaflet, “Spare
the Sparrow,” is out, and is procurable from the Hon. Sec. of
the Humanitarian League, 53, Chancery Lane, London, W.C., price
1d. I have now written to the Hon. Sec., enclosing 8d., and
requesting him to send six copies to myself, and two to
yourself. This leaflet, I think, will be spirity. There are only
a few lines quoted, but if the rest is so discourteous and
inaccurate it will not be of much value.
Amongst applicants for my leaflet, the Duchess of Somerset and
also Lady Alwyne Compton have asked for copies, which I am glad
of. If it were “fashionable” not to protect sparrows this would
go far with some people. I am longing to see the reply leaflet.
I expect I am roundly abused, but I think it is rather strong to
head something or other in the “Animal’s Friend” for September
“God Save the Sparrow.” I expect we shall very likely have Maine
and Auxerre, and Frederick the Great, and the cherries and
cockroaches and the whole story resuscitated!
_September 11, 1897._
The Secretary of the Yorkshire Union of Agricultural
Associations asked for some leaflets, and with his consent I
have sent him down 2,000 copies, which gives one for each
member of the Agricultural Clubs or Chambers in the Yorkshire
Union, and the matter is to be brought before the next
quarterly meeting, with the view, the Secretary says, of
seeing about asking the Board of Agriculture to remove _P.
domesticus_ from the list of protected birds. Mr. Crawford
wrote me acknowledgment of receipt of the leaflets I sent by
his desire to the Board of Agriculture, and said that next
week, when the Secretary returns, they will be laid before the
Board. I wonder what they will do? Daily applications are
running from seventeen or eighteen to thirty—and some very
good. To-day I have one from Smyrna and one from Stavanger,
Norway.
_September 19, 1897._
The applications are going on so well that I have had to order a
fourth 5,000 of the leaflets to be printed as soon as can be
managed, and of these over 2,000 are bespoken. A few days ago
3,000 were wanted for a Scotch centre, the Agent-General for New
South Wales will send out 500, and other distributions are
floating about; I think this is not bad.
_October 16, 1897._
As you will see by the enclosed, I am now working on the
twenty-first thousand. I have only about fifty copies left, and
Mr. Newman has sent out some of the twenty-second thousand, so I
think that we are doing well. One of the largest amounts asked
for lately has been 1,000 for the Lancashire County Council, and
also a little while ago Lady Aberdeen wrote for a small supply
from the Government House, Canada.
_October 27, 1897._
I hope you will be pleased to hear that I have brought our
sparrow work under the notice of Mr. [now Sir Ernest] Clarke,
Secretary, Royal Agricultural Society—I hope in a way to advance
our work. I sent him a couple of the twenty-second thousand,
with a sort of report letter, giving some points. Mr. Clarke has
replied very courteously that he is much obliged for my
interesting letter, which he will lay before the Society’s
Zoological Committee. Also that, as he is occasionally asked for
the leaflet, it might “save me (E. A. O.) unnecessary
correspondence” if he were able to send copies to inquirers. I
am delighted to follow up this suggestion—for practically it is
the Royal Agricultural Society distributing for us, and thus
giving their marked approval. I wonder what will come of the
Zoological Committee’s consideration. As the President of the
Society has such an exceedingly bad opinion of the sparrow, I
hope we may get some good colleagueship. I am perpetually asked
how to destroy sparrows, but I refer the inquirers to you. I am
longing to hear when your book will come out—surely it will have
a good circulation. I am well advanced now in the twenty-second
thousand, and the information is well spread, for we have a
splendid notice—much more than a column—in the “Madras Mail,”
and I have had two applications from scientific U.S.A. centres.
I am still dispensing knowledge about the evil ways of _P.
domesticus_ so steadily that I have had to order a sixth
impression.
The store of letters grew to such a size that a week or two ago
I sent them (excepting about seventy which were to some degree
private) in a great parcel to Mr. Janson, and I have arranged
with him that this great mass, perhaps of 1,500 or 1,600
letters, should be sorted out into those that are merely
applications for leaflets and those which contain any
information.
The overwork and worry was too much for me, joined to my bad
fall, and I was very far indeed from well for some time with
gout and exhausting troubles, but I am better, and regaining
strength.
_September 14, 1898._
I most truly think it a great distinction that my name should be
associated [on the title-page of “The House Sparrow”] with that
of an Ornithologist of such world-wide reputation as yourself,
and as it is your wish I very heartily agree. The only
alteration I would suggest is that the word “Miss” should be
removed. I do not like the word if it is not quite needed; and
would it not be well to add a reference to my being an
authorised agricultural worker? It may protect me from some
“mendacities,” and, a better reason, show that we are attentive
to all three of the points (Ornithology, Entomology, and
Agriculture) on which anti-passerine observation rests.
I like your frontispiece (figs. C and D, kindly lent by Mr.
Tegetmeier) very much. It is very pretty as well as very useful.
When your book appears I shall like to get some copies to send
to some of my own friends, British and extra-British.
_April 15, 1899._
It was a great pleasure to me to see “The House Sparrow”
yesterday, followed this morning by your kind and cordial
letter. I like your book exceedingly; it appears to me to be
exactly what is needed. Chapter IV. [Diminishing the Sparrow
Plague] meets the want which is greatly felt, and your voice
being raised against poisoning will do good. I propose to send
samples to the Agents-General of South Australia and New
Zealand, where the “Avian Rats” are special pests; also to Mr.
McKinnon, for the benefit of the Republic of Uruguay.
I think one or two would be well placed in the hands of the
Department of Agriculture, U.S.A. I suppose that in an obviously
much-needed matter like this it is hopeless to expect our Board
of Agriculture to do anything. But I have, besides the above,
several centres of work which I hope to make use of.
I do hope that your book will have the success that it deserves,
and be of infinite benefit. I like it thoroughly—its pretty
dress, the good figures and readable type on strong paper; it is
a National gift, in your good and authoritative working up of
the subject, and I feel myself honoured to be associated with
you in the good work and the pummelling, which I dare say we
shall get more of!
With my very kind regards and remembrances, believe me,
Yours very sincerely,
ELEANOR A. ORMEROD.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAPTER XVII
LETTERS TO MR. MARTIN, MR. GEORGE, MR. CONNOLD AND MESSRS. COLEMAN AND
SONS
Elm-bark and Ash-bark beetles—Roman remains—Bladder plums—The Silver
Y-moth.
A number of interesting and important fresh subjects are here concisely
treated in letters addressed to various British inquirers. These are
merely characteristic samples of a vast amount of correspondence for
which space could not be found.
_To the Rev. John Martin, Charley Hall, Loughborough._
TORRINGTON HOUSE, ST. ALBANS,
_April 2, 1897_.
DEAR SIR,—From your description of the elm-bark attack, I should
certainly think that the maggots were those of the Elm-bark
beetle, the _destructor_. If you do not feel certain after this
hint as to the nature of the infestation, and will send me a
little piece of bark, I will with pleasure examine it and report
to you. This infestation does not injure the timber of the tree.
The burrowings are mostly between the bark and the wood, though
necessarily there are a number of borings through the bark,
caused by the entrance and exit of the beetles. It would be
desirable to fell the trees, and peel off the bark and burn it.
The timber would be quite good (so far as this matter is
concerned) but if the bark is left, the maggots will in due
course develop to beetles and fly off to continue mischief
elsewhere. Further I would suggest that you should direct your
wood-superintendents to examine whether other elms show
shot-like holes in their bark—the sign of the presence of the
infestation. From your mention of the locality of the trees
being rather damp, I should conjecture that the trees were not
in absolutely perfect health, and this is the state of things
the beetle prefers for its attack. Injured boughs, or moderately
recently-fallen boughs, or, above all, felled elm trunks in
which there is still sap, but not flow enough to stifle the
little maggots, are the very headquarters of infestation, and it
is quite worth while to have such felled trunks peeled and the
bark destroyed, or they will be the nurseries of great mischief.
If you will supply me with more detail I will with great
pleasure give my very best attention.
[Illustration:
Beetle, much magnified (from “Forest Protection,” by W. R. Fisher);
workings in elm bark—from life.
FIG. 35.—ELM-BARK BEETLE, _SCOLYTUS DESTRUCTOR_, OLIV.
]
_April 5, 1897._
The little larvæ came safely yesterday and the specimens of bark
this morning. Necessarily when the attack has been going on so
long the burrows intersect each other so very much that they
cease to show the typical patterning or tracks, but I do not see
any reason at all to doubt that this is attack of the very great
elm-pest, the Elm-bark beetle. With regard to its infestation of
other trees besides elm, I have no knowledge of its ever
attacking either oak or ash, but on careful search I find that
one German writer records it as “sometimes” attacking the ash. I
greatly doubt this having been observed in our country. Our
ashes have, however, a bark beetle which tunnels much in the
same manner between the bark and wood, and of which the presence
may similarly be known by the shot-like holes in the bark. But
you would distinguish the difference in pattern of gallery at a
glance on raising the bark. As in the figure given, the
mother-gallery is branched. This Ash-bark beetle, _Hylesinus
fraxini_, does not do very much harm, for it chiefly attacks
felled trunks, or sometimes sickly or damaged trunks and boughs.
It is not to be compared in its ravages with the _Scolytus_,
well-named _destructor_. I am not aware of this ever attacking
oak.
[Illustration:
Workings, showing forked “mother gallery,” with larval galleries from
the sides.
FIG. 36.—TUNNELS OF THE ASH-BARK BEETLE, _HYLESINUS FRAXINI_, FAB.
]
_April 12, 1899._
You have certainly two kinds of bark attack present in the
specimens which you send me, but without the beetles I am not
able to say at all what species may have been doing the
mischief. I can say quite certainly that I do not see any signs
of the presence of the _Hylesinus fraxini_ (Ash-bark beetle),
but I have never, so far as I remember, seen the very long,
narrow borings, hardly wider than a thread of silk, which are a
good deal represented on the inner surface of one of your pieces
of bark.
There are two or three grubs in fairly good condition which I
have gently inserted into a burrow in the little bit of bark and
have put carefully aside in the little box, and if these
develop, we shall then know what we have to deal with. Perhaps
you may be able to secure some beetles in a month or two; it
would be of interest to make out the attack with certainty.
_November 7, 1899._
I have very carefully examined your beetle and find that it is
_Hylesinus crenatus_, sometimes known as the “Large Ash-bark
beetle” to distinguish it from _Hylesinus fraxini_, the
“Ash-bark” or the “Small Ash-bark beetle.” The life history of
each kind is stated to be the same, and I think, if I remember
rightly, that some time ago, perhaps a year or so, in the course
of our occasional correspondence, we have gone into the history
of the _fraxini_, but if not I should have pleasure in either
looking up the account in my Manual and sending the pages to you
or condensing the points.
There appears to me to be this difference in method of larval
proceedings: that whereas in the case of _fraxini_ the parent
galleries are formed somewhat in the shape of a T with a short
stem and long arms to the top, and the larval galleries placed
at right angles to the others (fig. 36), so far as I understand
this form is not followed by _crenatus_ fig. 38).
The beetle obviously pierces the bark, for the orifice
is visible; and in or under the bark there are the
mother-galleries, but I do not find the larval galleries
feathering as it were from these, and the figure before me gives
the idea of the body of larvæ having by their united attack
cleared a flat space from which they have continued their
solitary tunnels. Perhaps in cutting up your trees you may come
on some of these markings. It is said that there are two
generations in the year, of which the flight time of one is in
April and of the other in October. This species frequents oak as
well as ash, which is an important consideration, and I find it
noted as frequenting old trees. These are the main points which
I see about the history. I should think that if you find the
trees which you have felled much infested, it would be a good
thing to strip the bark off and burn it.
[Illustration:
1, Beetle, with wings expanded, and one wing-case drawn only in
outline, to show lower part of wing; 2, beetle as usually
seen—magnified; 3, smaller and paler variety; also lines showing
natural length.
FIG. 37.—GREATER ASH-BARK BEETLE, _HYLESINUS CRENATUS_, FAB.
]
[Illustration:
FIG. 38.—PIECE OF ASH-BARK, SHOWING MOTHER GALLERIES OF _HYLESINUS
CRENATUS_ ON THE INNER SIDE.
]
_June 25, 1900._
I am very much obliged to you for all the great trouble which
you have been good enough to take about the Ash-bark beetles,
including your letter of the 23rd and the box of specimens
received to-day. Some of the workings are quite certainly of _H.
fraxini_. One bit catches the eye at a glance as showing quite
typical galleries. In the long strip the workings are not so
clearly distinguishable. According to descriptions or comparison
with other specimens they appear to me of both kinds. But I
really cannot think of giving you further trouble. We have all
that is needed to make out a good, sound account, and I hope, if
all be well, to do justice to the subject in my next Annual
Report, and that you will be satisfied with my working up of the
points of the infestation.
With renewed hearty thanks, yours very truly,
ELEANOR A. ORMEROD.
_To A. W. George, Esq., Sedbury, Tidenham, Chepstow, Agent on Sedbury
Estate._
TORRINGTON HOUSE, ST. ALBANS,
_February 17, 1897_.
DEAR SIR,—My work is chiefly on injurious insects, so I am
afraid I am not qualified to give you the exact name of this
curious collection of cement-like pupa-cases. Still I may say
that your description most resembles those of the Mason bee, a
kind of _Osmia_ which constructs cells of a plaster formed of
little morsels of stone, earth, &c., and then fills them with
food and lays an egg on it, walls up the cell, and begins
another. The grub in due course hatches and feeds, and goes
through its changes to the perfect bee—and somehow or other
manages to make its exit. These cells are sometimes made on
walls, in parties of as many as a dozen (as shown in a figure
before me), but as I said, I am not a “specialist” on
_Hymenoptera_ (Bees and Wasps), so I would not like to express a
decided opinion. Your mention of the Roman coin found near the
Severn cliffs is very interesting, for it was quite inexplicable
to my father how it happened that, whilst coins are just the
things often found in such great plenty amongst Roman remains in
the pottery, bones, &c., of which there was such quantity in the
site of the Summer Station of the Augustan Legion from Cærwent
on the Sedbury cliffs, we absolutely did not _have_ a single
coin. Circumstances since we left have made me think that the
word I have underlined may be more correct than that none were
found. On one occasion it chanced I went when the ditch-diggers
were at their dinners, and under a little shelter of turf (which
naturally I inspected) I found a very nice little Samian cup. No
more were reported as found; but after we left I heard of a box
being in one of the lofts over the stables, addressed to myself,
which when opened was found to contain more of these Samian
cups, and also geological specimens from the cliffs. Of course I
wrote down at once, but (perhaps equally of course) by that time
the box had vanished. Your letter of this morning recalled all
this to me, and made me think that very likely the domestic
collector of curiosities who appropriated the Samian cups also
made a little collection of the coins, whose total absence
appeared so surprising. This is a very long story, but I thought
it might be of some interest to you.
I suppose most of our old work-people are gone?
Might I venture to trouble you, in case you should be good
enough some day to find time to write, kindly to let me know
whether my father and mother’s grave (vault) just below the high
bank with the pathway on the top in Tidenham Churchyard (plate
VII.) is in proper repair? If anything is requisite I think you
would likely be so very good as to tell me, and to whom I should
apply to do the work. Trusting you will forgive the intrusion on
your time of such a long letter, I beg to remain, yours truly,
ELEANOR A. ORMEROD.
[Illustration:
PLATE XXV.
RUINS OF CHEPSTOW CASTLE, MONMOUTHSHIRE.
(_p. 16._)
]
_To Edward T. Connold, Esq., F.E.S., Hon. General Secretary, Hastings
and St. Leonards Natural History Society._
TORRINGTON HOUSE, ST. ALBANS,
_July 4, 1900_.
DEAR SIR,—I think that perhaps before this reaches you, you will
have heard from the Rev. E. N. Blomfield that these curiously
formed damsons, of which you have forwarded me such excellent
specimens, owe the galled growth to the attack of a parasite
fungus. They are what you called popularly Bladder plums, or
Pocket plums (fig. 39), and the cause of this extraordinary
growth is the presence of the fungus _Exoascus pruni_. I do not
myself work on Fungi, so I should not have considered myself
qualified to give you trustworthy information, but I see in
Professor Marshall Ward’s good account of this attack, that,
besides reproduction taking place by means of the spores
carrying the disease from tree to tree, he mentions that the
fungus can carry on its existence from year to year by means of
its mycelium in the branches. Consequently much pruning back, as
well as collecting and burning the “pockets,” is needed to
combat the attack to any serviceable extent. I am not troubling
you with details, for you would find them so well entered on in
Ward’s useful little book, of which I gave the name yesterday to
Mr. Blomfield, that I think you would prefer them in his
wording. Hoping I may have assisted you a little in the matter.
[Illustration:
FIG. 39.—POCKET OR BLADDER PLUM INFLATED AND DISTORTED BY THE FUNGOID
ATTACK OF _EXOASCUS PRUNI_ (After Sorauer).
]
_December 19, 1900._
I am greatly obliged to you for the kind thought of sending me
the photo of the Bladder plums. This shows the difference
between the healthy and the diseased fruit so well that if I had
not secured a figure of the diseased growth I think I should
have asked your permission to copy part for my next Annual
Report. This assuredly is not an insect attack. Still, as it may
very often give rise to much perplexity, I thought that (with
due explanation) there could be no objection to including your
good contribution, and I hope that when in due time you receive
your “contributor’s copy” you will not disapprove.
About Dr. Nalepa’s publications; I dare not offer to lend them,
for all I have are copies presented successively during a long
course of years, and if any mishap occurred, I should be in a
difficult position. But if you have not yet applied to them,
Messrs. W. Wesley & Son would be more likely to help you than
anybody I am acquainted with. They would almost certainly be
able to give you the titles of the successive publications and
prices, and also procure for you such as are published. At one
time I worked a great deal on vegetable galls, _Cynips_ galls
chiefly, but _Phytoptus_ galls I have always found so very
troublesome in several points of view that I have never worked
on them more than I can help. Very truly yours,
ELEANOR A. ORMEROD.
_To Messrs. W. J. Coleman & Sons, Fruit, Pea, and Potato Salesmen,
Covent Garden Market._
TORRINGTON HOUSE, ST. ALBANS,
_August 1, 1900_.
DEAR SIRS,—I would very gladly help you about the
moth-caterpillar attack on your potatoes, but I am afraid that
without caterpillar or moth I cannot name it. There are very
many infestations to potato of caterpillars, nearly allied to
what you will, I think, very likely know well as the “Turnip
grub.” These are so numerous that it would be quite hopeless for
me to endeavour to name merely from description and the
chrysalides; and even with the caterpillar it would have been
difficult (though I would with pleasure have tried), on account
of some of these pests greatly resembling each other, and also
some (identical grubs) altering their colours completely as they
moult. I should have been glad to help you, but as these
creatures are now turning to chrysalides the attack is
presumably nearly over for the present.
P.S.—For general use in an attack of this kind the spray that
you have been using, which is very nearly equivalent to the
U.S.A. kerosene emulsion, is probably about as good as you could
try; for I conjecture that you might not like to try
“Paris-green”? Possibly this would not answer, and for various
reasons—it being a ground crop as well as the tuber a food
crop—it might not be desirable; still, I just name it.
_August 4, 1900._
I am obliged by the fresh specimens of caterpillars received
this morning from your agent, Mr. Carswell, and from these and
the moths coming out to-day from the chrysalides previously sent
me, I am able to say that the larvæ are those of the _Plusia
gamma_ moth, popularly known as the Silver Y-moth. I am not
aware of these caterpillars having been recorded as injurious to
potato leafage, excepting in the year 1892, when I had
information of two attacks to this crop, in both instances from
caterpillars migrating from clover. It is too late to-night to
give you a detailed account, but I write now, as you will be
interested to have the identification as soon as possible.
[Illustration:
1, Eggs; 2, caterpillar; 3, chrysalis in cocoon; 4, moth.
FIG. 40.—GAMMA OR SILVER Y-MOTH, _PLUSIA GAMMA_, LINN.
]
_August 5, 1900._
Your potato attack is, as I mentioned last evening, caused by
the caterpillar of the Silver Y-moth, so named from a small
bright mark on the fore-wings, in shape like the English Y or
the Greek _Gamma_. The moth is about half an inch in the spread
of the fore-wings, which have a satiny lustre and are varied
with rich coppery, as well as grey and brown, marks. The hinder
wings are greyish, with a brown border. The caterpillars are
fairly recognisable by being what are called “half-loopers.”
Having only two pairs of sucker feet beneath the body (besides
the customary claw feet) they form a slight arch when they walk.
The attack is occasionally very destructive and is one of those
which we have proof of having been blown to us, in moth
condition, from the Continent; and, from some information which
has come to my hands since I received your letter, I think it is
not at all unlikely such may be the case now, with another kind
of crop. The caterpillars feed on many plants, those of the
cabbage and turnip kind especially; also on _Leguminosæ_, as
peas and beans. Sugar beet they are destructively partial to. I
should not at all think that the attack was likely to recur to
potatoes, or that, as the infestation is now past its
destructive stage, it was worth troubling yourselves about. If
you should desire more about it than I can easily condense into
a moderate letter space, you would find a careful account of the
attack, with a good figure, in my sixteenth Annual Report on
Injurious Insects. Hoping, however, that my few notes may be all
you require, yours truly,
_Eleanor A. Ormerod_.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAPTER XVIII
LETTERS TO PROFESSOR RILEY AND DR. HOWARD
Flour moth and Winter moth—Orchard growers’ Committee—John
Curtis—Entomology in Cape Colony—Handbooks and Reports—The General
Index—The LL.D.
The letters addressed to the two distinguished United States officials
are unlike most of those we have passed. Miss Ormerod writes, as usual,
in courteous and even in deferential terms to the two acknowledged
chiefs among Entomological authorities in America. The considerable
variety of subjects touched upon are dealt with in less simple language,
and minor details give place to discussions on the higher polity of
Economic Entomology. The letters contain internal evidence of the esteem
in which her work was held by her correspondents.
[Illustration:
1, Moth, with wings expanded; 2, moth, at rest; 3, caterpillar; 4,
chrysalis—all magnified; lines showing natural length.
FIG. 41.—MEDITERRANEAN FLOUR MOTH, _EPHESTIA KUHNIELLA_, ZELL.
]
_To Professor Riley, Entomologist to the Agricultural Department,
Washington, U.S.A._
TORRINGTON HOUSE, ST. ALBANS, ENGLAND.
_March 6, 1889._
DEAR PROFESSOR RILEY,—We have got a flour caterpillar in
England, newly arrived in the last two years, which is so very
troublesome and injurious where it establishes itself that I
should like to place a short account of it in your hands, hoping
that at your leisure (I should rather say at your best
convenience, for leisure you have none) you may kindly tell me
whether you have it in the U.S.A., and, if so, whether you
manage to keep it in check. The caterpillars were first observed
in Europe in 1877 by Dr. Jul. Kuhn, of Halle, doing much
mischief during the process of grinding some American wheat. The
imagines from these larvæ were placed by Dr. Kuhn in the hands
of Professor Zeller, who considered them to be _Ephestia_ of a
species previously undescribed, and they were named by him
_kuhniella_ (fig. 41) specifically after their observer. All
this most likely you know well, but it is the appearance of this
“pest” here which I am more particularly writing to you about.
In 1887 the caterpillars did great harm in some large stores in
London, and last year the attack established itself in a
wheat-flour steam-mill in the North of England. The great harm
caused is by reason of the caterpillars “felting” up the meal or
flour by the quantity of web which they spin in it. They feed,
of course, but this is not so injurious as working up the flour
together, as thus they clog the mill apparatus to a very serious
extent. I have much reduced their numbers by getting the manager
of the steam-mill to turn on steam to scald them; and cleaning,
whitewashing, and some use of paraffin have done good. The real
cure would be to change the material ground. If we could use
ryemeal for a few weeks we could clear out effectually this
wheat-flour-feeding caterpillar. Unfortunately, however, the
delicate apparatus of our recently arranged wheat “roller” mills
does not allow of this. One point that would help us in
preventive measures would be to know where the attack comes
from. I am told it is a “scourge” amongst the flour (or rather
the meal, as it prefers the more branny parts) in wheat from
Russia and Hungary at the Mediterranean ports, so I am making
inquiries; but Dr. Lindeman is not aware of this attack having
been noticed in Russia. Under these circumstances I thought that
I would write to you about it, and if you are acquainted with
this moth and the larval working, and, still more, if you know
how to destroy it, I should feel greatly favoured and obliged by
any information that you may kindly give. I believe that unless
it has very recently been placed on your American lists of
_Lepidoptera_ it is not noted as known there, and I am trying to
persuade myself that it is not all selfishness which makes me
trouble you thus, but that if by any possibility you may not
chance to have heard of the serious nature of the work of these
larvæ, you may care to have a few lines about them. The moth is
about ¾ in. in spread of the fore-wings, which are of pale grey
with darker transverse markings; the hinder wings remarkable for
their whitish semi-transparency with a darker line from the
point along a part of the fore edge. The larvæ, when full-grown,
as far as I see, are about five-eighths of an inch long. You
will not care to have full description, but they have surprising
instinct for travelling, and amazing strength. One that I
watched to test this power escaped from under a little
smooth-edged cardboard frame which I had placed on a woollen
cloth on a quite flat table and pressed down with a one pound
weight.
I hope before long to forward my twelfth Report for your
acceptance and that it may meet your approval.
_June 22, 1889._
I have not until to-day been able to find time to study your
interesting and instructive Report (which reached me a little
while ago), and now after my best thanks I hasten to offer some
observations about our use over here of the word paraffin—see p.
104 of your Report. So far as I know or can learn, the different
oils sold under the name of paraffin, kerosene, or crystal oil,
only differ from each other by reason of treatment to secure
various degrees of purity or refinement. The common paraffin oil
is the coarsest; kerosene I understand is a little more refined,
and a trifle higher in price; and crystal oil—or (as it is
sometimes described in the trade) “A1 Crystal Oil”—is limpid
like water, and the purest of all. I do not know why, but
kerosene is a name little used here. Paraffin is certainly not a
correct term for the fluid form, but this fluid or oil is used
so enormously compared to the solid paraffin that the appended
word oil necessary for correct description is usually omitted as
being understood. I quite feel it is a loose and inaccurate
plan, but so the matter stands. In the same number of my Annual
Report from which you quote—namely, that for 1884 published
1885—at pp. 66-67, is a recipe for a mixture of soft soap with
“paraffin or any other mineral oil.” It has been thoroughly
tried over here, and found very useful. If you should think fit
to experiment with it I should greatly like to know results.
A single report of appearance of Hessian fly (fig. 15) here has
been sent me on June 13—with specimens accompanying—full grown
but still in larval condition. These were on lower shoots of
wheat of which the plant was then coming into ear at Revell’s
Hall near Hertford—the farm on which Hessian fly was first
observed here.
September 23, 1889.
It was very kind of you to spare time to write to me before
leaving England, and I well know how very much occupied you must
have been, so must not be selfish enough to say how much I
regretted not being able to have both the pleasure and the great
benefit of a little conversation with you.
I beg to place in your hands the little brochure which I am now
issuing on one of the consequences of warble presence, and might
I ask Mr. L. O. Howard’s acceptance of the other copy? You will
see I have tried to condense the points of the subject into a
space that workers would not be frightened at. It would be a
great satisfaction to me if the inquiry met with your approval,
and if you should judge fit to forward the cause of prevention
in your country, your high authority would be a great help in
strengthening my hands here. If you care to have a packet of the
leaflets for distribution it would be only a pleasure to me to
send some for your acceptance.
I have just seen with great pleasure that the Association of
Economic Entomologists has been formed, and that they have
elected the highest representative of the important work as
their First President. This is a great satisfaction to me, and I
hope ere long I may have the honour of being enrolled amongst
its members.
You pay me a compliment in saying you would care to have an
occasional contribution of mine in your valuable “Insect Life.”
If I had anything that I thought would be of sufficient interest
to send, I would very gladly do so.
[Here a contribution on the “Shot-borer Beetle” (Appendix D) followed,
which was published by Professor Riley. See also page 199.]
_April 10, 1890._
I must take up a little of your valuable time in offering my
best thanks for the exceedingly interesting transmission,
received through your kindness this morning. Your own “Insect
Life,” 3 pts.; “The Root Knot disease”; and Mr. Koebele’s
“Australian Thrips” are all very valuable contributions to my
library, and I greatly wish I were able to reciprocate more
worthily. There is one point in reply to which, if you are quite
willing, I should much like to be allowed to insert a few lines.
It is to the paragraph headed “Traps for the Winter Moth
Useless,” p. 289, of March No. of “Insect Life.” Mr. R.
McLachlan is mentioned as having stated that traps which aim at
destruction of the males of the _Cheimatobia brumata_, Winter
moth (fig. 30) are useless, as enough will remain to fertilize
the winged females. This I should have conjectured to be a
well-known fact—but it is not this point which we are in any way
working on, in any of the prevention details with which I am
myself acquainted. Our difficulty, as you will see mentioned in
my thirteenth Report, if you will kindly turn to p. 67, is the
transportation of the females in the act of pairing by the
winged males to the trees. This is a point much observed in this
country, and I have to-day once again had my attention drawn to
this difficulty in the matter of prevention, by a Somersetshire
correspondent who in confirmation of his observation has
preserved the pair in his collection. It is solely to meet this
difficulty that we use tarred boards and lights in any
preventive operations with which I am connected. I do not see
the “Gardeners’ Chronicle,” and I am not in communication with
Mr. McLachlan or I would have replied in my own country and
given the necessary explanations, but, if you approve, I should
much like to be allowed to insert the above observations,
otherwise the various Superintendents and myself might appear to
your readers (whose good opinion I should like to merit) as
wonderfully ignorant of what I believe is a well-known fact.
We have now formed a kind of Society Conference with
Experimental Committee of some of our best orchard growers in
the West of England for the purpose of themselves experimenting,
and reporting to the frequently recurring meetings—as to the
effects of Paris-green, London-purple, &c. At last our people
are roused to feel that “greasing” will not do everything.
I shall look with exceeding interest to the result of your
_Hypoderma_ or _œstrus_ (Warble and Botfly) experiments. I
sincerely hope that you will be able to rear the imago.
I have been greatly disturbed (and am consequently not writing
you in as good form as I could wish) by a report being published
in several of our London papers that I had been thrown from a
carriage and met with serious injuries. This is altogether
erroneous, but the many applications, and much writing and
wiring to get the press to stop the report, has been indeed
disturbing, and it has wasted me much time.
With kind regards and all good wishes from my sister and myself,
pray believe me, yours very sincerely,
ELEANOR A. ORMEROD.
_To Dr. L. O. Howard, Entomologist U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Washington._
TORRINGTON HOUSE, ST. ALBANS,
_July 26, 1894_.
DEAR MR. HOWARD,—I do not myself know what arrangements the
Royal Agricultural Society of England made with John Curtis.[68]
In the “Gardeners’ Chronicle” for October 18, 1862, however, I
find at p. 983, vol. iii., the following remarks in a short
notice of the decease of John Curtis, which I transcribe in case
they should be of interest. After mentioning that he had for
many years been engaged in investigating the habits of insects
injurious to farm and garden produce, the writer continues:
“These he published in detached memoirs in the ‘Gardeners’
Chronicle’ under the signature of ‘Ruricola,’ and in the
‘Journal of the Royal Agricultural Society.’ At a subsequent
period they were collected into a single volume and published
under the title of ‘Farm Insects.’ It was chiefly on account of
the value of these articles that Mr. Curtis was awarded a
pension from the Civil List which was augmented about three
years since on account of the sad loss of sight which he
experienced.” The note is given as quoted from the “Athenæum,”
and in case you should not have references to Curtis having the
pension he so well earned, I thought you might care for the
extract.
Thank you for letting me know of Professor Riley’s visit to
England; I greatly desire to have a long talk with him. He may
have comfort in having such a skilled successor. Special
thanks also for your paper on the Army worm, _Leucania
unipunctata_.[69] It is such a good one, and the remedies so
practicable. I hope to quote from this presently—duly
acknowledged. You speak very truly as to information not being
asked until the attack is so set up that much hope of victory
over it is lost.
I should very much like to be allowed to offer my best regards,
and respectful expression of my admiration of their good work,
to the many kind friends who will be present at the Economic
Entomology meeting in August, together with my hearty good
wishes for the prosperity of the Association and its members. I
owe much to the kindness of my U.S.A. colleagues and friends.
_October 17, 1894._
I hasten to thank you for your letter received this afternoon,
setting me right as to the origin of the bran-mash and
Paris-green application for killing “cutworms” (leather
jackets). I should indeed be sorry not to give credit in the
right quarter, and you may rest assured that the first time I
have to mention the matter this shall be set right. I am sorry
also on my account not to have known that this remedy was in
use, and now you have pointed the way I shall be very glad to
look the matter up. Through the kind liberality (public as well
as private), with which I have always been treated by your
country, I have a truly valuable library of your U.S.A. works,
from which I often and gratefully profit.
I am looking forward very much to getting your paper on Economic
Entomology, but at present I have only seen pleasant notices of
it, and I am greatly desirous to read it _in extenso_. Attention
to this subject is spreading very satisfactorily on the
Continent. I am now in communication with Professor J.
Jablonowski, of the Entomological staff of the Hungarian
Government Department of Agriculture at Budapest. He is doing
very careful and good work on _Thysanoptera_ (Thrips). Also at
Helsingfors (Finland) I hear from Dr. Enzio Reuter that they are
contemplating arranging an Entomological Station, and I hope I
may be in communication.
I am now beginning to pass my eighteenth Report through the
press. One of the interesting appearances of the past season has
been a widely spread outbreak of _Charæas graminis_, Antler moth
(p. 104). This was more or less in seven contiguous counties in
the South-west of Scotland, and though not remarkable in itself,
yet, as there were one or two competent observers on the spot,
some good notes were secured, especially as to presence of
parasites, which I hope in due time you may find of some
interest. There was much presence of a _Mermis_ in one district.
Out of a single larva I withdrew in three pieces about 18 inches
of thread-worm. Also there was presence of “flacherie” and some
_Tachina_ larvæ. Dr. Ritzema Bos, of Wageningen, who is always
most kind in colleagueship, helps me much about identification.
I hope to have a good deal to say about _Heterodera schachtii_
(an eel-worm enemy of hop-roots). Different kinds of eel-worms
seem each year to be showing themselves more, and I am greatly
desiring to find whether the _schachtii_ may not have come to
the roots of oats here as well as in Holland. The Great
Tortoiseshell butterfly, _Vanessa polychloros_ (fig. 13), which
is not common in this country, made a destructive appearance on
elms and cherry leafage in one locality in Hants. And not far
from Lymington was a destructive attack in one wheatfield of the
caterpillars of a small moth, which ate out the heart of the
young plant and was utterly ruinous. I cannot find the kind of
attack on record (that is from a _Lepidopterous_ butterfly or
moth, larva), and we are all perplexed as to species. There
seems little doubt that it is a _Miana_, and it appears to me
most like _expolita_, but none of us contrived to rear it.
_March 23, 1895._
I have been long in your debt for a letter, but sometimes it is
very difficult to keep all work in hand, and I am sure you will
forgive me. I had been endeavouring before your letter on Warble
came to hand, and have since also been trying in some of what
appeared the most likely quarters to gain information whether
the form of attack which you mention in the U.S.A. was
observable here, but as yet I have not been able to find that
such is the case.
Many thanks to you for your presentation copy of your most
interesting paper on “Rise and Progress of Economic Entomology,”
and your only too flattering mention of my own work (pp.
295-97). On the continent of Europe there is grand work going
forward, and the colleagueship I am favoured with from many of
the leading Continental Government Entomologists is most kind
and gratifying to me.
_September 23, 1895._
I think it is but a proper respect to you, as Entomologist of
the Department of Agriculture of the U.S.A., to mention what I
have been doing relative to the recent appointment of one of the
U.S.A. staff of skilled Entomologists to the post of British
Government Entomologist in Cape Colony. On the 17th inst. I
heard from Mr. C. P. Lounsbury from Cape Town, with a letter of
introduction enclosed from Dr. Fernald, which, he regretted,
from pressure of time he had not been able to deliver. So did I,
for I should very much like to have made his personal
acquaintance, as well as that of Mrs. Lounsbury, of whom Dr.
Fernald writes in such high terms.
I think it is a most happy thing for the Cape Colony to have
secured the services of a good, trained Entomologist, but that
he should bring with him in the person of his wife a lady so
highly qualified to be a companion (an “_alter ego_”) in his
work was a good fortune past hope. I wrote at once to Mr.
Lounsbury expressing the pleasure it would be to me to
co-operate so far as lay in my power. And I have since written
to the same effect to the Agent General for the Cape of Good
Hope, especially drawing his attention to the fact (though of
course I did not word it in this way) that really instead of one
Entomologist they had thus secured the services also of an
excellently trained assistant! Yesterday morning I received a
reply, expressing his best thanks, and mentioning that he was
then communicating the contents of my letter to the Hon. the
Secretary of Agriculture at Cape Colony, who he felt sure “will
be extremely glad to hear the high opinion you entertain of the
newly appointed Entomologist, and he will also be grateful for
your friendly offer of co-operation in the work of that office.”
I hope all this will meet with your approval. I am deeply
indebted to the aid and encouragement I have received for years
from the wonderful staff of workers of the U.S.A. and from its
head—first Professor Riley, and now yourself—and if I can be of
any service to a member of it by what I can do from here it
would be a very great pleasure to me.
_September 1, 1897._
I never before have ventured to submit one of my leaflets to
you. I felt as if I should be taking a liberty. To-day, however,
I have a request from the Boston Public Library for one of the
leaflets on the House Sparrow, and I have therefore ventured to
ask your acceptance of a few copies sent accompanying by book
post. You will see that I have extracted largely from the
excellent work of your own Board of Agriculture, but in a
condensed work of this kind it is impossible to show the value
and importance of the observations as I should greatly desire.
At least I have acknowledged my obligation gratefully. I am sure
I need not say that I should think it a pleasure and an honour
if you cared to have some copies of the sparrow leaflet for
distribution. The farmers here are delighted to have something
reliable, and their reports confirm the severe losses which _P.
domesticus_ causes. But there is virulent opposition from a few
people who rail at me in a most unpleasant manner.
Lately I had the great pleasure of a little visit from our good
friend Dr. Fletcher, and we spent half an hour or so in cutting
up some Plum-wood, infested by what I took to be the _Xyleborus
saxeseni_ (Shot-borer beetle) (fig. 46), given as a maker of
flat cells, or burrows, by Eichhoff; but very likely you have
heard about this from him already.
I have had some nice observations in the earlier part of the
year of the workings of the Angoumois moth, _Sitotroga
(Gelechia) cerealella_, which was imported in such quantity from
North Africa in one or more cargoes of barley as to give some
alarm.
The wings, such as they are, of the female _Lipoptena cervi_
(fig. 24), have given me some good figures. There is
demonstrably at times a mere abortive wing, but whether
sometimes there has not been a developed wing which has been
torn across so that only about an eighth of the wing remains,
seems to me open to doubt. Also the Lesser earwig, _Labia
minor_, has been locally a little troublesome. Altogether there
have been a good many rather nice observations sent in, which I
hope may presently be of some interest to you. Pray accept my
sincere thanks for the enormous benefit I receive from the
valuable publications so kindly sent me, and believe me with
most hearty good wishes, &c.
[Illustration:
1 and 2, Moth, magnified and natural size; 3, caterpillar, magnified,
and line showing natural length; 4, pierced grain, natural size and
magnified; 5, grain with frass, magnified; 6, chrysalis in grain,
and removed, magnified, and line showing natural length.
FIG. 42.—ANGOUMOIS MOTH, FLY WEEVIL (U.S.A), _SITOTROGA (GELECHIA)
CEREALELLA_, OLIV.
]
[Illustration:
1, Male; 2, female with wings expanded, much magnified; line showing
natural length of body and forceps.
FIG. 43.—LESSER EARWIG, _FORFICULA MINOR_, LINN., _LABIA MINOR_,
LEACH.
]
_April 7, 1898._
Your letter of approval was a very great pleasure to me, and I
greatly value your words of encouragement. Before this letter
reaches you, you will perhaps have received a visit from Dr.
Ritzema Bos, who gave me the pleasure of a visit on his way to
the U.S.A. to investigate the amount of danger to be feared in
Holland from this _A. perniciosus_ (San José scale). From what I
gather from the different publications with which I am most
liberally supplied from your own headquarters and the
experimental stations, I hope that we need not fear this
veritable pest making a settlement here. I have an impression
that a part of the commotion here is from a desire to exclude
foreign fruit imports. I am working now on what I hope may make
a “Handbook of Insect Attacks, injurious to Orchard and Bush
fruits, with means of Prevention and Remedy.” Fruit growing is
extending very much with us, and so many little-known attacks
have been reported to me in the last few years, that I thought a
volume including these, with our old standing attacks brought up
to date and very fully illustrated, would meet a need here. Also
I was somewhat afraid that if I did not do it myself some one or
other might be “good enough” to save me the trouble.
Our chief crop trouble during the spring and winter has been the
presence of _Tylenchus devastatrix_ (eel-worm), in clover. This
still continues, but I hope that with good growing weather and
sulphate of potash (as a manure dressing to encourage growth) we
may fight it down.
_March 24, 1899._
I am afraid that you will have been thinking me very negligent
in not replying sooner to your kind letter, but I felt sure you
would understand that if I could have sent any information in
reply to your inquiry about the “Cigarette beetle” I should have
hastened to submit it.
My Annual Report is late this year, for work on my Handbook,
&c., &c., threw me late.
I have been following the urgent advice of our good and much
regretted friend, Dr. Lintner, by having a “General Index”
prepared to the series of twenty-two Annual Reports (chap. IX.).
It is not a magnificently exhaustive compilation giving
everything that can be desired, like that to your invaluable
“Insect Life,” but I think that both entomologically and
practically it will be of service. When printed, I purpose to
forward copies for your own acceptance, likewise to Professor
Webster, to the State Entomologist, Albany, and a few other
positions where I think they very likely have a set of my
twenty-two annual issues, and therefore might care to have the
Index. But if I were not intruding too much on your kind good
nature, would you allow me to send a few, say a packet of ten or
twenty, to yourself, which perhaps you would so greatly oblige
me as to present to mutual friends whom you might see. I should
think this a kind favour, for I might go rather astray in my
sendings.
With my next number (all being well) I propose to commence a
“Second Series”—altering my plan a little, so as to have a
special section in which I could place any good short notes of
information sent me, thus utilising what may come to hand, but
without being encumbered by perpetual repetition, year after
year, of life history and figures, of well known, or what should
be well known, attacks.
_June 26, 1899._
It is too good of you to give me the two copies of this valuable
pamphlet, “Some Insects Injurious to Stored Grain,” and I thank
you very much. But I did not beg for more of your publications,
and tried to get them _via_ Messrs. Wesley, because you are so
good to me, in constantly presenting information quite
invaluable to me, that, as it is, I do not know how to
reciprocate the kindness. We have nothing like your publications
to fall back on here, and when a very heavy case is brought to
me I naturally benefit by your books.
I have lately been called in about a cargo of flour of 46,200
seven-stone bags, every bag (so far as examined) infested by
_Calandra (= Sitophilus) granaria_ (Granary weevil, fig. 68),
and the Mediterranean Flour or Mill moth (fig. 41), and it was
for the importers that I was trying to procure a copy, the other
for my own lending. I am truly obliged to you.
My Index is not ready yet. I thought I could improve it, and
strained my eyes so badly that I caused delay without much good.
Now I am trying to work up _Piophila casei_ (Cheese and Bacon
fly, fig. 12) as a cheese pest. How curious it is that it should
not trouble cured meats with us, as with you—nor cheese with you
as with us.
The Shell-slug, _Testacella haliotidea_ (fig. 44), seems to me
to deserve a little notice, as (by its carnivorous habit)
ridding us of various under- and above-ground troubles (slugs
especially), and I have been gathering a few notes about the
creature for some years. Another (I believe) unusual presence
lately sent me was a specimen of the Ground Planarian, _Bipalium
kewense_, found eating plants “like a slug.” I did not know the
worm (so to call it) at all, but the name was given at S.
Kensington. When it arrived it looked only like a very narrow
slimy strip about three inches long—but I thought from its
reported habitat possibly some slightly warm water would revive
it, and immediately it roused up and swelled to a narrow
cylindrical shape, and leaving the moss on which it lay made
such fair speed (by adhesion of the lower surface) up the side
of the bowl, bearing an unpleasant looking bilobed head before
it, that I restored it to its box as soon as might be.
[Illustration:
1, Snail-slug, in motion; 2, contracted; 3, head, with tentacles,
magnified; 4, shell, upper and under side, slightly magnified; 5,
shell, much magnified; 6, egg (4 and 6 from Plate v. of Jeffrey’s
_British Conchology_, vol. i.; the other figures from specimens
taken at St. Albans).
FIG. 44.—SNAIL-SLUG, _TESTACELLA HALIOTIDEA_, DRAPARNAUD.
]
[Illustration:
1, Worm extended; 2, contracted; 3, 4, and 5, different forms taken by
the head—all life size (after figures by Prof. F. Jeffrey Bell); 6,
bifid form of head, rather larger than life.
FIG. 45.—FLATWORM, LAND PLANARIAN, _BIPALIUM KEWENSE_.
]
_January 24, 1900._
I thank you most sincerely for this great trouble which you have
been good enough to take for me. I feel very much gratified that
you should place my Index in such distinguished hands, and I
thank you very much also for your kind letter. Please allow me
to add that if you should at any time care to accept copies of
any works of mine which are in print, for yourself or friends,
it would be a real pleasure to me to be allowed to send them.
I had a very pleasant letter from Mr. Lounsbury a few days ago.
He is working with great interest on the “tick” [which conveys
the disease known as red-water or Texas fever to cattle.]
_March 21, 1900._
I do not know whether, according to etiquette, I am quite right
in mentioning the following matter, but I think that to a kind
friend like yourself I may mention the great gratification it
was to me lately to hear from the University of Edinburgh that
they were about to confer on me the Honorary LL.D. I feel this
to be a great honour. It is not only the compliment to myself
that gratifies me, but I greatly hope that one of our chief
British Universities giving its approval to Economic Entomology
will be a great strengthening to work in this country, which it
has greatly needed.
_April 30, 1900._
I was very much gratified by your kind congratulations (p. 295)
on the great honour which the University of Edinburgh has
conferred on me. They were all very kind when I went to receive
the degree. I had the great pleasure one day of meeting His
Excellency your Ambassador at the Vice-Chancellor’s [Sir William
Muir], and was charmed with the kind interest with which he
conversed on Agricultural Entomology, and indeed all subjects
which were brought forward. At the ceremony I was next to him,
and now and then he kindly interchanged a few pleasant words. As
I took my seat by him after receiving the degree he gently
whispered, “I congratulate you; you did it splendidly,” and I
thought it very interesting that my first congratulation should
be so kindly given me by the Ambassador of the greatly advanced
country to which I am so indebted for help in my work.
_September 29, 1900._
It was a great pleasure to me (though it was only such a little
visit) to make personal acquaintance with Dr. John Smith of New
Jersey. Also Dr. W. Saunders (who came for the Paris Exhibition)
and Dr. Mills kindly came to see me. These visits are very
refreshing.
Meanwhile I have been learning a great deal from your “Notes on
the Mosquitoes of the United States.” It is a great
gratification to me to possess this valuable work, and my
medical adviser, Dr. Lipscomb, is only waiting until I can spare
it, to borrow it for his own perusal. With kind regards and good
wishes and grateful thanks for all your kind help and
encouragement, pray believe me,
Yours very sincerely,
ELEANOR A. ORMEROD.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAPTER XIX
LETTERS TO DR. J. FLETCHER
General references to insect infestation—Progress of Economic
Entomology—Success in using Paris-green in Britain—End of work done for
the Board of Agriculture and Royal Agricultural Society of England.
The series of selected letters to Dr. Fletcher in this and the
succeeding chapter is the most comprehensive of the remnants of Miss
Ormerod’s correspondence with distant scientific authorities. Although
only a portion of the original group of letters, it ranges over a period
of fourteen years, and touches, sometimes only lightly, a great many of
the leading objects of interest which had specially engaged her
attention. Some phases of character come out here more conspicuously
than in any other part of the volume. The mutual confidence in business
matters which speedily established itself developed in this, as in most
other instances, into intimate personal friendship.
_To Dr. J. Fletcher, Dominion Entomologist, Ottawa, Canada._
DUNSTER LODGE, SPRING GROVE, ISLEWORTH, ENGLAND,
_February 4, 1886_.
DEAR MR. FLETCHER,—You ask about gas lime (as a top dressing for
land). There is certainly need for caution in its use, but I do
not think you would find a better short treatise on it than the
little paper printed by the late Dr. [Augustus] Voelcker, of
which I have had a copy taken for you (now enclosed with much
pleasure), for I do not know where (or whether) it was
published.[70] The kind old man sent me a copy when I wrote to
him during his last illness, I not being aware how ill he was at
the time. He had a great opinion of the lime, and I think it
does immense good, but still, if too fresh or if too thickly
applied, dire are the consequences. Even if the heaps are left
standing a little while on the field, the chances are the spots
will be poisoned. But I always use it in our garden. When we
came here about twelve years ago it could be had as a gift, but
when I wanted some a few weeks ago it cost about 7s. the cart
load, and was only sold to me as a favour, there is such a run
on it. One of the market gardeners said he could not do without
it, and it is splendid for getting rid of the diseased growths
in cabbage and turnip known as “Club-root” or “Finger and Toe.”
But withal it does not do to trust the application to hands
without heads. You will find reports (or rather notes in some of
my different Reports) about quantities used.
I hope you will be able to come over, there are so many points
it would be so pleasant to talk over, and Croydon is only a
little way off by rail. It would give me great pleasure to make
your sister’s acquaintance.
_July 19, 1886._
Lately I had good specimens of a Hippobosca, _H. Struthionis_,
Janson, which is doing harm in South Africa to Ostriches at an
up-country station. It appears to be a very curious instance of
the migration of a parasite, as M. Lichtenstein (if I remember
right, or M. Offer) thinks it may have been caught so to say by
the Ostriches from the Quagga. It is very interesting as a
quadruped pest on a bird.
_March 15, 1887._
I was so very much gratified to receive your kind letter this
morning, that I will reply as soon as I possibly can. Your
Entomological Society of Ontario is the one of all others that I
desire to belong to. I shall think it a real honour, one made
still more welcome by the kind and courteous manner in which you
notify I am likely to be permitted to have such a distinction
[honorary membership]. Your society seems to me a pattern, a
thorough example of what a Society should be, so truly
scientific, and using its knowledge for the general benefit. I
shall be proud to be allowed to add its title to my
titles—prouder still to have the approbation and cordial
friendship of its President, and its late President.
You have encouraged and gratified me very much by what you
kindly say about my Hessian fly pamphlet; very few of our
English Entomologists care for subjects of practical bearing,
and it has grown me many a grey hair,[71] to endeavour to “keep
the bridge.” The “flax-seeds” are now being found near Errol in
Scotland in the light grain or “shag,” or “chog,” as it is
called, which is thrown down by a separate apparatus from the
machine. Meantime I am trying to get a kind of cordon
established for watch on the straw at such of our importing
ports as I have influence near. We give the working men, through
whose hands the straw daily passes, full instructions what they
are to look for, where, and how, likewise a small gratuity, and
a promise of a handsome bonus to the first who finds and
produces specimens of infested imported straw. The working men
can help enormously if they are kindly and properly dealt with,
and I did not think sending an inspector would do much good.
Hessian fly puparia would not have been “at home” on the day of
his visit! Could you tell me whether straw is usually cut above
the point of attachment of the puparia in Canada? This would
make an enormous difference as to danger of infection.
Dr. Lindeman, Moscow, has given me a list of the Governments
over which _C. destructor_ has spread in Russia since its first
appearance in 1879, and with his permission I am publishing it
in my tenth Report (p. 104). Would you care to have a packet of
copies sent over? Of course I shall send copies immediately on
publication for your and Professor Saunders’s kind acceptance,
and to a few other of my Canadian friends; but if you will give
me leave I should have real gratification in having a packet
forwarded, and also begging acceptance of electros of any of my
own figures which you thought might be acceptable to your
Entomological Society.
TORRINGTON HOUSE, ST. ALBANS, ENGLAND,
_April 22, 1889_.
It was indeed a pleasure to me to see your handwriting again,
and very soon after I received your Report which you have so
kindly sent me. I have turned over the pages to see the general
contents, and first of all I am exceedingly interested in your
“Silver-top” attack corresponding with our “white eared” wheat.
They—these peculiar ears—appeared in Southern Russia, Dr.
Lindeman tells me, two years ago, and he could not discover any
insect traces any more than I could. It seems to me quite
unaccountable, if it really is caused by Thrips, that they
should not leave their cast clothing behind them! I wonder what
you will think of my idea of ring vegetable disease? Dr.
Lindeman writes me that he means to examine for _Anguillulidæ_
(eel-worms).
I am particularly interested in your notes of _C. leguminicola_
[American clover-seed midge], for I have long suspected we had
the larvæ here, and to-day I succeeded in rearing my first
imago, and have sent it off to Mr. Meade with Dr. Lintner and
Professor Saunders’s description and figures to see if he will
agree with me. Will you kindly thank Professor Saunders from me
for having the new edition of his excellent book on fruit pests
sent to me. It is a pleasure to see it in this less expensive
form, so many more people will buy it.
_September 2, 1889._
You must indeed have had pleasure in your visit to Washington,
but what a spectacle your study table must be on your return!
Does not the collection, all calling “answer me first,” quite
make your heart sink? I cannot face it—it is such a terrible
strain, so I stop nearly entirely at home like a limpet on a
rock, and keep my work as well as I can in hand.
_November 11, 1889._
Did I tell you that the _Xyleborus dispar_, Fab. (Shot-borer),
has made what I hope may be only one of its strange intermittent
appearances, in plum stems at the great Toddington fruit ground
near Cheltenham? What a strangely destructive attack it is! I
could not completely understand how it killed the young trees so
wonderfully quickly until I dissected some stems, and found
that, like your _X. pyri_, Peck, the creatures partly ringed the
stem to begin with. And what a quantity in one stem! We need a
descriptive English name, so I propose to call it the “Crowder,”
from the manner in which all the galleries are so crowded with
the beetles, that there seems hardly room for another specimen.
_December 6, 1889._
How very very curious is what you say about Professor Riley’s
now thinking _E. kuhniella_ (Mill moth, fig. 41) may be a South
Carolina insect. I shall await the letter you promise me with
great interest. I suppose some records have been searched out,
for in the spring he wrote me that he thought he could safely
say that this species did not occur in the United States. Dr.
Lintner also held the same view, and he is care itself. I am so
glad you told me, for I had written quite a neat little
paragraph for my Report on the remarkable circumstance of
advance of one insect attack being so minutely recorded. How
awkward it would have been! How good of you to spare me a male
specimen. It is quite different your sparing me a specimen to my
putting anything I have in your hands; I really hope you have
not robbed your own valuable collection too much. I have been
trying to compare them as well as I can manage under present
circumstances, but I cannot of course do much without the
microscope. The colour of mine is deeper, but this is not much.
It was alive, but mature, when I took it.
I do believe all good work is done in concert, though we do not
know how it may be fitting together yet. It is very often a
great comfort to me to think so.
[Illustration:
1, Beetle ♀; 2, larva—magnified, with natural length of each; 3 and 4,
cell, natural size, showing broad and flat, and also narrow view.
FIG. 46.—SHOT-BORER BEETLES, _XYLEBORUS DISPAR_, FAB.
]
_December 16, 1889._
I put off writing for a few days because I wanted to tell you
more about the _Xyleborus dispar_ (Shot-borer or Apple-bark
beetle), which I am afraid is likely to be a very serious matter
in other localities than where it first appeared, and it is
doing much mischief: I do not quite like to raise the “danger
flag” on my own sole responsibility, so I have sent out some of
the new specimens to have my identification confirmed, and then
I mean to write to you again and send a few more males. I found
seven with hardly more than that number of females; also I found
specimens of the white stuff that Schmidberger observed the
larvæ fed on, and I have asked Professor Bernard Dyer to analyse
it for me. He is a very kind as well as skilled helper. I cannot
find the least sign of disease about the attacked trees: if the
bark had been washed it could not be cleaner from Scale or
moulds of any kind, but the havoc is dismal—what my
correspondent calls “a slaughter” of trees.
We have now got the subject of Agricultural Entomology regularly
announced as one of the subjects (voluntary) for examination of
the Senior Candidates of our Royal Agricultural Society of
England. I have been trying to get this arranged for some time,
and I hope it will do good.
I have drawn up the questions as practically, _i.e._, on as
practical points as I could.
_December 16, 1889._
Your letter was hardly started this morning when I received the
confirmation from Mr. Oliver E. Janson of my identification of
the fresh supply of Shot-borers from plum-wood being quite
correct, beyond doubt _X. dispar._ So I have great pleasure in
enclosing two males and two females in a thin quill. They are
packed in fine bark clippings, which they have shredded out
themselves, so I hope they will travel safely. These are from
plum stems, and in some cases they attack the branches. I have
just now written a letter to the _Worcester Herald_, warning
fruit-growers to be on the alert, giving as much practical
advice as I could compress into reasonable space, and especially
recommending burning infested trees.
_December 24, 1889._
I think that Agricultural Entomology is moving forward, but we
are much hampered at present by various difficulties, which I
fancy you would dispose of very rapidly on your side of the
Atlantic. I suppose that in a sort of confidence I may mention
that by private liberality of a Scottish advancer of science a
lectureship of Agricultural Entomology is being endowed at
Edinburgh University, but then comes the rather comical
difficulty: Who ever is to take the position of lecturer? I am
complimented by the expression of a wish from the authorities
who have the election in hand that I should take it; but then
Lady Professors are not admitted in Scotland. We know of “one
man” fit for the purpose, Professor Allen Harker, of the Royal
Agricultural College, Cirencester. He would do well, and as much
desires the post as we wish to put him in it, but then the
Principal of the Royal Agricultural College is very much set
against his holding the post, as well as his Professorship at
the college. It is a great puzzle. I have been doing my very
best to help the Professor of Agriculture—a member of the
appointing body—to find a suitable man, but what will come of it
I do not know. This is not private amongst friends, but it is
not yet before the public. Why, with you, I believe in a day you
could fill the chair. I think I could do all that is wanted, but
then, oh! Shades of John Knox!
I am hoping each day to receive the copy of “Insect Life”
Professor Riley kindly sends me, and to see what the Association
of Official Entomology did at Washington.
[_Cablegram._]
_December 28, 1889._
Is not “Paris-green” the same as “Scheele’s-green,” that is,
arsenite of Copper, not arseniate? With us arseniate of copper
is a bluish powder; please write.[72]
_January 20, 1890._
I am exceedingly obliged to you for so kindly and promptly
replying to my enquiry about the arseniate. I thank you most
heartily, and Professor Saunders also, for so very kindly taking
the trouble to make me sure how the matter stood.
I have been taking a great deal of pains to make my paper on the
Paris-green as plain and sound as I can, but whether I can
induce the growers to use it is yet to be seen. If any of your
orchard operatives accustomed to application of it should chance
to be in England, I believe that the best way to start affairs
would be for his services to be engaged at Toddington, and from
a proper method of spraying (and, without any doubt, its good
effect), we should then, I quite believe, make progress. If you
should know of any orchard workers being likely to come over, I
should be very glad if you would give me a line, and then if
none of my orchard applicants were disposed to engage him, I
would myself ask for a lesson and a lecture, and he “should not
lack his fee,” as the old ballads say. Unless something is done
to rouse the good folks they will go on smearing and smearing
until their trees are one mass of grease, and swarming,
nevertheless, with caterpillars of all kinds.
Now, I want to mention to you and to Professor Saunders that I
have felt obliged to tell Mr. Whitehead, as gently and
courteously as I could, that I must decline to continue the
assistance which I have given since 1885 to the Entomological
part of his work as Agriculture Adviser to the Board of
Agriculture. I have recommended professional helpers who can aid
him in the technical identifications, and if he needs more aid
on general matters I have suggested that he should apply to
Professor Harker, who has a great deal of strictly technical
entomological knowledge, and of late years has given much
attention to the agricultural application of it.
Even if the post of “Entomologist” should be offered to me, I
should not think myself justified in accepting, for my great
wish in my work is to be of immediate use, and if I had to wait
for permission from boards and committees, &c., &c., before I
came down on pests that want attention by return of post, I
should not feel in the right place. Please forgive my telling
you this story about myself, but though of course it is only
meant for private friends, I thought I ought to let you know. My
own work has steadily increased to such an extent that, with
this sort of underground (unacknowledged) Government work in
addition, I did not feel able to do full justice to it, and
especially I wanted more time for experiment and correspondence.
_February 13, 1890._
Many thanks for your kind congratulations on my better health.
I am really better now. Work was bearing me down so very
seriously I was obliged to make some degree of alteration. I
regretted very much indeed not continuing any help I could give
to Mr. Whitehead about his entomological Government work, but it
was too severe a task, and it prevented my giving proper
attention to my own, and likewise when the post of Agricultural
Adviser was avowedly a paid one, I felt, and my friends felt,
that if aid were needed it ought to be on a business footing and
obtained from professional helpers.
_March 24, 1890._
I thank you very heartily for the little box of _X. dispar_
which you have kindly spared, for your own paper on the
“Mediterranean Flour Moth” preceding the copy in the “Canadian
Entomologist,” and for all the information in your always truly
acceptable letters. The little beetles came quite safely. I
divided them duly, and I have no doubt both Mr. Janson and Canon
Fowler will be very much pleased to possess them.
Our Worcestershire and Toddington people are really roused to
see about these weary caterpillars. We have formed a “committee
of experiment” with two or three very sensible and able men at
the head, and I officiate as their entomologist, and benefit the
stationer, at least! You should see the sheets of paper covered
with sage advice!
At present I am trying to keep well before them that the very
centre of all advance is to arrange our “washes” and our means
of applying them, so that we may be able to destroy the hordes
about May or June, when they are really and evidently doing
harm. Your information is invaluable, not only in itself but
because whatever may be advanced I can say Mr. Fletcher advised
it, or more often, reported its success in Canada, and I feel
secure. I really hope we shall make progress; the leading people
are quite weary of this everlasting greasing, but I certainly do
feel that our only excuse for asking you so many questions about
it, is your own great knowledge of the subject, and great good
nature; and, indeed, I am most truly grateful.
Professor William Fream, of Downton College of Agriculture, has
just been appointed, by unanimous vote of Council of our Royal
Agricultural Society, to be Associate Editor of their journal.
This is such an excellent appointment it delights me. Professor
Fream is an old friend of mine, so that besides the great
benefit to the society of having such an able man in the post, I
gain a skilled and heartily helpful colleague.
I hope that you will come over to England this summer, it would
be such a benefit to me and such a pleasure both to my sister
and myself. We hope you will stay here as long as you can make
it convenient. This is a very good centre, and Rothamsted [the
great English Agricultural Experiment Station] is only about
four and a half miles off, and I am quite sure the staff would
be delighted to show you everything.
_July 7, 1890._
I believe that after our hard fight we have won the victory and
Paris-green is now acknowledged, so far as the area of the work
of our Committee has spread, as an indispensable insecticide in
orchard-growing on a large scale. The caterpillars have been
killed and the leafage not injured, and the Superintendents at
Toddington are, up to date, quite satisfied and grateful. We are
greatly indebted to you for your kind and able help, and what it
has been to me I cannot say. It would fill a volume to record
the progress of our work. It at first appeared as if the spirit
of folly had got into the heads of the opposition; everything
imaginable turned up one after another, and, as Entomologist to
the Committee, I have hardly had a day’s peace till now for
weeks or months. We had one definite combination against us, and
when all seemed quiet the beekeepers raised a commotion. This
had to be answered publicly, but it seemed self-evident that if
we did not spray when the trees were in flower we would not hurt
the bees. One of our members made a commotion about his own
health, and I had to point out to him that if he were not used
to standing out in a March wind slopping with cold water (only I
put it more politely) he was likely to feel uncomfortable.
If we meet, as I hope we may some day, I am sure you would be
entertained with “The rise and progress of Paris-green.” But
really all the work and terrible anxiety have tried me very
much, and I am going to have a little holiday with my sister for
a couple of days at Oxford as a refreshment.
_October 6, 1890._
You encourage me very much indeed by all you so kindly say, and
I value your approval of my new book greatly, but I always feel,
and I try to acknowledge, that the real usefulness of my work is
derived from the kind co-operation I am allowed the benefit of.
Just look at the Paris-green matter. I quite sheltered myself
behind your name as an active referee. The good folks were hard
of belief anyhow, but I really doubt if I could have driven the
nail home without having you to fall back on. But for the pain
that it could not fail to give, the history of our Evesham
Committee’s work, and what we had to meet, would be a most
interesting chapter, and at last we had perfect success!
I think I told you of the wonderfully diseased strawberry
plants, looking more like pieces of cauliflowers placed on the
ground than their own graceful forms. Dr. Ritzema Bos has found
that this is from the presence of a _Tylenchus_ (eel-worm)
(figs. 47 and 49), hitherto undescribed, and is going to bring
out a preliminary notice in November, and as some portion of the
observations (not the scientific parts) were mine, he will
kindly let me use what I need for my Report. He is a very kind
colleague.
_November 18, 1890._
My sister is delighted to send you two copies of her Hessian fly
maggot diagram, which she hopes you will kindly accept. This, as
she says, is “her first public appearance,” so she is rather
anxious! But I have been doing my best to ensure her picture a
good reception, and I revised it very carefully before it went
out. I think you will like it. It should accompany this letter,
but it comes so very near parcel post limitations of size that
if it does not arrive please expect it shortly in a different
travelling dress, by book post.
_December 22, 1890._
For your collection you will, I think, like a regular letter of
our good old Professor Westwood, but this is not in the least
characteristic. He usually takes a postcard, and into it, by
small writing, and adding in little bits where there is room, he
gets in a surprising quantity of instructive matter. Mr. Meade’s
letter you would perhaps care for, as he is one of our leading
Dipterists—he is very kind to me in identifying whenever I ask
him; and the letter from Mr. Hormuzd Rassam is a contribution
from my sister. He was, I suppose, our greatest British explorer
in Assyria (after Sir Henry Layard) and was for a long time one
of the prisoners of King Theodore in Abyssinia (to liberate whom
this country went to war). I am not sure whether you saw him
when you were at Spring Grove, but he was a near neighbour, and
when he went on his Assyrian trips used to leave his very
charming wife, and untoward little flock of Chaldee children, in
what he was pleased to call “our care.”
Many thanks to you for such gratifying notices of my Manual.
They are only too kind, but it is very encouraging to have such
approval, and very refreshing too, for sometimes I am nearly
eaten up by anxiety.
I think the beneficial effect of Paris-green is quite
established, and I hope that the use of it may spread widely
next season; I fully believe that in it or in London-purple,
lies the sole hope of keeping in check the crowds of
miscellaneous kinds of moth caterpillars which appear with the
leafage. In my fourteenth Report (that is, in the paper on
orchard caterpillars which I am now preparing for it) I have
tried to dwell with even tedious repetition on the points of the
small quantity of the Paris-green to be used, and also the
importance of the fluid being distributed as a mist or fine
spray so as to coat the leaves, but on no account to be allowed
to drip. Some of the good people seem to have an idea that they
cannot have too much of a good thing, and results are dismal.
I am getting on as steadily as business allows with my new
Manual. There are many new papers, and such subjects as
Wireworm, Hop aphis, and others come out almost as new papers
when the information which has been contributed piece-meal or in
Special Reports, is sifted, and the information arranged in
order. I am replacing figures that were not all that could be
wished, with new ones. I am very anxious indeed to bring out
what may be a really sound, up-to-date book, of our most
important observations here. I think it will be about a quarter
longer than my present edition, and “demy” instead of “crown”
8vo., so that it may be of comely form.
Economic Entomology is really doing better here. Our Highland
and Agricultural Society of Scotland are looking about for an
Entomologist, and this is a good step. [Dr. Stewart MacDougall
was appointed to fill the office.]
_December 23, 1890._
I have at once replied to your inquiry as shortly as I could
manage, for I know how valuable space is, but indeed I shall be
quite hurt and annoyed!—and your report will not give a right
view!—unless you say that we applied to you, and that our work
was in colleagueship. I really do not know whether I could have
worked as was requisite, unless I could have had the advantage
of being able to quote from your letters.
_February 2, 1891._
Would you think me very greedy if I were to ask you for another
copy of the “Proceedings of the Convention of Fruitgrowers,”
1890. It would be a most acceptable help to the Evesham Fruit
Experiment Committee. I should very much like them to read what
you say about Paris-green, &c., but I am afraid if they had my
copy it might not come home again. I have formed a short paper
on “Paris-Green, its Uses and Method of Application for
Prevention of Orchard Moth Caterpillars.” I think it is all
right, I have been very careful and plain, and I thought we must
have some directions out before the season’s work begins. We are
finding wingless Winter moths and some other kinds going up the
trees now, and this shows that there is no good trusting only to
grease-banding, for we should have really to grease from October
to April to catch all the offenders! Our intermittent frosts let
the creatures appear at intervals in a way which I suppose you
are quite free from in Canada. Surely it should be recorded of
me,
“SHE INTRODUCED PARIS-GREEN INTO ENGLAND”!
You should see the mass of correspondence since this time last
year, from the first feeble efforts, through opposition and all
sorts of things, up to success. The work is well begun, and
though I may in fun mention myself, our Experimental Committee
has worked wisely and grandly. Now they are going to publish the
reports of all the members who have sent them in. That by Mr.
Wise[73] is very good indeed, and I am to write a preface for
them, so I can show the teachings, where they agree, and why
they differ.
We have had a long spell of cold weather, bringing great
suffering to the poor, and to my sister and myself the loss of a
brother, who was “coldstruck” and carried off almost
instantaneously by _angina pectoris_. I had a temporary share in
troubles from a severe fall, my feet going from under me down a
slope on hidden ice, and sending me down on the back of my head;
but I think I am right again now.
There is a great want over here of some kind of lesson book for
village schools telling something that would interest the
boys—possibly, too, the girls. I do not know whether I could
manage it, but I am thinking of trying to take some thirty or so
of the very commonest attacks—including a very few to stock,
which boys always care about—and seeing what I can do. I have a
hope that through the boys we might get at the agricultural
labourers and cowmen.
I like your address very much at the Economic Entomologists’
meeting in reply to Professor Riley’s grand and comprehensive
address; but as yet I have not been able quite to make out the
scope of the Society’s arrangements for extra-American members.
It must be a great pleasure to all members who can meet, to talk
over serviceable points, and a great benefit conferred on the
country, but I am puzzled about the external bearings. It does
not seem to affect me say, for example, in my communication with
such kind friends as yourself and Dr. Lintner. I would venture
any way, I think, to ask at your convenience for advice or
instruction, and where I can afford information I shall think
myself honoured and happy to render it.
But I do not understand qualification. You have the names of Mr.
C. and Mr. S. on your list. I do not know the gentlemen, so
cannot tell what they may be doing, but our grand old chief, my
entomological master, and friend almost of a lifetime, dear old
Professor Westwood, is not there, and yet _ex-officio_ as Hope
Professor of Zoology he lectures on Entomology (to the best of
my belief) regularly at Oxford. And what work Dr. Lindeman does!
It would be a great help over here if we had some such Society.
My work is so very solitary, but I do what I can.
Dr. Fream’s lectures [Steven course in Edinburgh University]
have been quite a success. This delights me. Professor Wallace
has been exceedingly pleased with the sound manner in which he
built up his Agricultural Entomology in the students’ minds, and
I think the course has given great satisfaction. He is a very
sound worker, and I should greatly like him to be my
collaborateur at the Royal Agricultural Society of England. I
have not brought the subject forward yet, but if there were an
Assistant Entomologist who might present my Reports instead of
my personal attendance being necessary in all the business hurry
of that great number of gentlemen, it would relieve me of a very
distasteful part of my work.
_March 23, 1891._
We have just got a full stream of applications for gratuitous
distribution of “Paris-green” pamphlets, so we are very anxious
to keep all in hand. I greatly hope that this will take hold. We
broke through many objections last year, and now we can point to
saved crops, and no disastrous massacre of gardeners—not even a
sparrow defunct; also a lessened amount of Winter moth in
autumn, and a glorious promise of flower bud on trees which have
been reported on. Last year we did not know where to turn for a
proper sprayer; now, on the day before yesterday there was to be
a “contest of sprayers” at the Crystal Palace. I think this
shows of itself how the matter on insecticide sprayings has come
forward. I am fairly broadcasting the P.G. pamphlets. Many years
ago when a railway bridge on a new method of construction was
made over the Wye (plate XXVI), near my old home, the natives
were “afraid for their lives” to go over it, but the ingenious
plan was struck, of running any one gratuitously over and back
all day long—the trains of trucks were crammed, the people
shouted for joy, and the victory was won; and now I am carrying
out the same principle. Gentle and simple, wise and very unwise,
are wanting “Paris-green” pamphlets, and I hope that by the
sheets of advice, &c., that have to be sent accompanying, that
the very silliest souls will not do harm; and meanwhile we are
getting the subject popularised. You will think that I am _tête
montée_ about it, but it has been a long, severe labour, and I
thoroughly believe that on the adoption of the arsenical
insecticides depends the success of the English orchard growing
in the future.
So far as I see, the “grubs” have not been the least the worse
for the cold of the recent frost so long as they were in their
self-made shelters below ground, but we carried devastation
amongst hundreds of Cockchafer grubs, _Melolontha vulgaris_, by
ploughing. The larvæ were too torpid to bury themselves, and the
birds disposed of them very thoroughly.
Dr. Lindeman writes that he “had a district inspection set on
foot” to find presence of _Tylenchus devastatrix_ in Russia, but
“always with negative results.” This is very interesting.
[Illustration:
PLATE XXVI.
RAILWAY BRIDGE ON THE WYE, NEAR CHEPSTOW.
]
[Illustration:
1, Adults; 2, anterior of female, showing mouthspear; 3, embryo in
egg—all greatly magnified, anterior portion 440 times (from figures
by Dr. J. Ritzema Bos). One of the causes of clover-sickness.
“Tulip-rooted” oat plant.
FIG. 47.—STEM EEL-WORMS, _TYLENCHUS DEVASTATRIX_.
]
_June 26, 1891._
Did I tell you that my sister has been preparing a set of
twenty-four diagrams—same size and in the same style as that of
the Hessian fly? These are of our most destructive or most
remarkable insect pests—and our Royal Agricultural Society has
approved so highly of those which are printed that they have
arranged for her to transfer to them the ownership of copyright
of the set. This gratifies her very much. They pay her “out of
pocket” expenses of printing and she presents the copyrights and
her work. I think they form a very beautiful collection, and I
believe the Society means to bring them out (together with my
previous ones—p. 99) in little half-dozen sets. Thus, one set
for village schools, one for fruit-growers, one for forest use.
I hope they will be very useful in this way for those who do not
wish to purchase the whole.
We have certainly good proof this year that in our insular
climate cold does not “kill the grubs.” If it were possible it
would even seem the Entomons were the better for it.
_September 26, 1891._
A letter came from Adelaide to announce Mr. Frazer Crawford’s
decease. It was caused by chronic gout and heart disease. He had
been as cheerful as usual, and when a friend left him about nine
o’clock in the evening he set to work to prepare a scientific
article, but not long after he went to bed. On the following
morning, October 30th, the servant found the lamp still burning,
but Mr. Crawford had quietly passed away as if in sleep with his
book, a volume of Cryptogamic Botany, fallen from his hand. He
was a perfectly indefatigable worker; even in the last month of
his life, weighed down as he was by all the inconveniences and
pains of hip disease besides those which took him from us, he
prepared a long paper on vegetable and other plant pests for the
“Garden and Field,” in which he wrote, besides a review of my
Manual. And a warning paper by him on the danger of importing
_Phylloxera_ appeared in the Report of the Bureau of Agriculture
of South Australia accompanying the notice of his death. As a
friend he was excessively valued by all who knew his kindness
and his worth, and his loss is deeply regretted at Adelaide. To
myself it is a very great cause of regret both as a true friend
and an Entomological colleague.
_February 6-8, 1892._
I have this afternoon sent the index to my fifteenth Report up
to press, and am now enjoying myself by at least beginning a
letter to you. I hope you will like the report. The paper on
_Plutella cruciferarum_ (Diamond-back moth) is quite enormously
long, but I believe so far as evidence in my hands shows, that,
taking all points of the attack together, it has been unexampled
in this country before, and I was very desirous to present a
trustworthy record, which would bear sifting at every corner as
to what did happen, and readers could judge for themselves
whether my conclusions are well founded. I think the moths were
wind-borne. When the report reaches you I should very much like
if you would read the “General Summary,” pp. 157-164, first, or
you may really wonder what could have induced me to give such a
host of reports on the pest. I greatly doubt whether, without
proper identification, we could trust to farmers distinguishing
between Diamond-back moth caterpillars and those of Turnip
sawfly, and there is no good at all in trusting to their
reminiscences! No more than to moths being attracted to the dark
side of a lighthouse (see p. 159 of my Report). I have taken
great pains to be accurate.
In No. 1 of “Canadian Entomologist” for this year, which arrived
on Saturday, the 6th, I read with much interest some of the
observations on “Can insects survive freezing?” and I thought
perhaps you might like to look at a few slight observations
which I read before our Entomological Society in 1879. At that
time I was one of the regular daily observers of the Royal
Meteorological Society, so I was able to be sure of readings of
temperatures, but I could not get nearly as many examples as I
wanted of the insects. Mr. Whipple’s experiment, which I have
added, was the best. I used to think it very interesting to see
how some larvæ would crack across like little bits of stick, and
their brethren when thawed would recover themselves. If you
think the remarks are of any interest pray make any use that you
please of them—it would delight me if they were of any use.
Have you chanced to hear from any quarter that the Mediterranean
flour moth (p. 179) has made its appearance in Moscow? It is now
a few weeks since Dr. Lindeman wrote me that it had been found
there in a chocolate or cocoa store brought by bags from London
(England). Apparently the enemy was descended on with full
power, and no delay, and he hoped it was stamped out. It puzzled
me at first how _kuhniella_ came to be in chocolate, &c., but it
was suggested that these food-cake compositions were much
adulterated with flour. The pest is steadily spreading here, and
you will see in my Report that I have again reprinted a portion
of your directions.
The weather has been so wet that very great breadths of
wheat-land have remained unsown, so at present I have had little
inquiry about the young plant pests, but with warmth and
sunshine I expect they will come with a rush. I am just
beginning a second edition of my little “Guide.”
[Illustration:
1, Caterpillar; 2, eggs; 3-5, diamond-back moth, natural size and
magnified.
FIG. 48.—DIAMOND-BACK MOTH, _PLUTELLA CRUCIFERARUM_, ZELL., _CEROSTOMA
XYLOSTELLA_, CURTIS.
]
_August 22, 1892._
After an operation on my knee the joint was right, but the long
suffering had lowered my health exceedingly—and great pain
pretty constantly in the troubled limb, with occasionally
racking neuralgia, reduced me to such a state that I was gravely
warned recovery was hopeless unless I lessened the enormous load
of work. So as it was the engaged and routine work of my
“office” which was so very harassing, I resigned my post at the
Royal Agricultural Society as their Consulting Entomologist, and
I have ever since been steadily progressing towards recovery.
Sleep has returned, and the terrible pain of the neuralgia is
gone, and I can work happily and comfortably.
I do not know how it happened, but the work (quite beyond what
seemed my work) amplified on all hands—Continental and Colonial,
and revision of papers, &c., &c.—until it would have required a
good man of business and a staff to see to it all. So I cut the
Gordian knot.
I hope not to make any difference at all in my Agricultural
Entomological work for the country, especially as referee for
the farmers and fruit-growers and the agricultural papers; also
to continue my Annual Reports—and in all ways to work
thoroughly. But this is very different to being obliged to
attend _ex-officio_ to people and things who or which appeared
to me really often to take up time to little purpose, or even to
prevent attention to really important investigation.
_November 21, 1892._
One very great trouble last year was the fungoid attack to
cabbage and turnip roots, which we call here “Club” or “Anbury,”
or “Finger and Toe.” I do not know whether you have it in
Canada. You will recognise it perhaps best under the scientific
name of the “Slime fungus” which causes it—_Plasmodiophora
brassicæ_ of Woronin. Our people confuse it so constantly with
maggot root attacks that they send me a deal of inquiry about
it, so I do not think there can be any harm (as I have really
studied it for many years) in giving a paper on it in my next
Report, and I have secured three excellent photos from life,
which I hope will each give a good whole-page figure of the
three chief forms respectively.
There are some nice new reports of infestation (so to describe
them), and I am working as steadily as I can, but I wish I could
get on faster. I envy you your power of doing sound and good
work so rapidly.
I have never thanked you for your excellent paper on the “Horn
fly” (_Hæmatobia connicola_), which I read with very great
interest and benefit, and lodged some of your liberal supply of
copies where I thought they would be most useful—including
getting attention drawn to the subject in the “Agricultural
Gazette.”
Dr. Bethune most kindly asked my sister and myself to come over
to stay at Port Hope for the Chicago Exhibition, but delightful
as it would be to see all the friends who would be gathered to
such a centre, neither sister nor self could manage the fatigue.
Our millionaire lady who is so known for her philanthropic
work—Baroness Burdett-Coutts—wrote me that she had been elected
President of the, or a Woman’s Branch of the, Chicago
Exhibition, and desired an account of the “Genesis of my
organisation!” What could I say? There is not a woman but myself
and my sister in it. I thought of Canning’s famous “Knife
Grinder” story, “God bless you, I have none to tell, sir.” The
Baroness wrote that she was obtaining information from the
Bishops and the heads of all the Churches, so I suppose her
branch is _pur et simple_ religious female organisations.
[Illustration:
1, Larva; 2 and 3, females; 4 and 5, eggs in different stages of
development—all enormously magnified (2 from sketch by E. A. O.; the
other figures after Prof. Geo. Atkinson).
FIG. 49.—TOMATO ROOT-KNOT EEL-WORM, _HETERODERA (ANGUILLULA)
RADICICOLA_, MÜLLER.
]
[Illustration:
Female, showing side and upper surface; larval scales, with legs still
visible—all magnified; infested gooseberry twig.
FIG. 50.—CURRANT AND GOOSEBERRY SCALE, _LECANIUM RIBIS_, FITCH.
]
_March 13-16, 1893._
You will see by a copy of the Report I have just issued that we
have really got the _Heterodera radicicola_ (Root-knot
eel-worm). I should have liked to give the name of the sufferer,
but he is our greatest English tomato grower, and it might have
injured his business. He is trying many experiments, and at the
end of April he is going to give me a report. It would be a
pleasure indeed if we managed to make out any serviceable
remedy.
At present I am trying to make a fair history and description of
the Gooseberry scale, _Lecanium ribis_, Fitch, which has made
such a headquarters here (I suppose set up when I was too ill to
look after it) that I think I must almost have a chance of
finding the desiderated male! But except the few lines by Dr.
Signoret we do not seem to have a European description. Locusts
came over in imported vegetables and fodder about a month ago,
so that I secured three species, but no more are arriving now.
Mine and the grower’s chief investigation at present is as to
finding measures to check the attack of the Mustard beetle,
_Phædon betulæ_, and evil-doers of similar habits, and I am
making a kind of link in operations with Messrs. Colman and
Messrs. Keen, our two great rival mustard firms, and I greatly
hope we shall make some advance.
One great worry is these (to my thinking) unqualified so-called
lecturers sent out by the County Councils.
[Illustration:
Beetle, natural size and magnified; maggot, magnified, and natural
size on leaf.
FIG. 51.—MUSTARD BEETLE, _PHÆDON BETULÆ_, LINN.
]
_May 22, 1893._
I only knew as a fact a very little while ago that Professor
Riley was standing for the post of “Hope Professor of Zoology”
at Oxford, vacant by the death of our grand old friend Professor
Westwood. Mr. Hachett-Jackson (Professor Westwood’s assistant, I
believe) wrote to me very urgently from Keble College, and I
responded most heartily, mentioning everything I could think of
that might assist Professor Riley’s election. It would have been
a benefit to myself past hoping for to have a really great
Entomologist like Professor Riley in a definite post over here.
The magician’s rod would have beaten all kinds of underhand
misrepresentations, scientific and practical, out of the field.
Anyway I fear that Professor Riley has hardly a chance, and
indeed I wonder that he should contemplate changing his grand
central position—central to the whole world—for such a very
inferior post without genial colleagues around him.
By book post accompanying I send a copy of Mons. J. Danysz’s
paper on _Ephestia_ (Flour moth), to your kind acceptance, in
case you have not yet seen it; you will be interested to run it
over and see his views of _Pyrethrum_. I very much doubt whether
we could get our millers to try it, but it would be different
with you.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAPTER XX
LETTERS TO DR. J. FLETCHER (_continued_) AND TO DR. BETHUNE
Foreign correspondents—Book by Dr. Nalepa—Efforts to endow Agricultural
lectures at Oxford or Cambridge—Literary productions—Sympathetic
communications.
The letters addressed to Dr. Fletcher after his visit to Miss Ormerod
and her sister Georgiana at St. Albans have here been grouped, as a
matter of convenience, with letters to the Rev. Dr. C. J. S. Bethune,
another Canadian Entomologist, who held a high place in Miss Ormerod’s
esteem, both as a man of science and as a sympathetic friend in whom to
confide in times of sorrow.
_To Dr. J. Fletcher, Dominion Entomologist, Ottawa, Canada._
TORRINGTON HOUSE, ST. ALBANS,
_September 29-30, 1893_.
DEAR DR. FLETCHER,—We were very glad to hear you had safely
returned home. I wish we could have had a longer chat, but I
will be thankful for the very great pleasure of chatting with
you at all.
Just after you had left (or rather, I think, were leaving)
England the Rothamsted Jubilee took place, which brought very
many distinguished agriculturists to this part of the country,
and you may imagine how much it was wished that you could have
been present. I did not attend, but a few friends from long
distances off looked in here on their way.
_November 26 and December 1, 1893._
I have long been owing you a letter, and thanks, too, for your
“Entomological Report,” which I read at once when it reached me.
You know the pleasure and the confidence I feel in all I learn
from your writings. They and your kind co-operation have been an
immense help to my work and me for many a year, which I have
never ceased to appreciate most gratefully. I am working now on
my next Annual Report. There has been a good deal of nice fresh
matter sent in, and (so far as I could) I have tried not to go
over old ground. I have a grand paper on Locusts (fig. 55), my
specimens being identified at Madrid by Senor Don Igo Bolivar.
Wasps were a terrible plague—and I have got some charming
observations, so entertaining! but I have taken great care to
have them on good authority—and M. Schoyen kindly sent me some
notes by the Swedish State Entomologist of an enormous
appearance at Tromsoe a few years ago. As this is so high up in
the Arctic circle I thought the record would be of interest
scientifically, and it is so spirited I have had many a good
laugh over it (p. 239).
But what I hope you may be really pleased with is, that through
the kind introduction of Dr. Friedrich Thomas, of Ohrdruf, whom
you will know, I think, as one of our leading European
Phytopathologists, I was put in communication with Dr. A. Nalepa
(of Vienna), who for some years back has quite especially
devoted himself to the study of _Phytoptidæ_ (Blister galls). So
that now we have in his successive publications first-rate
specific descriptions, with measurements and everything
requisite for certain identification of all the species which he
has studied so far. Also in very many cases he gives good
magnified figures, and he added to his many kindnesses to myself
by sending me a plate with the details of the creatures marked
with the technical names. In his treatises already published he
has given excellent accounts of very many species as well as a
good serviceable classification, and I rather think that the
work which has been coming out in the Reports of the Imperial
Scientific Society of Vienna is to be completed this spring.
This letter has been lying by me for a few days for an addition
I wanted to make, and now I have to thank you very heartily for
the great kindness which you have shown to poor Mr. T—— [a West
of England farmer who had been unfortunate]. If he can manage to
adapt himself to circumstances your timely and great assistance
will have been the means of setting him up again. I doubted
rather whether it was right of me to trouble you about him,
still I thought I would venture, and indeed your help will have
been the means of saving him from going quite down. I had no
idea (no more apparently than Mr. T——) that his Canadian
prospects on his own and relations’ standing were so hopeless.
Do you think a little money would help? Say a couple of £5 notes
or so, for possibly thick clothing is a matter needing supply.
If you think it would be well, we would very gladly (if you
would kindly give me his address) send out a little. One can get
over scruples by calling it “a loan,” and to be returned, if
ever, at convenience, or not at all if more so, but I do not
like to send without your leave.
_December 5, 1893._
A hasty line to catch post, about Dr. Nalepa’s books. I have
just heard from Messrs. Wesley that they have ordered (as I
asked them) a duplicate set of the four of Dr. N.’s pamphlets
which I have, and sent you the names of yesterday. When these
arrive I shall send them on to you, hoping you will kindly
accept them, if for no other reason, to be a trifling reminder
to you of how much I appreciate your always kind help to myself.
The money value, as I mentioned to you, is small, but I am very
desirous that you should have them as soon as possible, and
ordering from here will save some delay.
Mr. Sinclair [the editor] wrote me thanks for your paper, and
that he is having a figure of your fly copied for the “Live
Stock Journal.” This will attract attention surely.
_December 21, 1893._
I wonder if you ever came across any observation of
moths—_i.e._, their larvæ—injuring silk in the raw material, as
they habitually do woollen goods. I did not know that they did,
but this morning I had an inquiry about it from Tiverton, and
amongst the moths sent as offenders was a lovely white cocoon,
which appeared as if it might have been made of the same
material as the beautifully fine silk manufactured web or net
sent with it, and outside this cocoon, now empty, were a number
of little pellets of pale larval excrement, as if they were the
results of feeding on very pale material. I hope to hear more of
this. Would it not be a nice new observation?
_March 13, 1894._
Very many thanks for the copy of your charming Report kindly
sent to myself, and the six so liberally also presented, which I
am placing carefully where they will be appreciated and useful.
One I sent to our Lancashire and Cheshire Entomological Society,
to the pleasure of the President. They are doing a good deal of
nice work, and were going to have a special exhibition of
_Silphidæ_ (Beet carrion beetles), with observations (fig. 26).
I like your Report very much; there is an immense amount of
good, sound, straightforward information, both scientific and
practical, in it, and it is quite an example of honest dealing
with your body of observers. I have been very much interested in
your Silpha notes, and I wonder whether we could get our farmers
to try poisoning the cutworms, “surface caterpillars” as we call
them here. I wonder whether I should not do well to follow your
example and have short notes of anything interesting, even
without giving a long story. These embody a great deal of useful
information, but with us who are so behindhand in entomological
information, I have been afraid that without a full account and
a figure the readers would be all abroad. I was very much
gratified to see the honourable place you give my name among
your colleagues. Indeed this pleases me very much.
I was very much interested with what you told me of overplus of
wasps having accompanied deficiency of rainfall in one portion
of your part of the world. Our Press has been very kind to me,
and I was particularly pleased with one remark, that (although
retired from the Royal Agricultural Society) I had not ceased to
be the “Consulting Entomologist of the Agriculturists of Great
Britain.”
Just now I am running a leaflet on _Bryobia prætiosa_
(Gooseberry red spider), through the press, and this morning I
had an order for 3,000 copies! Just think of that, and without
the firm even seeing it!
_April 9, 1894._
I am trying to bring kerosene, or mineral oil emulsion more
forward as an insecticide. I have given a number of the best
recipes in one of our leading agricultural journals—“The
Farmer’s Gazette,” Dublin—with the information that for those
who cannot manage permanent combination of the constituents, the
so-called “antipest” makes a good substitute.
It appears that “formalin,” as the trade name is called, is
being brought out as a disinfectant. Mr. A. Zimmermann has been
trying the effects as an insecticide on greenhouse plants, and
he considered it so bad for the insects, and beneficial rather
than hurtful to the plants, that he wanted my co-operation in
getting it tried. Dr. Bernard Dyer told me he thought it would
be well worth trial.
The point that occurred to me was could we use it against the
Flour moth, _E. kuhniella_? At present we have got some flour
well impregnated with emanation from some of the tablets, and
Mr. Zimmermann was going to have a loaf baked of some of this
flour, and consumed in his own large household, without letting
them know there is anything peculiar about it! I am to know
results; and I have said I should like a piece of the
experimental loaf. I hope we shall not all be made very
miserable indeed. If the flour rises properly, and the bread is
fit to be eaten, then I am meditating getting an experiment made
as to the destructive powers of the fumes by some of our folks
here connected with milling, and also suggesting to Mons. J.
Danysz, Director of the Laboratory of Parasitology, Bourse de
Commerce, Paris, whether he might care to experiment in some of
the French mills with which he had been in communication
regarding destruction of _E. kuhniella_. The chemical is sold in
tablets like large thick lozenges, and also as a fluid, and, I
believe, in powder.
Enclosed is a little packet of seed of the pink hawkweed, which
you thought pretty while here last summer, and a few seeds also
of the white _Lathyrus_ (vetchling). I hope they may remind you
how welcome your visits here are.
[Illustration:
From life; Red spider (outline figure after Koch)—both magnified.
Infested leaf, natural size.
FIG. 52.—GOOSEBERRY AND IVY RED SPIDER, _BRYOBIA PRÆTIOSA_, C. L.
KOCH.
]
_June 20, 1894._
I was so sorry to learn from Professor Riley’s circular that he
really had resigned, and also from some observations in it to
surmise that all had not been quite comfortable. Who will be his
successor? Will it be Mr. L. O. Howard, I wonder? I expect that
Professor Riley (unless he is really very ill) will work at his
Entomology from morning till night or more.
The oak trees have been very severely injured by caterpillars in
various places. Down near Lymington, Hants, one of my
correspondents tells me the leafage is stripped so that the
trees look as if it were the middle of the winter. Aphides also
are very great pests this year, and we had a bad grass attack of
them near Newcastle-on-Tyne. They were reported to be spreading
rapidly from one large field (that is, large for us) of 15 to 20
acres, so I thought the best advice I could give was to mow the
field—in the most literal sense, cut off the source of evil.
Is it not rather an interesting point to think of—that whether
the weather be hot and dry, or cold and wet, there are some
kinds of insect attack which appear to do equally well? The
crops bear up better in special circumstances, but their
unpleasant enemies seem to me just as comfortable.
I have got a very curious investigation on hand of the mischief
of some beetles on the grassland of our South American Land Co.
in the Argentine Territories. I will enclose or send you a
little note I put in one of our agricultural papers. Is it not
curious that the two Scarabæid beetles sent over with the
Dynastids should so rarely come to hand here that there is only
one specimen of each in our British Museum! I hope to work up
the observations, or rather, to get a good deal of trustworthy
observation to work upon, and to get some more specimens.
_July 16, 1894._
I am now writing first of all to ask you kindly to accept a copy
of the translation by Professor Ainsworth-Davis of Dr. Ritzema
Bos’s “Agricultural Zoology.” It seems to me a very useful book,
but I think it is a mistake of Messrs. Chapman & Hall to have so
arranged it that the price is 6s. This is almost a prohibitory
price to many who could find 2s. 6d. or 3s. Also, if I had seen
proof of title I think I would have asked for my name to appear
in a much more secondary fashion. I should mention this copy is
one of a few sent me for friends. I did not buy it or I would
not have enlarged on the price! I have written, by request of
Professor Davis, a short Introduction, and I was very glad to do
it to show that I had no feeling of opposition, for much of it
is on parallel lines with my Manual, and there might have been
misunderstandings which I should have been very sorry for—for
Dr. Ritzema Bos is always kind in helping me.
You will believe how intensely I was interested in all I could
hear about Professor Riley’s retirement. I was sorry for his
indifferent health, but perhaps it was more the desire to be a
free agent that led to his resignation. I think I could feel
very much with him, but his was a magnificent post to resign.
_October 28, 1895._
I was shocked and grieved to receive the news of our friend
Professor Riley’s fatal accident.[74] Dr. Bethune kindly sent me
a paper with the full account, and as I did not know what any
one might do in properly announcing it here, I wrote a short
letter to the “Times” which they inserted at once. This was just
what one might call a friendly notice; an account of the
accident and a few observations, the dry obituary notice (I mean
the regular formal notice) had been inserted the previous day. I
was very pleased to see yours in the “Canadian Entomologist.” It
was very sad, and I feel his loss much, for he was always, when
we corresponded, kind and helpful.
Here, things are going on (or standing still) much as usual, but
it has been a grand year for fresh observations. I have secured
a long carefully watched observation of _Harpalus ruficornis_
(Ground beetle) feeding on strawberry fruit. I watched and
recorded until I got so weary of acting as their fruiterer that
I thought seventeen days’ observation was enough.
Amongst pine attackers I have had a lovely specimen of the
_Astynomus ædilis_ (Timberman beetle), sent me from the north of
Scotland, the longest horned of the European “longhorns.” It is
wonderfully pretty to see the tiny beetle, not three-quarters of
an inch long, comfortably bearing its delicate antennæ, nearly
half a foot in expanse. Also I have got a good observation of
the Pine Shoot moth’s bad doings; the _Retinia buoliana_, the
“Post-horn” attack as they call it in Germany, from the twisted
shoots; and some other fresh work—but the great point of this
year’s observation is Horse and Cattle Diptera, Warble flies,
Gad flies, and Forest flies. Just now Forest flies are being
sent me from India. The Indian species is very pretty. I have
been working up the structure of the Hippoboscal foot, which is
indeed wonderful (plates XXIII., XXIV.). I do not understand the
details, so I have had two great drawings made, and
lithographed, for my next Annual Report, with the tiny foot
magnified to a size of 6 inches by 5, showing every detail that
appears to me observable, and I wonder what the parts will be
considered to do. I think I have made out a good deal, but there
is some apparatus that none of the few people I have consulted
make out.
[Illustration:
Magnified, and lines showing natural length; strawberry fruit gnawed
by _Harpalus ruficornis_.
FIG. 53.—GROUND BEETLES—“BAT BEETLE,” _HARPALUS RUFICORNIS_, FAB.
(left), _PTEROSTICHUS VULGARIS_, LINN. (right).
]
[Illustration:
Slightly larger than life; line showing natural length.
FIG. 54.—TIMBERMAN BEETLE, _ASTYNOMUS ÆDILIS_.
]
_May 15, 1897._
You will have seen the state of enthusiasm this whole country is
in about the celebration of the Queen’s Jubilee. I trust that
the exertion and excitement will not be quite too much for her,
but it will be a great trial.
Another matter I feel more at home in—do you happen to have seen
in some of our English papers that some of us are trying to get
an Agricultural Lectureship established in the University of
Oxford? It came about this way. It appears that the funds for
support of the Sibthorpian Professorship of Rural Economy had
fallen so low, that it was feared it would have to be given up.
But the Clothworkers’ Company came forward with the offer of
£200 a year for five years on condition of Agriculture being
made one of the subjects to be taken for degrees. I offered £100
on the same terms, and then it was offered by one or two people
jointly, on the same terms, to clear off a debt which seemed
growing like a snowball. The matter is now under consideration
by the University authorities. They would gladly accept the
money, I believe, for an Agricultural Lectureship on which
attendance was voluntary, but the difficulty is accepting the
matter as essential for a degree.
Instruction in agriculture (that is, chemistry, forestry,
entomology, &c.) would do a great deal of good at such a centre
of our “coming on” great landholders as Oxford, but the students
will not attend the lectures unless the matter is compulsory.
Prof. Warington is the Sibthorpian lecturer—a friend and
neighbour (at least, he and his wife live very near by
railway)—so we can talk over progress. He has his hands, I
think, very full. In case after due consideration Oxford does
not think it desirable to establish the Chair, I fancy it is
very likely our offer may be then transferred to Cambridge; but
this is at present uncertain.
[These efforts in the higher interests of science as applied to
agriculture having failed, Miss Ormerod, in her _Last Will and
Testament_, bequeathed, out of her ample means, a sum of £5,000
to the University Court of the University of Edinburgh, “upon
trust for the benefit of that University.”]
_December 6, 1897._
I thank you very much for your two Entomological Reports lately
received. I want to read your observations on “Hair-worms”
carefully as soon as I can get time, for these creatures come, I
think, as regularly as the summer.
You will perhaps have seen the turmoil that the Sparrow-lovers
raised, and the floods of abuse they bestowed upon me. But it
advertised the leaflet beautifully, and I could hardly print at
first quickly enough to keep up to the demand. Our Royal
Horticultural Society has asked leave to reprint the Sparrow
leaflet in their Journal, which gratifies me much.
_January 21, 1898._
I think you will be pleased to know that I am in most pleasant
co-operation with the Duke of Bedford’s staff at the Woburn
Experimental Fruit-ground as to endeavouring to find some way to
lessen presence of _Phytoptus_ (mite galls), on black-currants.
We are going to try grafting on species which are not affected,
for one thing; after I have been trying for I do not know how
long to get growers to consider having their bushes in line,
with other crops between, I hear to-day from Woburn that it
appears as if those which had been grown that way were much the
freest from attack.
_February 16, 1898._
We are having an extraordinarily mild winter, and vegetation is
said in some places to be one or two months over-forward. Of
course insects are plying their trades heartily underground, but
(so far) I do not see any difference in amount of above-ground
appearances. If this is so generally, would it be too
far-fetched an idea to think it was a still further confirmation
of hibernation being constitutional, not an effect of weather?
The underground workers that are sent me are larval “eaters”
when not frozen torpid; also _Tylenchus devastatrix_ (eel-worm)
is, I believe, making wild work with clover, which is popularly
attributed to _Sitones_ (Pea-weevil) larvæ. I found the little
eel-worm (fig. 47) in quantities in abortive shoots of
“stem-sick” clover sent me, and I am giving warning about it.
_January 7, 1900._
I am very much gratified that you approve of the Index to my
Annual Reports. You will believe that it was a weary work to
make up our minds what arrangement would be desirable. The time
and sight that I worse than wasted on it was incredible, for, I
believe, I really complicated matters very much, and doctor, and
business manager (Mr. T. P. Newman) spoke so seriously that I
left off meddling, and I think Mr. Newstead did the work well.
I now very gladly forward a copy by book post, and I should be
only too pleased to send any copies that may be desired. My hope
is that besides being just a paged reference list, it may stand
for a sort of up-to-date “catalogue raisonné” of British
Economic Insect attacks.
_June 12, 1900._
I have owed you an answer to your kind letter so long that on
receipt this evening of your very valuable pamphlet, which I am
delighted to possess, I sit down at once to write.
I promise myself a great deal of information from your “Recent
Additions,” which is obviously of quite exceptional value. What
you say of the number of injurious insects being greater, as
well as the number of species, is very interesting. I am hoping
to utilise the reports of forest insects which have been sent me
up to date, in co-operation with Dr. R. Stewart MacDougall, the
consulting Entomologist of the Highland and Agricultural Society
of Scotland. I have much information scattered in my Annual
Reports, but I have not strength to work it and attend at the
same time (as I wish to do) to regular application, so we are
thinking that, as a “Text-book of Forestry” is much needed for
University use, we might work together; that is, Dr. MacDougall
to take the heavy scientific part, as his engagements allow, and
I to add what I can to the entomological notes which he has been
collecting for years, and also give the figures. I should like
this collaboration very much. Mr. Robert Wallace, the Professor
of Agriculture in the Edinburgh University (an old friend of
mine), is a very kind ally, and now I do not feel so very lonely
in my work. By parcel post (posted with this letter) I am
sending a photo of myself, taken in Doctor’s robes, for your
kind acceptance; I hope you will approve of the appearance of
your old friend in her new dress! With very kind remembrances
and good wishes, pray believe me, ever sincerely yours,
ELEANOR A. ORMEROD, LL.D.
_To the Rev. Dr. C. J. S. Bethune, Editor of “The Canadian
Entomologist.”_
TORRINGTON HOUSE, ST. ALBANS, ENGLAND,
_April 1, 1895_.
MY DEAR MR. BETHUNE,—My sister and myself were indeed grieved
and shocked to see from the papers you kindly sent (received
yesterday morning) what a disaster had happened.[75] What a
mercy that all the boys were saved! The order and promptness
speak volumes for the spirit of obedience and discipline—and we
have been reading the whole history with the greatest sympathy
and admiration. Poor boys—I feel so sorry for them—running out
into the cold, to watch their pet collections and treasures
burning!
I gather that for building purposes you are fairly insured, but
will you let my sister and myself try to replace what we can of
our own books and drawings? We are writing up to Messrs.
Johnston to ask how best to forward my sister’s and my five sets
of Insect diagrams, which were published by our Royal
Agricultural Society. When we learn, she is going to have them
forwarded, and hopes you will kindly accept them as a little
token of her great sympathy. By this post I am sending, in two
book post parcels, my Manual (2nd edit.), “Cobham Journals,”[76]
and Annual Reports, vols. 13, 14, 15, 16, 18. These I have here,
and I am going to write to my printers to forward some more to
try and make up the set. Kindly accept these, and please excuse
the “Cobham Journals” not being absolutely new. But it has long
been out of print and I secured a presentation copy which was
offered for sale and had it bound, and put a strip of paper to
hide what might be on the title-page.
Mr. Fletcher is my chief Canadian correspondent, and it is a
great delight when I get a letter from him.
You will not have time at present to think of entomological
matters, but we were desirous to assure you as soon as possible
of our great sympathy in your trouble. With my very kind regards
to yourself and Mrs. Bethune, in which my sister begs to join
me.
_June 7, 1897._
I was very much pleased to see your handwriting again a short
time ago—and a little while before exceedingly gratified with
the long kind review. You, living among so many friends and
colleagues in work, can hardly appreciate how very greatly
indeed I value such kind encouragement.
Your beautiful letter was a great support and comfort to me in
my loss last year,[77] and now my health is fairly established
again. I had great trouble for many weeks, some months rather,
from some very troublesome disturbance of sight, but I did as
well as I could, and when circumstances allowed, I got one of
our best London oculists to come and see what was amiss. To my
great joy he told me that each of my eyes individually was in
excellent order, but there was some such difference in their
action that some special glasses were needed, and I find great
comfort from them. He said he wondered how I had been able to
work.
Just now Alfalfa (lucerne), infested with locusts is coming in
from Buenos Aires, and one of my correspondents found his horses
so ill after feeding on the infested lucerne, that I sent a copy
of his notes to our “Live Stock Journal.”
One of the three animals was reported to appear to suffer from
colic; another recovered when bran was substituted for the
locust-infested hay. The third I should conjecture was very ill
when I heard. But as I know nothing of veterinary matters, I
thought it was but right to send the notes on, with a kind of
apology. The locusts are of the South American migratory
kind—_Schistocerca paranensis_. Pretty creatures—even all
flattened out. My correspondent sent me about 120 of them.
[Illustration:
Locust with wings spread: tip of male abdomen to the right, and of
female abdomen to the left. (After Conil, but reduced ⅙.)
FIG. 55.—SOUTH AMERICAN MIGRATORY LOCUST, _SCHISTOCERCA PARENENSIS_
(_MALE_).
From Lawrence Bruner’s Locust Investigation Commission Report, Buenos
Aires.
]
_July 20, 1898._
I am working now on what I hope to bring out in the autumn as a
good thick volume, called, “Handbook of Insects Injurious to
Orchard and Bush Fruits, with means of Prevention and Remedy,”
very fully illustrated. I am trying to include all the attacks
of any real importance of which observations have been sent to
me in the past twenty-one years, and though I give these from
British observations to a great extent, I am trying to bring
them all up to date. I hope you approve of the idea. Our fruit
industry is increasing so much, that more information is needed
for growers; but I do not feel sure I should have had courage to
begin it, if some one had not written to me that he purposed
bringing out a book on insect pests, and would like the use of
my figures to illustrate it! It occurred to me that when he was
about it he might like my letterpress also! So I have set to
work and I have got to about p. 224.
There are more of the rarer attacks about than usual this
year—_Atomaria linearis_ at mangolds, for instance. This morning
I heard from Messrs. Laxton, of Bedford, that they have gained a
complete victory over that destructive pest, the Strawberry
ground beetle, or beetles, I should say (in this instance
cockchafers, fig. 58). They bought a multitude of pudding basins
and sunk them in the strawberry beds, baited with sugar and
water, and tempting solids, and the beetles were caught in
hosts, sometimes by the half basin full. I think this is real
good news for strawberry growers.
I wish I knew better how to manage my work. I do not think I
should have any difficulty in keeping the real work in hand, but
there is so much correspondence on subjects which, indeed, one
can hardly call even allied, and yet I suppose one should return
a reply, and that adds uselessly to the work. How well you must
know this sort of thing!
I was grieved at the loss of our kind Dr. Lintner,[78] and I saw
my good friend Mr. T. P. Newman about some not wholly inadequate
notice being inserted in the “Entomologist.” I could from my
heart record his exceeding kindness to his weaker brethren.
[Illustration:
Magnified; natural length, one twenty-fourth of an inch.
(After Taschenberg.)
FIG. 56.—PIGMY MANGOLD BEETLE, _ATOMARIA LINEARIS_, STEPHENS.
]
_July 28, 1899._
Your very kind letter to me of a few weeks back was a sincere
grief to me in its information of your abiding sorrow under the
heavy affliction with which it has pleased our Father to visit
you.[79] I scarcely know how to write to you, for it would be
presumptuous in me to endeavour to enter to you on the only
sources of consolation, which, in my own great loss, you placed
so comfortably before me; but, believe me, I earnestly
sympathise in your affliction, and earnestly hope that any
arrangement you make may be to your comfort. I am much pleased
to see in the paper of which you have kindly sent me a copy,
that great care is being taken, that, so far as may be, you
shall have a worthy successor in the office you have so
honourably held for so many years [Head Master of Trinity
College School, Port Hope].
I do not often hear from Canada, for Dr. Fletcher is so occupied
and has to move about so much, that he has not time to give me
the bits of entomological novelties he used to form most
interesting letters with. I am trying this season to get my
applicants to fill up their observations to some degree. Rather
an undertaking this, you will believe! But I am getting a few
new (or rather little brought forward) infestations.
The _Cidaria dotata_, sometimes called the “Spinach moth’ is, I
think, of interest at present.
I am sure that when you move to a new home you will kindly let
me have your address, for I should be very sorry not to be
allowed to still look forward to our occasional interchange of
pleasant friendly communications, and with my very kind
remembrances and most sincere good wishes, pray believe me, most
sincerely yours,
ELEANOR A. ORMEROD.
[Illustration:
From Newman’s “British Moths,”
p. 193.
FIG. 57.—“SPINACH MOTH,” _CIDARIA DOTATA_, LINN.
]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAPTER XXI
LETTERS TO DRS. RITZEMA BOS, SCHÖYEN, REUTER AND NALEPA, MR. LOUNSBURY
AND MR. FULLER
Eel-worms—Lady-birds—Wheat midges—Resignation from the Royal
Agricultural Society—Wasps—Study of Norwegian and Swedish—Gall
mites—Boot beetles—Experience of publishing.
Representative letters to five foreign and colonial scientific
entomologists have been gathered into this chapter, among other reasons
to show the diversity of Miss Ormerod’s work, carried on in close touch
and in the most agreeable relations, with the highest wide-world
authorities on various specialised branches of her subject.
_To Professor J. Ritzema Bos, Amsterdam._
TORRINGTON HOUSE, ST. ALBANS, ENGLAND,
_July 27, 1893_.
DEAR DR. RITZEMA BOS,—I have not written to you for a long time,
partly because I had nothing of sufficient importance to allow
me to submit it to you, but also because both my sister and
myself had rather severe illnesses.
Enclosed I beg to send you some pieces of potato, which I think
it is just possible may be infested by (or at least have now)
some slight presence of _Tylenchus devastatrix_ (eel-worm, fig.
47). I received several tubers this morning from near
Helensburgh, in Dumbartonshire, Scotland. Mr. Robert Howie, the
sender, writes me that a large field recently dug up by him was
very much damaged by being badly “scabbed” in the same way as
the samples sent. But, when I came to examine the so-called
“scabbed” parts after washing, the surface for the most part
looked to me more as if it had been gnawed by some larvæ, than
if it were a diseased state of coat. The skin of the potato is
often left overhanging. I was going to suggest to Mr. Howie that
he should search for _Agrotis_ larvæ, or _Melolontha_
(Cockchafer), grubs, but examining further at the end of one or
two tubers, where the skin was still in its natural state,
excepting small patches of what was as yet only a slight
discoloured roughness, I found a few eel-worms. They were so few
that they evaded me when using the higher power, but in one
instance I thought I detected a bulb near the head end. I am
afraid I may be taking up your time with what is of no
importance; still I thought I should like to send you some
pieces, and if the attack is one of any interest I would gladly
forward more. The eel-worms I have seen are all anguilliform,
the largest was about as long or longer than the largest _T.
devastatrix_ I have seen, the others were smaller. Mr. Rochford
has been carrying on with great care and precision his
experiments as to poisoning _Heterodera radicicola_ (root-knott
eel-worms, fig. 49). He has tried about forty different
applications—noting the amount given and the effect on the
eel-worms and the plants. I certainly hope that a few will show
successful results, but he is very careful, and is now going
over his series of experiments a second time, that he may be
quite certain before coming forward with statements of effects.
As soon as I know anything of interest I shall be very glad to
be allowed to tell you; Mr. Rochford has given me permission. I
do not know as yet whether he will bring forward his results
himself, or leave it to me to do. Pray believe me, with best
thanks for all the kind assistance you give me.
[Illustration:
Larva, pupa, and antenna of male ♂ and female ♀.
FIG. 58.—COCKCHAFER, _MELOLONTHA VULGARIS_, FAB.
]
_September 7, 1893._
As I think that you have either returned home, or will soon be
returning, I now (with your kind permission) send a few more of
the “scabbed” potatoes, which it seemed possible might be
infested by _Tylenchus devastatrix_. If it should be convenient
to you at your best leisure to make any examination, and to let
me know results, I am sure I need not say how acceptable your
information would be, not only to myself, but to many interested
in the cause of this external deformity. I send the potatoes in
a little tin box by parcel post. Recently I have had rather an
interesting observation of the little black, somewhat pubescent,
“lady-bird” beetle, _Scymnus minimus_, as a feeder on Red
spider, _Tetranychus telarius_. I have not been able to find any
account of its life history, so I have had great pleasure in
watching its progress from larval to imago state. It seems to me
to be greedily carnivorous; after a few hours’ want of food
during their journey to me, the larvæ set to work to feed on
what they could pick up on the back of a leaf infested by red
spider, as eagerly as sheep on fresh grass; and as I found one
day only a single larva remaining of three or four confined
together, I suspect it was this survivor who had reduced his
brethren to the small remains which were all I found. The final
changes were rapid, for the above happened on August 28th, and
shortly after it had pupated, and yesterday I found the little
black lady-bird in most active condition.
I have heard nothing further at present from Mr. Rochford about
his _Heterodera_ experiments. I think I must remind him soon
that he kindly promised me a report.
[Illustration:
1, Cluster of eggs; 2, egg, magnified; 3, grub, magnified; 4, line
showing natural length; 5 and 6, pupæ; 7 and 8, 2-spotted lady-bird,
_Coccinella bipunctata_, L. (= _dispar_), and dark variety; 9,
7-spotted lady-bird, _C. septempunctata_, L., like in form but much
larger than the black lady-bird.
FIG. 59.—LADY-BIRDS, _COCCINELLIDÆ_.
]
[Illustration:
1, _Geophilus longicornis_; 2, _Lithobius forficatus_, “thirty-foot”;
3, head of _Lithobius forficatus_, magnified.
FIG. 60.—LONG-HORNED CENTIPEDES.
]
_May 14, 1894._
I have been quite sorry for a long time that I have had no
specimens which would be of interest to you. I was afraid you
might think I was not attending to these subjects, but now I
have received a cucumber root quite beset with galls, of which I
forward you a portion. It is from a nursery gardener at Rhyl, in
Flintshire, North Wales, where they are much troubled by
cucumber and tomato plants dying, some of both kinds having the
“roots covered with galls but some have not.” Messrs. Maxwell
and Dalgliesh sent me some of the roots without galls, from
plants that were nearly dead, but I could not discover the cause
of the failure of these. On such inefficient examination as I
make, I find in the soft pulpy centre of the larger galls some
anguilliform nematodes, which I conjecture to be males, or
larvæ, of the _H. radicicola_, but so far as I searched I did
not find females; there were a fair number of eggs. On cutting
the pieces of plant into fragments for packing I find the stem
just about the ground-level much beset with diseased growth. I
have not, however, delayed to try to examine this, for I might
be only wasting specimens. Messrs. M. and D. have five houses
fifty yards long each, so the infestation is a serious trouble
to them. They tell me that they clear out all the soil each
year, and bring fresh soil in. It “is rich alluvial soil.” They
have tried lime, soot, and nitrate of soda without effect, and I
should certainly say that something requires alteration for the
extermination even of an infestation much more easily dealt
with; for they are troubled by millepedes (fig. 27), and also
there are such great numbers of _Geophilus_ (centipedes), that
there must, I think, be something amiss whether these live
chiefly on vegetable matter or on small animal vermin.
Some inquiry about _H. radicicola_ has been sent to me from Glen
St. Mary, Florida, U.S.A., but no new information.
On Saturday, Professor Ainsworth-Davis wrote to ask me to write
a preface to his translation of your “Zoologie,” and it will
gratify me very much indeed to prepare such a one as I hope may
please you. Your book will be a very valuable addition to our
educational series, and I shall like very much to be permitted
thus to appear in colleagueship.
_October 3, 1894._
This matter of the ? _Tylenchus devastatrix_ in the cortex seems
to me most perplexingly curious. I cannot venture to form an
opinion; I have not the knowledge requisite, but looking at
these _Tylenchi_ being smaller than _T. devastatrix_ is
customarily known to be, and also their occurring in a locality
where _devastatrix_ is not known, the idea just floats in my
mind whether they may be ♂ (males) or, alternatively, larval
_Heterodera schachtii_ (“Beet-root” eel-worm).
But perhaps I am almost wrong in taking up your time with a mere
idea, as you work on definite proof, and though the shape of
those I mentioned to you much resembled your larval _H.
schachtii_, I had not sufficiently high powers to be sure of the
species. I have been trying to make out whether there is ever a
definitely formed opening for the exit of the contents of the
♀(female) _schachtii_. In examining one specimen I found a
circular orifice with what appeared to me a regularly formed
edge—not a merely torn one. On putting this in glycerine under a
thin cover-glass, and very lightly pressing it, there first came
out a number of little eel-worms, without disturbing the
condition of the orifice. I was, however, so desirous that my
sister should see the interesting sight that I called her, and
when I looked again perhaps in a couple of minutes, the
regularity was gone; the outer skin—the skin rather of the
female—was cracking irregularly from the aperture and giving
exit to a mixed collection of eggs and wormlets. I have tried to
find another instance but without success. Very many thanks to
you for also sparing time to explain to me the meaning of the
word “schaŭmerde.”[80] Now I quite understand and am very glad
to know about it. Thank you also for your kind permission to use
some of your figures of _schachtii_.
I should very much like to have some specimens of the hop-growth
called “nettle-headed,” but I have only received a very few
leaves, in which I did not see anything amiss.
I received a specimen (though I suppose this is not rare) of the
large _Coccinella ocellata_ (Eyed lady-bird). What a pretty
creature it is! I had never seen it before.
Also from a North British correspondent I received a number of
what I do not think could be other than larvæ of one of the
_Staphylinidæ_, which were doing mischief by feeding in turnips
or their flower stems or leafstalks. They looked grey to the
unassisted eye; magnified, they were whitish with grey patches
along the back, and they much resembled the fig. by Professor
Westwood (see p. 167 of vol. i. of his “Classification of
Insects”), of which I give a rough tracing of the magnified
larva and line showing natural size. Professor Westwood found
numbers of these larvæ feeding on turnips, but, unfortunately,
he does not give even the generic name. They are obviously very
destructive, that is, those sent me.
I have been most carefully studying your observations on
_schachtii_ in oats with great pleasure and profit. With kind
regards and ever with many thanks, believe me,
Yours very truly,
ELEANOR A. ORMEROD.
[Illustration:
Natural size and magnified.
FIG. 61.—EYED LADY-BIRD, _COCCINELLA OCELLATA_.
]
_To Dr. W. M. Schöyen, State Entomologist, Christiania._
TORRINGTON HOUSE, ST. ALBANS, ENGLAND,
_August 23, 1892_.
DEAR SIR,—I have long been in your debt for grateful
acknowledgment of your kind thought in sending me from time to
time copies of your valuable pamphlets, and also of your
portrait, which I have much pleasure in adding to my collection
of portraits of the leading entomologists of the world. But I
trust you will forgive my long silence because for a long time
(that is, since last autumn) until about three weeks ago, I have
been a great sufferer, and it has been with difficulty I have
been able to keep up to work.
May I ask your kind acceptance of my fifteenth Report
(accompanying by book post), and a little brochure I recently
arranged by special request; also with them may I place a copy
of my portrait, recently taken,in your hands? I value your
pamphlets which you kindly send me, much; but, unfortunately, I
have never been able to master your language—so when I have read
the title, if it be a subject bearing specially on my own work,
I get help from a linguist to enable me to benefit. Trusting
that for the reasons given you will pardon my long silence.
_October 25, 1893._
I thank you very much for being so good as to tell me of the
appearance of the _Cecidomyia destructor_ (Hessian fly, fig. 15)
in Norway. This observation of the further spread of this
troublesome barley pest is very interesting to me, and I am also
greatly obliged to you for letting me have the characteristic
specimens of _puparia_. There is no doubt that these are the
chrysalis cases (the “flax-seeds,” as we call them here) of the
Hessian fly. I at once wrote to two friends to endeavour to
procure the specimens you name, and it would have been a great
pleasure to me to send them at once, but I much doubt whether I
shall be able to procure any of the Wheat midge, _C. tritici_; I
have not got any myself, nor have my two colleagues so far as
they see.
About the Hessian fly, I have been more successful. I have
secured some specimens well put up for the microscope. It is too
late this evening to repack them properly, but I hope to send
you three slides to-morrow in a registered letter, of which,
with very great pleasure, I beg your kind acceptance. Should
they not reach you in proper condition, you will oblige me by
letting me know, that I may try to replace them. I should hope
that the thoroughly well-advised treatment which you are
endeavouring to get carried out in the infested district will be
successful. I have great confidence in the efficacy of
destroying the _puparia_ in the screenings or siftings; and
ploughing so as to turn down the “flax-seeds” also quite
certainly answers well.
One special insect trouble during the past season in this
country has been an unusual prevalence of wasps, _Vespidæ_, of
various species. They caused much injury and loss by destroying
fruit, and also were very troublesome by attacking horses
ploughing, if their nests were turned up. I hear that they were
also troublesome in Holland, and in the Hartz districts of
Germany. Should you write to me, I should be very much
interested to know whether they were also unusually plentiful in
Norway.
[Illustration:
1, 6, infested floret; 2, 3, larvæ; 4, 5, cased larva or pupa, natural
size and magnified; 7, 8, part of horns, magnified; 9, 10, wheat
midge; and 11-14, ichneumon parasites, natural size and magnified.
FIG. 62.—WHEAT MIDGE, _CECIDOMYIA TRITICI_.
]
_November 7, 1893._
I beg to offer you my best thanks for your very acceptable
letter of the 31st of October. Indeed, I am greatly obliged to
you for not only kindly giving me your own information as to
amount of wasp presence observed in the past season, but also
the translation into English of the account of their great
appearance at Tromsö in 1883-4. This is exceedingly interesting,
and also very entertaining. I have enjoyed reading this spirited
account uncommonly, and I shall like very much to add it (of
course duly acknowledged) to my paper on wasps in my next Annual
Report.
[The translation appeared as follows:—
“In the years 1883-1884, there was an unusual prevalence of them
in the Arctic Norway, especially at Tromsö and other islands in
the vicinity. Mr. J. S. Schneider, Conservator at Tromsö Museum,
writes in the Swedish ‘Entomologisk Tidskrift,’ 1885, pp. 148,
149, about this matter as follows:—‘Who can tell all the tears
which these wicked animals have squeezed from the poor children,
or the swearings which the mowers have thrown out, the half-shut
eyes, and the swollen hands and cheeks which have shown forth in
the autumn months of these two years? Perhaps this may appear an
exaggeration, but it comes, however, pretty near the truth. They
built their nests everywhere, in the earth, in stone walls,
behind the wainscottings of the houses, under garden benches, on
the trees; it swarmed with wasps on all the flowers and bushes,
the windows were filled with them, they crawled on the plates of
the dining-tables, licked of the dishes with preserves, crawled
under the clothings, and in the hair, and did not at all spare
the ladies! When one was going in the woods, a humming warbling
was heard, which is still sounding in my ears; wasps everywhere,
it was almost a despair,’ &c.
“I have not seen anywhere in the southern districts of our
country the wasps so exceedingly numerous as they must have been
in Tromsö in the said years. The species occurring here are:
_Vespa crabro_, _media_, _saxonica_, and var. _norvegica_,
_holsatica_, _vulgaris_, _germanica_, _rufa_, and _Pseudovespa
austriaca_.” (W. M. S.).]
_November 7, 1893 (continued)._
Now I have much pleasure in begging your acceptance of a few
pamphlets sent accompanying by book post—three on Hessian fly
and one on Paris-green. Two of the Hessian fly pamphlets were
condensed notes regarding its first appearance here, the other a
report in full of the communications of my correspondents. I
wished very much to send you a similar detailed report of the
first year’s observations of this _Cecidomyia destructor_ (fig.
15) in Britain, but as yet I have not been able to find one
remaining. Every year since the first appearance of this
infestation amongst us, I have received some amount of
information as to its greater or less presence, and I have
given, so far as I could, my best attention to it. If it should
happen that there is any point on which you would wish a reply
to any inquiries, I would with pleasure do my best to answer
fully, and would think myself honoured, as well as be very much
pleased to be in communication with you on the above subject, or
any other point of injurious insect presence.
[On the subject of wasps, Miss Ormerod wrote to Mr. Edward
Connold on January 15, 1894:—
“I am very glad that you were able to procure my late brother’s
book on “Social Wasps” and that its perusal gave you pleasure.
You ask me how the combs were removed from the nests. I do not
know how my brother managed it, but I found the matter very
easy, as long as the nests had been so recently taken from
out-of-door localities, that the paper had not become too dry to
be operated on. Indeed, the damp condition induced by the first
stages of the very nasty state that combs with dead grubs get
into, rather facilitated work than otherwise. The first thing in
working on a nest of any size was to get a pair of scissors,
long in the blades, thin, and also very sharp. Then carefully
make a clean vertical cut through the paper-case of the nest
from the entrance below nearly to the top. Through this great
gash I had no difficulty in removing the combs—so to say
(although it is a disagreeable word) “eviscerating” the nest. I
began with the smallest and lowest comb. Inserting my scissors
horizontally I snipped through the little paper pillars by which
it was connected with the comb above and withdrew it in a very
convenient way, with fingers or forceps (or very likely by help
of the scissors) through the opening. Continuing this process I
do not remember that I ever failed to clear out the comb
successfully. It did not always require to be entirely removed,
if I recollect rightly. I think sometimes the upper comb did not
require removal. When all was cleared out, I filled the empty
paper case with cotton wool, and applying plenty of gum to this
below the slit, I very gently pressed the paper back to its
former position, and if the work had been dexterously done, the
injury did not show much. If the paper had been broken of course
the damage showed, and it was requisite to be careful that the
gum or adhesive mixture used for keeping the cut edges in their
places did not run about. Sometimes where circumstances
permitted, I cut a little aside from the straight line in places
so as to secure an uninjured piece of a layer to hide part of
the slit. In this way very pretty specimens could be arranged,
showing both nest and comb. I have been preparing a long paper
on the wasp attack of last year for my next Annual Report. I
have had very good contributions, and hope it may be liked.
“It will give me great pleasure to attend to any inquiry the
Hon. Sec. of the Museum may care to send me as to starting a
collection of pests to agriculture, and I think I might be able
to help with suggestions where specimens are procurable.
“Many thanks for your suggestion as to membership, but I do not
care to belong to more Societies than I can possibly help, so I
hope you will forgive my not accepting your kind offer.”]
[Illustration:
After sketch from original specimen by E. A. O. Dimensions, 8 in.
across by 7½ in. deep.
FIG. 63.—NEST OF TREE WASP, _VESPA SYLVESTRIS_.
]
_March 10, 1898._
DEAR DR. SCHÖYEN,—In reply to your inquiry whether any measures
are being taken in this country to prevent the introduction of
the San José Scale, _Aspidiotus perniciosus_, I am not aware of
any such measures being in contemplation. I have not heard of
anything of the kind being proposed, nor have I seen any mention
in our newspapers of preventive measures being contemplated in
regard to imports. My own impression is that we are not likely
to suffer from it. With our island climate (as a general thing,
and as especially observed by Dr. C. V. Riley) the injurious
insects of the Continent of America rarely establish themselves
here, although ours adapt themselves to the American Continental
circumstances, and this Scale appears to be remarkably
susceptible to damp and cold. The Bulletin by Dr. John B. Smith,
Entomologist of the New Jersey Experimental Station, published
November 27, 1897, says, p. 6, “The Scale does best with us in
dry, warm weather. It does not like dampness, nor shade, and
will die out in a cold, moist locality. Large trees with dense
foliage are therefore least troubled, and a dense mass of
vegetation shading the ground completely will be infested only
towards the tips of the twigs or branches nearer the surface,
where sunlight and air are most abundant.” I greatly hope,
therefore, that even if this injurious attack should come, that
it will not establish itself to a serious extent, as shade is a
characteristic of many of our orchards.
Our chief trouble at present is an attack of eel-worms,
_Tylenchus devastatrix_, on red clover, _Trifolium pratense_,
causing what we call “Clover-stem sickness.” I never knew the
attack so widely prevalent before. But I hope that with the
measures which I draw attention to in my recent Annual Report we
may do some good.
_March 11, 1898._
Relatively to the San José Scale, I find, from some information
received this morning, that Mr. R. Newstead, Curator of the
Grosvenor Museum, Chester, has lately attended by request at the
Board of Agriculture, and stated that this infestation had not
established itself in any way in this country. Also that he had
not heard of, nor had he seen any instances of its presence,
although he had made diligent search for it at Liverpool, &c. He
thinks the matter is a “scare,” and that the insect is not
likely to establish itself here. In this opinion (the document
before me states) he is supported by our Entomological Society.
Mr. Newstead is, I believe, excellently qualified to form an
opinion on the subject, as he is a practical Economic
Entomologist, and he has also made the _Coccidæ_ a subject of
minute investigation. This I should say was more important than
the views of a meeting of our Entomological Society, of whom
few, if any (excepting Mr. Douglas), have, so far as I am aware,
studied _Coccidæ_ to an extent approaching Mr. Newstead’s
observations, and have no special bias towards applied
Entomology.
The above will perhaps be of some interest to you as the nearest
approach I am able to make to a reply to your inquiry, and I beg
you to believe me.
Yours truly,
ELEANOR A. ORMEROD.
_To Dr. Enzio Reuter, Helsingfors, Finland._
TORRINGTON HOUSE, ST. ALBANS, ENGLAND,
_October 15, 1894_.
SIR,—In acknowledging receipt of your obliging letter of the 8th
of October, received here on the 12th, permit me to say that I
think it not only a pleasure, but an honour, to be in
communication with the leading Entomologists who, like yourself,
are working for the good of their countries. I thank you much
for your letter.
First, about the _Cecidomyia_ (Wheat midge) larvæ (fig. 62) on
the _Alopecurus pratensis_[81] (Foxtail grass), I cannot
remember that any further observations were sent me about it,
nor have I noticed anything in publications which come to my
hands. My correspondents often send me specimens and details of
some infestation which has caught their attention, but it is
with the greatest difficulty in many instances that I can induce
them to continue their observations for successive seasons, and
the development of the imagines of the _Cecidomyiæ_ from the
early condition is much more trouble than they care to take.
By book post accompanying this letter I forward to your kind
acceptance a copy of my seventeenth Report. In the pages of the
Report I have placed copies of various leaflets. These, you will
see at a glance, are not at all scientific, but intended quite
for popular use by our farmers, therefore I have used the very
simplest words I could.
You are good enough to offer to send me copies of some of your
future reports in connection with Economic Entomology. If you
can spare them I should value them very much. For although I am
not able to understand more than a word here and there, yet with
the help of the dictionary I can make out enough to see whether
your information is applicable to the conditions here, and I can
get a good translation made for me. I can read German and
French, but I am sorry not to be able to write with ease in
either language.
_November 21, 1894._
DEAR SIR,—I had much pleasure in receiving your kind letter
yesterday, and also beg you to receive my very hearty thanks for
your kind and valuable gift of so many of your writings received
on the day before. But now I am going to ask you a further
favour. At your leisure would you oblige me with the name of a
dictionary which would help me to understand them? I do not
understand Norwegian, but, with the help of the Dano-Norwegian
dictionary of Mons. A. Larsen, I can manage to make out what I
especially need from Dr. Schöyen’s writings, which he is so good
as to send me. But now I have been trying to translate your few
lines on _Charæas graminis_ (Antler moth) (chap. XIII.), and
either from my own ignorance, which I much regret, or from not
having the right dictionary, I have not been able to read them.
P.S.—It pleases me very much to hear from you that you approve
of my reports, and it is kind of you to mention it.
_December 11, 1894._
I thank you most heartily for sending me this useful dictionary.
It is just what I was needing. With this help I can already make
out short pieces of your reports and publications, which is a
great pleasure and profit to me. It really was quite a vexation
to see what I wanted so much to study and yet could hardly make
out any connected meaning. I only just write now to say that
both for your kind and helpful gift and your letter accompanying
I thank you most heartily.
_March 5, 1895._
I did not at once acknowledge your Report on Injurious Insects
which you have sent me because I thought very likely you would
send me a few lines about mine, and now I beg to acknowledge
your note with many thanks. What a vast sum it is that you
mention as the loss [about 5,000,000 Finn. Marks = ca. £200,000,
in the years 1889-1891] caused by _Charæas graminis_, Antler
moth (fig. 4)! I am so sorry that I am not able to read your
reports, which, from the little bits I can pick out here and
there, are, I see, so valuable and would help me so much. But
please not to think that they are wasted on me, for I learn a
great deal that helps me, and when there is something that I
particularly wish to know I get the passages translated.
_April 8, 1895._
I beg that you will never for one minute think of taking up your
valuable time in writing to me at length about my reports. If
you can at any time (as you have so nicely done in your letter
received to-day) tell me that you think them serviceable, this
is a most pleasant encouragement, for which I am grateful, but I
know well what a tax it would be to write letters, so to say,
merely for compliment. Pray believe me, I should indeed be sorry
thus to trouble you. I value your writings that you are good
enough to send me very much, and I got a serviceable Swedish
grammar and studied it when I could get time, so I can make out
a little now; at least so much that I can see where what I wish
particularly to understand is, and get it properly translated.
Accompanying I have much pleasure in sending two copies of my
little brochure on Paris-green. I thought perhaps M., your
brother professor, Odo M. Reuter, whose pamphlet on _C.
graminis_ I have studied with much benefit, might care to have
one.
_August 21, 1895._
Many thanks for kindly giving me a copy of your work on the
“Zwei neue Cecidomyinen,” which I am very glad to possess. Your
minute description will be a most valuable assistance in
identification. This year I have only had one report of presence
of _C. destructor_, but there has been a great deal of insect
presence, and sometimes of kinds not often observed here.
But the chief point of general interest, I think, has been what
to do about the _Hippobosca equina_ (Forest fly, fig. 18),
relative to some of our military manœuvres in the New Forest,
which is its especial English locality. I do not know whether
you have the infestation so far north as your country? It is
very troublesome at times here.
_December 18, 1899._
I should be very glad to help you if I could by reference to
publications on “Silver-top” or “White-eared” wheat, but I am
not aware of anything having been written on it in this country
excepting my own short and meagre notes in my twelfth Annual
Report, for 1888. Specimens are sent me occasionally, but—as by
the time that the top of the wheat (or grass) has faded so as to
draw attention to the injury, the insect, if insect was there,
has gone—I have never been able to identify the cause of the
mischief with any approach to certainty. I conjecture the cause
to be the presence of some species of thrips. The American
observations point to this, but these you probably are well
acquainted with (and, indeed, it is not these you are inquiring
about). In my notes I mention the peculiar manner in which the
injured upper part of the stem can be withdrawn, the stem having
been apparently severed about three or four inches above the
uppermost knot. In the only instance I have seen in which the
attack was still in progress (that is, the stem was not already
parted, although it cracked asunder on being pulled), I found
that at the point of fracture the straw tube had within an
irregular swollen growth, what might be described as a
granulated growth, filling up the tube; also the cross-section
showed small open cells which had been cracked across in
severing the stem. I had specimens of the attack also on barley,
and at the time I was inclined, from the absence of all insect
appearance, to ascribe it to some vegetable disease, but in the
years that have elapsed since then it has appeared to me more
likely to be attributable to thrips.
I am afraid that there is not anything worth your study in the
page and a few lines of my remarks, but if you would care to see
it, I would gladly direct a copy of my twelfth Annual Report to
be sent for your acceptance. I would do so now, but I have not
an unbound copy by me. Many thanks for your own publications
which you have kindly sent me. I have read with great interest
your remarks on the _Argyresthia conjugella_, Zell.[82] We have
an apple attack here occasionally noticeable which agrees well
with the characteristics of this infestation, but I have never
been fortunate enough to identify the cause.
Yours very truly,
ELEANOR A. ORMEROD.
_To Professor Dr. Alfred Nalepa, Gmunden, Vienna._
TORRINGTON HOUSE, ST. ALBANS, ENGLAND,
_August 3, 1893_.
MONSIEUR,—I am very greatly indebted to your kindness and
courtesy in taking the trouble to give me all the very valuable
and helpful information which you favoured me with in your
letter of the 28th July. I also thank you much for your
permission to make some extracts in my Annual Report from the
information which you have placed in my hands. This is a very
great favour, and you may rest assured that I will most fully
acknowledge my debt to yourself. From the study of the pamphlet
which you were good enough to send me I have already benefited
largely. But I earnestly pray you, do not let me intrude on your
kind liberality for any work that I might be able (if you were
good enough to give me the name) to purchase. My London
booksellers are accustomed to procuring Continental publications
for me, and I am feeling myself so greatly indebted to you for
valuable information that I am quite uneasy at not being able to
reciprocate as I much wish. I have delayed writing in the hope
of being able to procure some specimens, but as yet I have only
the enclosed (Pear leaf blister galls, ? of _Phytoptus pyri_) to
send to you from trees in my own garden, and these I am afraid
will be of little interest. Your valuable list of infestations
has shown me that there are very many kinds of _Phytoptus_
attack that I had no idea of the existence of, and I will indeed
try to be of some service to you.
By book post accompanying I beg your kind acceptance of the
current number of my Annual Report, in which are some remarks on
a species of _Entedon_ (or _Entedonidæ_, parasites of Dipterous
leaf-miners especially) which we found in currant buds in
watching for what we hoped might prove a parasite on the
_Phytoptus_. I fear my report will be of little interest to you,
but I just beg you to accept to show the kind of publication.
_August 16, 1893._
I postponed replying to your kind letter of the 7th in the hope
that I might have something of interest to send you, but I have
only been able to procure the enclosed Prunus galls. They are
from Toddington, Gloucestershire. I rather fear they will wither
on the journey, but I forward them because the twigs have
something amiss with them, which just possibly may be owing to
_Phytoptus_ presence. Thank you much for giving me the name of
the _Phytoptus pyri_, which I have noted at p. 296 in your
“Katalog,” which you were good enough to send me, and which is
of truly valuable assistance. My booksellers will, I hope,
before long procure me five or six of your publications either
in separate impressions or in the parts or volumes in which they
were published, and then I shall hope to have the information
that I am much wishing for, without troubling you personally.
But should the special attack, which I desire to understand
better, not be specifically described, then I should indeed be
very thankful to avail myself of your kind permission to ask for
further information, and a sketch would be a most valuable aid.
I have too great a respect for the time and work of scientific
men to intrude if I can possibly help it, and I am very grateful
for the important help which you have already given me.
[Illustration:
1, female (natural length circa 0·2 mm.); 2 _a_, left leg of the first
pair of _Phytoptus tristriatus_, and 2_b_, of _Phytoptus
tristriatus_ var. _carinea_, magnified 550 times—all after Dr.
Nalepa. 3, infested pear leaf.
FIG. 64.—PEAR LEAF BLISTER MITE, PHYTOPTUS PYRI.
]
_November 2, 1893._
I am greatly obliged for your kind letter received two days ago,
and it is so very good of you to have taken the trouble of
writing the names of the various portions of the _Phytoptus_ on
your plate accompanying so clearly for me that I hardly know how
to express my thanks sufficiently. This is indeed a most
acceptable help, for there were some of the quite minutely
technical terms that I had failed to make out the meaning of,
and now you have most excellently got over my difficulties for
me, and I thank you very much for the same. Since I wrote to you
at Gmünden I have had great pleasure and benefit in procuring
some of your valuable publications, so full of excellent
descriptions and figures. One of these is the separate
impression of your paper, read on January 24, 1889, with 9
plates, including p. 11, of which you have now sent me this
valuably explained copy.
Another—the separate impression for February 13th—contains
description, p. 11, and figure, plate iv., of _Phytoptus pyri_,
and I have also a copy of your “Genera und Species der Familie
Phytoptidæ,” 1891. Now I think, thanks to study of your clear
descriptions, I have a fair knowledge of the characteristics of
a _Phytoptus_, and of the divisions of the Family Phytoptidæ.
When I publish my next Annual Report I should very much wish to
give my readers some better information than I have hitherto
been able to do, and to point to them from what source I
obtained it, and how they may obtain it for themselves. I think
I have your kind permission to use one of your figures. I am
therefore having a very careful copy executed of your _P. pyri_
(plate IV., fig. 1), of the two claws (in your Genera and
Species, plate ii., 9_a_ and _b_), together with an attacked
leaf from life (fig. 64).
Your part would be a most soundly valuable aid to readers here,
for really and truly I doubt if more than very few among us are
aware (say) that the legs of the _Phytoptus_ are made up of
claw, tarsus, tibia, and so on, much less that the claw is of
this peculiar shape. I confess to you I was ignorant of this
myself. I should like to give a part of your description of the
_P. pyri_ to show what a description ought to be; also to allude
to the species which you were so good as to name for me, and to
your principle of classification (p. 317 of “Katalog”). Should
any of this not be according to your pleasure, I beg of you
kindly to tell me. I should indeed be ungrateful if, after all
your kind help, I trespassed on your information against your
wish. Should you allow it, you may depend on me to quote
accurately, so that my quotations will send readers to your
works, not enable them to use my report as a robbery of you;
also I would fully and honestly acknowledge the source of my
information, and be truly grateful. I wish I could send you
specimens. Would you care to have some galls of the _Phytoptus
ribis_ from black currant in their (I think) very unusually
advanced condition for this time of year? I think I could
procure some from Kent.
[Illustration:
1, Mite, greatly magnified—natural length of female 0·23
millimetres; 2, head and fore parts, still more magnified (by
permission, after Dr. A. Nalepa); 3, mite-galls of unusually
large size, with one withered and open.
FIG. 65.—CURRANT GALL MITE, _PHYTOPTUS RIBIS_, NALEPA.
]
It is with regret that I read in your letter that you are not in
strong health. But if you could work less severely might not you
hope to have benefit? The excessively minute work of your
elaborate investigations must be exceedingly wearing. In my own
observations (which, indeed, are not to be compared with yours)
I always find they tell very much on my health if I have at once
to overwork my sight with the microscope and my mind in the
record of my observations. But I have not robust health, so that
I can sympathise. With renewed thanks for the welcome contents
of yours lately received.
_March 12, 1894._
I am greatly obliged to you for your kind present of your
“Beiträge zur Kenntniss der Phyllocoptiden,” with its first-rate
descriptions and magnificent figures. It is a very great
advantage to me to be in possession of your noble work on these
creatures, and I feel myself very much indebted for all the
great help you have given me.
About the _Phytoptus ribis_. I delayed replying because I
thought that if any thoroughly complete description of this
_Phytoptus_ had been published by Professor Westwood it would be
sure to be known of by Mr. W. Hatchett Jackson, of Keble
College, Oxford, who was Professor Westwood’s chief assistant.
But he tells me that “under the generic name of _Acarellus_ I
can find nothing but a brief paragraph without figure in the
accounts of the meetings of the Entom. Soc.” Mr. Jackson adds,
“I remember the occasion very well, and making slides for him
from specimens in our own garden. I shall search for those
slides in the Hope Museum.”—W. H. J.
After some search here I found the enclosed, and as I think you
would desire to see the fullest account which I believe
Professor Westwood published, I have detached the page. If he
were still with us I know how he would have delighted in your
splendid unravelling of what was then a mystery. At your best
convenience, when you have quite certainly no further use for
the page, perhaps you would kindly let me have it back.
In my own early observations of the habits of the Currant
_Phytoptus_ I noted it as _P. ribis_, Westwood, on the
authority, or rather after the example, of Mr. Andrew Murray
(see “Aptera,” p. 355), for we had not in those days any more
trustworthy and accepted guidance, but as to comparing these
with such a work as yours, no one with the least atom of
knowledge would think for a minute of such a thing.
Yours very truly,
ELEANOR A. ORMEROD.
_To C. P. Lounsbury, Esq., Government Entomologist, Cape Town._
TORRINGTON HOUSE, ST. ALBANS,
_September 17, 1895_.
DEAR MR. LOUNSBURY,—It gave me great pleasure to receive your
letter this morning, in all excepting that I find I might
possibly have seen yourself and Mrs. Lounsbury. I am really very
sorry not to have done this, for there are many things so
difficult to enter on in writing, which yet (as now you are on
our British staff) I should like you to know, relative to
entomological matters, and also, though I should have said this
first, it would have been a pleasure to my sister and myself to
become personally acquainted with you. How fortunate you are in
having such a skilled colleague [his wife]; it must be a real
comfort to you to have an entomological _alter ego_, and yet
such a charming companion.
You will have made acquaintance with your colleagues, and you
will, I conjecture, find Mr. Bairstow useful if he be still
attending to insect matters. He collected a great deal of
information for me when I was compiling my little S.A. book. But
now I am chiefly writing to indicate the pleasure it will give
me to be in communication with you as occasion may occur, and
with good wishes both for your success and comfort to yourself
and Mrs. Lounsbury, &c.
I do not know whether you have my little book on “South African
Insects,” so I beg your acceptance of a copy sent by this post.
[Illustration:
1, Beetle; 2, larva; 3, pupa, magnified (from Bulletin No. 4, New
Series, U.S.A. Department of Agriculture, p. 124).
FIG. 66.—BREAD, PASTE OR BOOT BEETLE, DRUG STORE BEETLE (U.S.A.),
_ANOBIUM PANICEUM_ (= _SITODREPA PANICEA_) LINN.
]
[Illustration:
FIG. 67.—UPPER OF A BOOT INJURED BY MAGGOT OF PASTE BEETLE, _ANOBIUM
PANICEUM_.
]
_November 4, 1895._
I had great pleasure in receiving your letter of the 12th of
October, and first of all I will try to reply so far as I am
able about the Boot beetle, _Anobium paniceum_. The English
manufacturers did what is so very inconvenient—though one is
not surprised at it—they begged that their names and
localities might not be mentioned. But with regard to the
use of a deterrent paste (or mixture in the paste), it was
quite plain that they did not mean to do anything. They
spoke of difficulties to the workers, &c., and as to using
Paris-green!—really, there would have been a disturbance
indeed, if I had ventured to suggest such a thing. The
subject appeared to be making no headway, and my suggestions
as to the all-importance of cleanliness in the workshop, so
that the beetles might have no harbouring places, did not
meet their views. So I strongly advised in order to make
sure whether the infestation took possession in this country
or at the Cape, that some boots should be packed up and
properly secured against all possibilities of external
infestation, and sent to South Africa, and on arrival there,
sent back to the exporters here unopened. Thus we should
have learned on examination, if they were infested, that the
mischief was started in this country. But not one word on
the subject have I had from them since. Perhaps the result
put the locality of the origin of evil being in this country
beyond doubt. I have kept a quantity of the letters on the
subject laid away, but now I think I cannot use them to
better purpose than by forwarding them to you. Please do not
return them. I have not re-read them, but it is impossible
there can be anything confidential in them, excepting the
names of the firms which the writers did not wish published,
and it is just possible (in case you can spare time to run
them through) that there may be points of interest.
What you say of inertness is just what is such a drag on the
advance of work here. Instead of getting information, and acting
on it, they (or many) propose to write to the Board of
Agriculture or possibly to another quarter, and sometimes they
follow advice, sometimes they do not.
Just now I had an application about _Strongylus filaria_ (thread
worms which produce husk or hoose) which is doing great damage
in one district. They thought of writing to the Board of
Agriculture. I suggested the excellent account in your Dr.
Curtice’s book on “Sheep Diseases,” but it did not appear to
have occurred to them to teach themselves.
_June 24, 1896._
It was with great pleasure that I received your first Report
about two days ago, and I must both very sincerely and heartily
congratulate you on this good work. It seems to me quite an
example of what a report should be. Clear wording that all can
understand, and a short sound life history, with all requisite
means of prevention of the specially detailed “pest” attacks,
with a deal of excellent reading besides. Indeed, I congratulate
you greatly on taking your place so firmly, and I consider the
Colony is much to be congratulated also on securing your help. I
am glad to see that the Government gives you good paper and
printing. There is only one thing which I should much like to
see added, and that is pictorial illustrations. Could not you
have at least some figures? I believe they are available in the
Government Stores. Sometime after the publication of my little
book on the “Injurious Insects of South Africa,” a request was
made to me for a number of figures, which with much pleasure I
presented. If you would like, besides those which could be
looked up at the office of the “Agricultural Journal,” electros
of some of the figures which are my own, which I use in my own
publications, I would gladly send you out, say a dozen or a
dozen and a half, if the Agent General would (as I feel pretty
sure he would) kindly allow me to send them out to you in the
Government box. It would give me real pleasure if I could be of
any help to you in your good work.
_August 17, 1896._
I have this morning had great pleasure in receiving your letter,
and I shall be very glad to send you electrotypes of the blocks
of which you will let me have a list,—that is to say, of such as
are quite my own. Those that I have from Messrs. Blackie and
Son, Stanhope Street, Glasgow, I have only permission to use in
my own publications. I think very likely, though, that, if you
were inclined to purchase electrotypes from them, they would be
quite willing to let you have them at the same price which they
charge me, that is eighteenpence the square inch. About my own,
I have no difficulties, as my wood figures and electrotypes are
all in charge of my printers. There would be no charge for
carriage, and I would charge you just the cost price of the
electros. But there is one point, please, that I am sure you
will forgive me insisting on as a condition of use of my
electrotypes, namely, that they may be used in any publication
of the Department of Agriculture of Cape Colony, or in any
publication of your own, but nowhere else without my consent.
_July 28, 1899._
I have, I am afraid, been owing you for a long time, more than
one letter in reciprocation of your kind letters to me, but I
have hoped you would forgive me, for you know how I am situated
with a deal of application and no staff. I am wanting now to say
that I hope you have not been vexed with me for having had a
hand in robbing you of an efficient member of your staff (Mr.
Fuller), which I am afraid must for the present be an
inconvenience, but it surely will be an immense benefit to
Natal, to have a trustworthy Entomologist.
I am trying to work up _Piophila casei_ (Cheese and Bacon fly),
which Miss Murtfeldt took up so well. I incline to think that it
is more present than is supposed, only of course, “cured meat”
dealers do not like to own to it. I have got a nice little
family reared from bacon for observation under a glass, and some
of their brothers and sisters loose about the room, which I see
little or nothing of until the cheese is brought in twice a day,
when they come, and so give me an opportunity of watching
egg-laying.
_August 9, 1899._
What a frightful thing this prospect of war is! I have not an
idea what may be politically right, but it distresses me
intensely to think of the sorrow, and so far as in me lay I have
had a hand in getting poor Mr. Fuller right into the thick of
the trouble.[83] You have assuredly been having trouble enough,
with fire, water, and “sausages”! I am truly glad that your
books and insects were not very much damaged. But I hope you
will not peril your valuable health by turning yourself into a
pasturage ground as you say, for these very detestable ticks.
Much better try the convict! His nervous system will not be so
delicate.[84]
_July 5, 1900._
I learn with great pleasure that you and Mrs. Lounsbury are
coming back through England, and I hope you will be able to give
me the great pleasure of your looking in here. I should be so
glad to see you, and you and I could have some delightful
entomological talk. On Saturday next, I hope to see Dr. John B.
Smith, State Entomologist of New Jersey.
What a business you must have in transporting your parasites
from America to Cape Colony, but I hope you will have good
success in obtaining the specimens you are needing.
Yours sincerely,
ELEANOR A. ORMEROD.
_To Claude Fuller, Esq., Entomologist Department of Agriculture,
Pietermaritzburg, Natal._
TORRINGTON HOUSE, ST. ALBANS,
_November 5, 1898_.
DEAR MR. FULLER,—I would very gladly in reply to your request,
offer you any suggestion in my power, but I scarcely know
whether my ideas would be serviceable. Judging by my own
experiences in purchase by farmers or fruit-growers of books
which they certainly need and wish to have the information
contained in, I should not expect any publisher to take any MS.
of mine as a speculation. The good folks wish for the books, but
they do not, at least only a very small proportion of them (I am
speaking of agriculturists) wish to buy. My work is done at a
great money loss, and my publishers do not take my books as a
speculation, but act in fact as my agents. Could you not get
your MS. published in a serial, with a stipulation, that you
held copyright, and so your valuable information would be
brought forward without cost to yourself.
There is another point. The differences in species, even in
genera, are terribly difficult to be sure of amongst many of the
Scale insects, and many of the Aphides, and unless fruit-growers
have magnifiers and knowledge how to use them, I should not
expect them to identify to any trustworthy purpose. If you
brought out a strictly scientific work this of course would be
very valuable as a book of reference, and Prevention and
Remedies added would make it very useful indeed; but if you look
forward to purchase by the public, I am afraid you will not find
it happen.
Please excuse rather a hurried letter to catch the evening post,
and believe me,
Yours very truly,
ELEANOR A. ORMEROD.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAPTER XXII
LETTERS TO MR. JANSON AND MR. MEDD
Deer Forest fly—Flour moths—Weevils—Grouse and Cheese
flies—Beetles—Agricultural Education Committee—The Water-baby
Leaflet—Paper on Wasps.
MR. JANSON, addressed in the opening letters of this chapter, occupied
the position of technical expert, to whom Miss Ormerod referred her
generally accurate identifications of insects for confirmation. The
cases of flour infestation referred to we have learned of in Chapter X.,
“Legal Experiences.” The language employed is more technical than in any
other part of her correspondence—the words of an expert addressing
herself to another expert in the language of their common subject. Mr.
Medd’s name has been more associated with education than entomology,
especially in relation to the comparatively new branch of “Nature
Study.”
_To Mr. O. E. Janson, Technical Expert in Entomology, 44, Great Russell
Street, W.C._
TORRINGTON HOUSE, ST. ALBAN’S,
_February 13, 1897._
DEAR MR. JANSON,—I hope that in a very few days you will receive
your copy of my twentieth Report, in which you helped me so
especially about the Forest flies.
I am hoping you may be good enough to help me about the
enclosed, or kindly put me in the right path, for I greatly hope
that this may prove to be the long-needed observation about
amount of wings of the ♀(female) Deer Forest fly, the _Lipoptera
cervi_ (fig. 23). I received a day or two ago a good number,
many still alive, or fresh on a little piece of Roe-deer’s hide,
which was infested with them even to being in clusters (from
Strathconan forest, Ross-shire). On examining, I found on each
side, at the hinder edge of the thorax, a little membranous kind
of structure with a scalloped edge, and on very carefully
raising it I found it was fixed to the thorax by a joint, and
was, I think, quite certainly an abortive wing. I saw veins
traversing the structure longitudinally, and though the
scalloped and notched extremity was irregular in shape, it did
not at all have the appearance (to my thinking at least) of
being torn. Enclosed I send you half a dozen specimens, one of
which has the structure very plain; the others I picked out at
random, and what I am very much wishing you would help me about
is whether these are females. They have the distinguishing dark
brown colour (not the faint yellow colour of the male), and I
should say they had the shape of the female, but I am not
anatomist enough to be certain. If you cannot with complete
convenience tell me yourself could you oblige by getting me a
trustworthy opinion. I would most gladly give a most liberal
consideration to any one you would get to investigate, for if
these are females, we have here the long-wanted observation, and
proof that they have abortive wings. I have plenty more
specimens if you would care for some more; also I have two
puparia.
_February 23, 1897._
I am greatly obliged to you for helping me in this matter of the
_L. cervi_. You will remember that you kindly helped me to a
sight of a good number of German publications, from which I made
large extracts, and, turning to these, I find notes of the male
and of the female _L. cervi_, being found together in the hair
of the deer all the winter through, and pairing there and the
female depositing puparia. But the matter is much involved by
the following statement regarding two varieties in the form of
the males by Professor Stein, or Hartmann quoted by Stein: “The
first are pale yellow, and the abdomen is slender and shrivels
considerably after death; the latter are more yellow brown,
their abdomen is wider and firmer, and the external organs of
propagation clearly observable.” There is a deal about abortive
or shed wings, but the writers are under uncertainty. My belief
is that our only hope towards clearing up the matter is our own
observation, and if these creatures are really females, we have
got the information that was being sought after. But do not let
me tax your very great good nature too much. If you could give a
specimen or two to Mr. Verrall and to Mr. Austen I should like
it, and you would hear what they say, and I would replace them
to you. I have two puparia which I suppose are not likely to
develop till towards the end of summer.
_April 16, 1897._
I have been so fortunate as to find a puparium of a Deer Forest
fly lately sent me in a consignment from Strathconan, and this
gave me an opportunity of communicating with Professor Jos. Mik,
Vienna, and he pronounces the specimens I sent accompanying to
be females. He writes me (and I think it very kind of him to
take the trouble) an exceedingly long letter, full of
information and references, extending in a very small
handwriting over five and a half large pages of note-paper, and,
as he justly remarks, I have some difficulty in reading it!
I think of getting Mr. Pillischer to make some preparations of
the _L. cervi_ ♀and their abortive wings so that we may have
material for a good figure. Professor Mik is fearfully
particular.
_May 12, 1897._
Professor Mik identified my _L. cervi_ as certainly
well-developed females. I think he was a good deal pleased to
have a mature puparium which I sent him and to dissect out an
immature one. He says that he has himself ♀ of _L. cervi_, with
abortive wings, so my work will not be a discovery as I hoped,
still I think it will be of interest to illustrate.
_May 24, 1897._
Your description of _L. minor_ (lesser earwig) has helped me
enormously, and I have translated as much as I think is likely
to be needed of the technical part to help Mr. Knight to make a
characteristic drawing (fig. 43).
I should like ♂ or ♀and forceps of both, and I have material for
this, but I should very much like a wing. I tried to unfold one
or two and wasted my materials. Would your microscopist set one
for me do you think? I should much like it; for I fancy (I have
not been able to make sure) that there is a longer band of dark
colour along the front edge than in our common earwig. But, any
way, if I could have the wing set I should very much like to
have a good figure of it.
_October 5, 1897._
If you can spare time to help me in the present inquiry, I
should be much obliged; it is quite a trade business matter. I
am consulted by a London firm dealing in flour, as to
infestation in their barrels, but as I gather it may be both
from the Eastern and the Western world, and also may be infested
by insect pests from whatever may be lying on the wharves, I
want to be very sure of my identifications.
The presence of _Ephestia kuhniella_ (Flour moth) was quite
plain, so this I need not trouble you about. But about the
“Weevils.” I think those of which I enclose specimens in the
bottle stoppered with cotton wool, are the common _Calandra_ (=
_Sitophilus granarius_). I am quite sure _C. oryzæ_ was present,
but I do not think I have enclosed any. Messrs. Henderson write
me to-day that they are quite sure their barrels took the
infestation from oil-cakes which were swarming with _S.
granarius_. To the best of my belief and search, _Calandra_ only
lives on grain, so I fancy that its connection with the
oil-cakes must be only as a shelter. I know _Calandra_ will
resort to remains of bread and milk or ripe apricots near a
granary, but I supposed this was in search of moisture. But,
nevertheless, as one weevil is so like another, it would be an
important help if you would kindly verify my identification for
me.
In the same little bottle are two small not-far-from-globose
pubescent beetles, which I thought might be _Niptus hololeucus_,
but when they came clean I saw they had not the beautiful bright
yellow pubescence, nor were they so globose. I do not know them;
you probably will at a glance, and your kind help would save me
long search. Amongst the larvæ I found one answering to that of
_Cucujus testaceus_ (as given in Curtis) = _Læmophlœus
ferrugineus_—and in the flour there were numbers of the minute
rusty little beetles of which I enclose some in a corked bottle.
Will these be _Cucujus ferrugineus_? I do not think I have any
types, and as this is such a decided business inquiry, I feel
sure you will allow me to ask you to keep me right about it, at
your convenience. The flour or barrels or something must have
been (to my thinking) in a very neglected state.
[Illustration:
6, 7, Granary weevil; 2, 3, chrysalis, natural size, and magnified; 8,
9, rice weevil, natural size, and magnified; 1, 4, infested grains,
also magnified.
FIG. 68.—GRANARY WEEVIL, _SITOPHILUS GRANARIUS_, AND RICE WEEVIL,
_SITOPHILUS ORYZÆ_.
]
_October 11, 1897._
I am greatly obliged to you for your kind help about the flour
coleoptera. I was puzzled about the _granarius_, as there was a
slightly different look about it, from the specimens which I
usually have, and I had no series for comparison. I have never
had _Læmophlœus_ in this quantity before,—they run in all
directions out of the flour. I cannot find another _Ptinus_, but
the information you have given me is quite enough, I am sure,
for my flour people. The really important attack that they have
got is _E. kuhniella_ (Flour moth) but as the flour is in
barrels perhaps it will not trouble them.
I have kept my _X. saxeseni_ (Shot-borer beetles), in a
good-sized glass-topped box, where the larvæ are still throwing
out dust and the beetles come out and die, but I do not see any
more, and I think that instead of giving you more trouble about
them I had better get Mr. Knight to copy one of the U.S.A.
imagos and add larvæ, pupæ, and strange “cleft” like cell from
life. If the specimens you have are of interest to you pray
oblige me by keeping them. I think I have material for a really
interesting paper. Do you happen to know what has become of my
very much valued correspondent, Dr. Karl Lindeman [the Russian
Entomologist]? I have not heard from him for a year and a half,
and I do not find his name in the U.S.A. Scientists’ Guide. He
was truly friendly and very punctilious in writing, but if he
were dead I think I should have seen his obituary. I wonder
whether he was so useful to the people that he has had to take a
trip to Siberia!
_October 26, 1897._
What work _Hylurgus piniperda_ (Pine beetle),[85] continues to
make in some of the great Pine woods in Scotland, consequent on
the damage by high winds some years ago. I had an application a
little while ago from the forester on one of the great
properties near Aberdeen, who reports great mischief on 1,000
acres. This afternoon I have a report of the woods at Craighlaw,
Kirkcowan, Wigtonshire, being in most dismal condition.
I really wonder whether it will ever occur to our Board of
Agriculture that there ought to be a Government Entomologist. It
is only a short time since I had an application connected with
the Austrian Embassy about a beetle attack that was eating the
oats at Constantinople, but I suggested that Vienna was
unsurpassed for its scientific men!
_August 18, 1899._
I am thinking (though I have not mentioned the matter beyond
just beginning at present) of (if I can find it) taking a
comfortable villa and good garden at or in the outskirts of
Brighton. I much wish to be nearer relations, for living so much
alone is at times a very dreary kind of thing. Also there are
many points in which Brighton would, I think, suit me better for
my work, and possibly be more conveniently easy of access for
entomological friends living on the South London lines. I know
the place very well, and it has always suited my health
excellently.
_September 19, 1899._
I have a _Hippoboscid_ this afternoon from Mr. Wheler, which was
found on a lamb. He thinks it is a Grouse fly (or Spider fly, a
near relative of the Forest fly). Surely oddly located! But so
far as I see I think it must be so. Shall I not send it you? In
any case it might be of interest, and I should very much like,
at your convenience, to be made sure of what it is. If it be
_Ornithomyia avicularia_ (Grouse fly), I conjecture that it
straggled into the nearest shelter when it developed. It is in
beautiful order, but so lively that I have not been able to get
a good look at the claws. [This identification was confirmed by
Mr. Janson.]
_September 22, 1899._
I am much obliged to you for all the points of interesting
information in your letter. There is no hurry about figuring the
Grouse fly, so that if Mr. Norman would kindly let me have the
slide as soon as he thinks it would be safe to use it, I should
feel very much obliged. I now enclose the specimen from a lamb.
I quieted its very superabundant antics by slipping a little
lump of cotton wool down the tube, about a third of the way, and
it accepted the soft material moderately. It died afterwards,
and I enclose it with some spirits in the tube. I should (if not
inconvenient to you to ask), very much like this specimen also
set by Mr. Norman, with the wings as they are at present—at
rest, but showing the fore-nerves very nicely. I incline to
think that if this be certainly _O. avicularia_, that it would
suit better for figuring than the previous specimen as being in
the same position as my _H. equina_ and _L. cervi_, both ♂ and
♀in previous Annual Reports. If you could oblige me with the two
slides together I could make what personal observations I want;
have which ever seems best figured, and afterwards, if one or
both are of interest to you, I would very gladly beg your
acceptance. I daresay you will be good enough to let me use your
interesting short note about finding the specimen of
_avicularia_ alive in the box with the Horned owl.
I am working now on _Piophila casei_, Linn. (Cheese and Bacon
fly, fig. 12), and hope to make a good paper, with some original
observations of my own. Is it not a noteworthy circumstance that
besides undoubtedly breeding in myriads in stores of cheese and
bacon, that also they come in through the windows in such
numbers that wire gauze, or equivalent, is a recognised
protective measure? I think this points to there being some home
of _P. casei_ that wants looking up.
I did think Brighton might suit me better, but I found there was
no suitable house, so I am staying here. I am very glad that you
had a pleasant rest, and a beneficial one.
[Illustration:
1, Grouse fly, magnified, with line showing natural length; 2,
puparium, magnified and natural size; 3, end view, magnified; 4,
claw, magnified.
FIG. 69.—GROUSE FLY, _ORNITHOMYIA AVICULARIA_, LINN.
]
_October 21, 1899._
Messrs. Forshaw and Hawkins, of Liverpool, have written me
regarding beetle and maggot presence in flour and meal in two
compartments of “Telesford,” from New Orleans to Glasgow. They
send me “a deal of”[86] report and two tubes with beetles, larvæ
and flour. I believe these beetles (and larvæ) to be _Tribolium
ferrugineum_ (Rust-red flour beetle), and I enclose four beetles
and six maggots. Will you be so very good as to let me know if I
am right, and I enclose a telegraph form filled in, which would
put me at ease for the present if you would be good enough to
send it to me. The reason I am troubling you now is that the
small amount of flour in the little tubes has the characteristic
(mentioned in Mr. Chittenden’s paper in “Household Insects,”
&c., in a Bulletin of U.S.A.) of being greyish. See top of p.
113 as to “Flour Beetles.”
This is quite different from the state of Messrs. Smyth and
Co.’s flour, and if you are so good as to confirm my
identification I might perhaps be allowed to use the information
on our side on Tuesday, when Mr. Blyth comes down about
depositions. The Glasgow case has every appearance of being on
the road to a lawsuit, but now (after Friday’s experience) I
should not be so afraid of giving evidence, if you would make me
sure.
[Illustration:
1, Beetle; 2, larva; 3, pupa—magnified, and with lines showing natural
length; 4, head with antennæ, much magnified.
FIG. 70.—RUST-RED FLOUR BEETLE, _TRIBOLIUM FERRUGINEUM_, FAB.
]
_November 1, 1899._
I received the Grouse fly slide in perfect safety, beautifully
put up; many thanks to you for procuring the same. If at your
very best convenience you would settle my debt to Mr. Norman for
his help, I should be greatly obliged. I am getting into your
debt assuredly also, but whilst I am troubling you, thanks to
these infested cargo people, I think I had better let this stand
over. It is very weary work getting up information in this
minute way, and as matter of choice I had rather be without a
visit[ation] from six professional gentlemen and a shorthand
writer all at once!
I have had a beautiful specimen of workings in willow of
_Cryptorhynchus lapathi_ beetle.
[Illustration:
Beetle, natural size and magnified; willow stem, tunnelled by larvæ.
FIG. 71.—MOTTLED WILLOW WEEVIL, “ALDER-KILLER” (GERMAN),
_CRYPTORHYNCHUS LAPATHI_, L.
]
_December 29, 1899._
Many thanks for a sight of Mr. Fuller’s letter (returned
enclosed). I have enjoyed reading it very much; it is so
interesting to have a real letter about the war, not made up
“for press.” I worked myself nearly stupid in running up the
habits of the _Calandra_ mentioned in “Insect Life,” and there
was some such roguery somewhere or other about the mate’s
report, which he stated afterwards was written under
intimidation, that I felt a little uneasy about having anything
to do with the matter.
_January 12, 1900._
I have lately had an application about “White Ants” being
destructive to young Cocoa trees in Ceylon. I do not know much
about the great hill-building Termites as plant eaters, but I
thought that probably exposing just the couple of inches or so
subject to be gnawed, to the light might be useful.
[Illustration:
Caterpillar (not full grown) and chrysalis.
]
[Illustration:
FIG. 72.—GOAT MOTH, _COSSUS LIGNIPERDA_.
]
_September 16, 1900._
I am very much obliged to you for all the trouble you have
kindly taken in identifying the _Bruchi_ for me, but on running
the matter up there does not seem to be the least reason to
suppose that these creatures had more to do with the barley than
that they had strayed into it from beans, of which I find on
special inquiry that the steamer carried also a consignment “in
the same hold.” I wrote to the importers (or rather my
applicants wrote to them on my part) and I received a small
consignment of the very identical beans from them (from Hull),
and most of these I now enclose to you, as I thought you might
care to see if anything of interest would develop. The specimens
in the little bottle, including one or two hymenopterous
parasites, are also from the beans.
In a little box with the beans is a fine specimen of the Goat
moth, _Cossus ligniperda_, larva, which is very diligently
spinning.[87] I have been much interested in watching the way it
thickens its beginning of lacework web. I believe (unless the
top specimen has eaten it!) that there is another larva at the
bottom.
[Illustration:
3, _Bruchus brachialis_. 1, _Bruchus tristis_. 2, _Bruchus
rufipes_.
]
[Illustration:
_Bruchus pisorum_=_pisi_. _Bruchus rufimanus_.
Magnified, with lines showing natural length.
FIG. 73.—PEA AND BEAN WEEVILS, _BRUCHI_.
]
_September 23, 1900._
I am very much obliged to you for these nicely set _Bruchi_, and
I do not think it would be at all out of place, although two of
the species are not British, to give figures of the three kinds
(_brachialis_, _rufipes_, and _tristis_) as found in a cargo
including beans and wild peas from Smyrna, together with barley.
(The consignees were very much puzzled about them.) I also found
_rufimanus_ in one of the beans which I was opening, a lovely
specimen, so perfect in its marking. But now, if you please, I
very much wish for a little further help. I cannot find any
reference to _brachialis_ or _tristis_ in any book I possess,
excepting just the names in Calwer’s “Käferbuch.”
I have been not a little disappointed about _Scolytus pruni_. I
found nice larvæ in a piece of plum bark with this infestation,
and had a good figure taken, but I kept on watching the small
number of specimens to be fairly certain of species, and to my
vexation on development out came one as _rugulosus_!
With many thanks for your welcome and valuable help.
[Illustration:
1 and 2, _Bruchus rufimanus_, natural size and magnified; 3, infested
bean split open, showing cell; 4 and 5, larvæ, natural size and
magnified; 6 and 7, pupæ, natural size and magnified; 8, bean,
injured by beetle, vegetating; 9 and 10, _Bruchus pisi_, natural
size and magnified; 11, injured pea.
FIG. 74.—BEAN BEETLES.
]
_October 4, 1900._
I am very much obliged to you for lending me the two vols. of
“Deutsche Ent. Zeit.,” which will help me very much about those
_Bruchidæ_—and more particularly with the specific distinctions
which you have been good enough to give me. I will try not to
keep the books over-long, and will return them carefully packed.
_November 1, 1900._
Is it of interest to you (in case that you have not heard) to
know of the decease, on the 13th of October, of Professor Josef
Mik, of Vienna, after a short illness? I shall miss him, for he
was a friendly colleague, and was good enough to send me a
little collection of types of _Tabanidæ_ which have been a great
help.
I was rather perplexed how to name these three newly-imported
species of _Bruchus_, but for want of a better I thought that
sad-coloured bean-seed weevil, _B. tristis_; red-footed
bean-seed weevil, _B. rufipes_; and red-horned bean-seed weevil,
_B. ruficornis_ [=_brachialis_] would do fairly.
Yours very truly.
ELEANOR A. ORMEROD.
[Illustration:
Beetle and wing, magnified; line showing natural length of beetle.
FIG. 75.—“SPLINT,” OR SAP-WOOD BEETLE, _SCOLYTUS PRUNI_, RATZ.
]
_To J. C. Medd, Esq., Stratton, Cirencester._
TORRINGTON HOUSE, ST. ALBANS,
_March 12, 1900._
DEAR MR. MEDD,—I am much obliged by the packet of publications
regarding the work of the “Agricultural Education
Committee,”[88] and I note excellent names in your list of
members, and some excellently true observations in your
four-page leaflet, “Agricultural Instruction in the Elementary
School.” But it is with great difficulty that I am able to keep
my own work in hand, and I have been quite unable to find time
to study the other pamphlets which you have been good enough to
send me, although, from their titles, I make no doubt that they
contain both valuable information and suggestion.
Although I am sure that plain and interesting information on
subjects of their daily surroundings would be gladly received by
the boys, I do not in the least see my way to complying with
your flattering suggestion of my pen being useful in the matter.
You know how I am situated? There is a constant stream of
applications sent me for advice regarding prevention of insect
pests, which though chiefly about British troubles, involves
much correspondence both with the Entomologists of our Colonies,
the Continent and the U.S.A.—and to meet which I have no staff.
I could not find time to write papers such as you desire; but if
you wish I would send you copies of such leaflets as I have in
which some of the ordinary crop pests are treated of very
plainly; and from these I make no doubt that you could get
passages arranged for your readers which the boys would like to
read.
_July 9, 1900._
It gratifies me very much that you should think my leaflets and
“Manual” likely to be of use; and you have only to express the
wish, for me to send another hundred of the “Manuals” as soon as
they could be bound. I have been reading and much appreciating
your observations in “Our Programme,”[89] of which you have
kindly given me a copy, and it has occurred to me whether, now
that I understand the scope of your work better, I might arrange
a very simple paper on our commonest Live Stock attacks. I
enclose a few pages as a sample of what is in my mind, just
giving what could be taken in (and I think is needed) with
addition of a little more life history, and the exceedingly
simple methods of prevention. I have quantities of first-rate
illustrations, but now I just submit the enclosed to you, hoping
you will be kind enough to let me know at your convenience what
you think of my idea.
_July 14, 1900._
I am personally truly grateful for your letter of this morning,
for I was very uneasy lest I should be, to put it shortly,
giving sad offence. I certainly think the “Water-baby”[90]
leaflet is a great mistake, but, as you judiciously remark, if
it is to be issued we must make the best of it.
I will think over to the best of my power what appears likely to
be of use agriculturally on the subject of fly attacks on farm
stock. Whilst I am preparing the papers themselves perhaps a
good heading such as I may presently submit for approval will
suggest itself. I should much like to have the primary heading
“Agricultural Education Committee,” for—with a footnote that the
papers were prepared at the desire of the Agricultural Education
Committee to give information—this would throw a shield over me,
in writing on Cattle and Stock attacks. The ones selected do not
infringe on what might be called “Veterinary”—things that
involve discussion unbecoming in a lady writer, and those I
propose to write on are what I have long had application about.
There need be no difficulty about publishing if I do it in my
usual way.
_August 2, 1900._
After your visit, so pleasant as well as profitable to myself
yesterday, I sat down as soon as I could to see what I could
write about “Wasps,” and I enclose the results. It is mostly an
abstract of records of much personal observation of my own. If
you like I would gladly lend electros of the figures.[91] If you
care to accept the enclosed for any use to our Agricultural
Education Committee that you may think it may be suited, I
should be really pleased, only begging that it may not on any
account whatever appear as part of the “Water-baby” series—that
really I do not think I could bear.
_August 8, 1900._
I thank you very heartily for your courteous reception of my
letter about resignation. It is very good of you to write so
kindly on the subject. I enclose you a copy of the letter which
I have sent to the Secretary, which I have endeavoured to
express with the friendliness which I feel. But, much as I
regret leaving, I find that, independently of the considerations
which I told to you, when I come to the real working my health
does not allow it. If I am over-pressed it brings on (without
being unduly explicit) troubles both of health and sight, and I
am very thankful that, beyond your exceedingly kind expressions,
you do not press my remaining too hardly on me.
_November 26, 1900._
Many thanks to you for Mr. Bathurst’s paper on “Orchards;”[92]
there is some excellent advice in it, particularly about sawing
beneath the limb, trimming smooth, and not planting deep. But I
think that as the piece of cloth to be tied round the tree is to
“act as a trap,” a little addition is needed (see my “Insects
Injurious to Orchard and Bush Fruit,” pp. 12, 13), viz., that
the trap should be examined and the caterpillars cleared out
every few days, or say every fortnight. If this be not done the
sacking is very likely to make a nice little house for them.
Please excuse my giving my views thus vigorously, and uncalled
for.
Yours very truly,
ELEANOR A. ORMEROD.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAPTER XXIII
LETTERS TO PROFESSOR ROBERT WALLACE BEFORE 1900
Washing Wheat—Text-book on Insects—Grease-banding Trees—Steven Lecturer
on Agricultural Entomology—Australian agriculture—Examiner in
Agricultural Entomology—Insect cases presented to the
University—Death of Miss G. E. Ormerod.
The four remaining chapters, consisting chiefly of letters addressed to
the editor, are of a more general, less technical nature than those that
go before. They deal more with University and personal matters, and with
efforts being made to advance the cause of Economic Entomology than with
the structural details and habits of insects.
_To Professor Robert Wallace, University of Edinburgh._
TORRINGTON HOUSE, ST. ALBANS,
_August 20, 1888_.
DEAR PROFESSOR WALLACE,—I have delayed for a short time thanking
you for your very kind present of your beautiful as well as
valuable book on “Indian Agriculture,”[93] as I wished to make a
little acquaintance with it before writing. Now I see what a
great amount of serviceable information you have collected, and
I am greatly obliged for such an addition to my library. I note
what you wisely say about not substituting our implements
hastily for native kinds better fitted to the land, but just now
your explicit account of “wheat cleaning,” beginning at p. 227,
interests me exceedingly. I should be so glad if, when you have
leisure, you would tell me a little more about this. You mention
Messrs. Dell and Son, of London, as the firm that specially gave
you information. I have been in communication about cleaning
wheat with some of the Hull millers, one of the large corn
brokers in Liverpool, and some other places, and had not heard
of the washing, and this point, to me at least, seems a very
important one. When I have gone carefully into the subject, and
had the different kinds of screening sent in bags they do not
seem to me to have been wetted. If they can wash at one mill
they can at another, and we might have a chance of getting these
pest-bearing extras neutralised as to evil qualities. I should
greatly like to show you my set of screenings from Hull,
labelled with their uses.
Do you happen to be aware of its being a regular business to
supply weed seed, &c., &c., to deteriorate imports—that is of
course exports of Russia, &c.? I had an interview with one of a
firm who used to take orders for this at Samara! I believe these
foul screenings most likely brought Hessian fly, and I rather
think from a larva I saw in the spring _Meromyza_ is come too.
It appears to me a deplorable thing that everything should be so
absolutely arranged to import these nasty pests amongst us. If
you will come I will show you my “pièces démonstratives.” I have
not a book like yours to reciprocate your kind thought, but will
you give the enclosed “Manual of Injurious Insects” a place in
your collection. With kind remembrances from my sister.
_November 12, 1889._
About a text-book on Injurious Insects—it is not well to
recommend one’s own work, but I most earnestly wish that I knew
of any better English book for plain work than my own “Manual.”
I formed it because there was no other book that met the
everyday needs of Agricultural Entomology, excepting my own
Annual Reports, and the Reports of the Department of
Agriculture, which are formed in great part from my work and
revised by myself. I do not know of any work on Agricultural
Entomology which I can recommend.
If you want something very good about the lower creatures up to
date I suppose you could not mend “Text Book of Zoology,” by Dr.
Claus, translated by Adam Sedgwick. This is a grand book, but I
would not put it in my students’ hands without a strong
observation that I consider Darwinianism, &c., of this nature
perfectly unproved and baseless. I certainly think that
presently this view will follow “spontaneous generation.”[94]
But to go on, Curtis’ “Farm Insects” is an excellent book up to
date of publication, but that is long ago now, and the second
edition is an issue of the original sheets with a new
preface—also £1 1s. is a great deal for students to give. If you
want a book for your own study, “Die Praktische Insektenkunde,”
by Dr. Taschenberg is to my thinking unrivalled for practice and
science—price circa £1 4s.
Now about your Australian larvæ. The longer and larger is a
lepidopterous caterpillar; as far as I see nearly allied to
our Turnip caterpillar, that is to say, of much the same
nature as what we call Surface caterpillar here, and Cutworms
in America. This would probably turn to a good-sized moth. The
larvæ in the two other bottles appear to me to be beetle
grubs, of the _Lamellicornes_—you will notice the three pairs
of well-developed legs, and the peculiar swollen form of the
caudal extremity. I should suppose that like our Cockchafer
(figs. 58) (or some other Chafer) maggots, that they fed at
the roots of grass or other plants, but I should not like to
commit myself to giving even a generic name to exotic pests in
larval state. Would not a letter to Mr. Frazer Crawford,
Adelaide, be the best way to gain information about
prevention? And about figuring, if you sent specimens to
Messrs. West, Newman & Co., 54, Hatton Garden, London, E.C.,
they would get them well figured—but still as the grubs and
caterpillar have been so long in spirit the exact shape could
not be conveyed.
I am delighted to hear that you are making progress about
attention to insect pests in your University. When Professor
Harker[95] was here lately, he told us something about these
matters, and I cordially wished him the post of lecturer.
_November 25, 1889._
I drew attention carefully in my first official report at the
Royal Agricultural Society of England (when the Committee began
again in November) to the need of caution [in connection with
Codlin moth prevention] as to the adulteration that there might
be in so-called cart grease, and also to the success of the plan
of before greasing putting paper round the trees. On the first
glance it might seem doubtful whether papering was not one of
the “study” applications which there are too many of, but it
answers so well, that at the great Toddington Fruit Grounds the
managers told me they were treating 120,000 trees in this way.
The paper is what is used by grocers as “grease proof.” It is
passed in a broad band round the tree, and the overlapping ends
fastened by paste and a band of bass mat or anything of that
kind tied round to make sure of all being firm, and on this the
“grease” is spread with a thin bit of wood—a sort of paper knife
in fact. This kind of paper would, I should conjecture, be more
certain to prevent the grease, &c., soaking into the tree than
cloth. I have lately received copies of analyses of two or three
kinds of cart grease which prove (in one case) to consist of
grease and tar oils mixed with water and sulphate of lime. This
did harm. Another consisted mainly of rosin oil, &c., mixed with
a little carbonate of lime. This, I believe, answered quite
well. I do not know how better to guard against mishaps than by
starting the very earliest intelligence of important points
round the newspapers as soon as ever I can; but you will believe
me it is difficult to meet all sides. A Kentish correspondent
wrote me that he was preparing his trees for dressing by cutting
all the old bark off and then was going to tar on the fresh
surface! If you would mention to your correspondent that my
report of this month is in the “Agricultural Gazette” for
November 18th, and that he would find some special cautions
about grease-banding at p. 501, column 1, I think he might be
interested, but if he cares to write to me on the subject I
would gladly reply, or I would with pleasure explain any point
to you that you would care to have details of.
In the second edition of my Manual, which I am doing all I
properly can to get time to start through press, I hope to give
the very valuable practical teaching of the last two years about
orchard insect pest prevention, and I hope to be able to add
good results of a special (very cheap and very nasty) kind of
fumigation we are going to try next spring.
P.S.—Do you see how the “I.L.N. Almanac” has been helping itself
to John Curtis’ figures and mine—and then giving the credit to
Mr. Jabez Hogg? I have had a little representation to make to
the editor, and an erratum slip is to be added to all unissued
copies.
_January 21, 1890._
We expect Professor Harker here at the end of the week. Most
likely he will come on here after his lecture at the Royal
Veterinary College, at 4 p.m. on Friday next, and stay till
Saturday, so we can bestow our best attention on affairs. I wish
I saw a more hopeful state of things in (or for) the various
matters [connected with entomological appointments].
Your letter came a few minutes after Professor Fream’s arrival,
and we said nothing about the lectures on Entomology in
Edinburgh, but I told him how affairs were standing about the
Board of Agriculture, and that I had recommended Professor
Harker in case an entomologist was wanted. He was very pleasant.
I have known him so long I always like a talk with him, and
amongst other points we went over some special work about
students’ entomological examinations, and he left the impression
on my mind that he would convey the requisite kind of
information for your proposed lectures very satisfactorily to
the hearers.
_February 14, 1890._
Some time ago, before I knew that your University Entomological
Lectureship [Steven course] was in a sort of way private, I
mentioned something about it to Mr. James Fletcher (Dominion
entomologist), and he is delighted with the hoped-for advance.
He says how very much, if circumstances had allowed, he should
have liked to give the course. You would, indeed, have had “a
feather in your cap” if you could have secured him.
What a sad loss we all have in Professor Little.
_April 18, 1890._
I return your two lists marked.[96] What you want is a set of
cases with models and figures such as Mr. Mosley arranged for
Kew. I told him he ought not to sell at as low a rate as he at
first proposed, but I think that if strong card boxes were
substituted for the nicely-finished mahogany ones, he could
certainly let you have the cases at 7s. 6d. If you do not wish
to open the cases (excepting for very special work), the board
on which the exhibits are fixed might be fastened from below,
and thus the cost of the beautiful work of one half sliding
perfectly into the other half of the box saved.
_July 21, 1890._
I was lately down for a few days at Oxford, and took the
opportunity of asking Professor Westwood whether, if you
arranged to have a course of entomological lectures, and asked
him to deliver them, there was any chance of his granting such a
favour? I thought it was too much to hope for, but I gained his
permission that you might write to him on the subject, and I
really think that if it were so early that there was no fear of
cold setting in, he would very likely undertake the set.
Professor Westwood is, as Professor Riley well says, the “Prince
of entomologists.” I do not suppose any one living has such
knowledge extending over all branches of entomology as he has.
He is the Hope Professor of Zoology at Oxford, so constantly in
practice of lecturing on his own special subject, and very fond
of making things clear to young people. He has attended greatly
to the economic aspect, and if you could secure him, his
lectures as the commencement of the Agriculture Entomological
course would give an _éclat_ to the series that nothing else in
the whole world would. To say he is Life President of the
Entomological Society shows the respect he is held in on all
hands. But you would have to be very careful of the good old
man, for he never thinks of his 82 or 83 years, and he is not
strong, though much more full of spirit than many a younger man.
His address is: Professor J. O. Westwood, Walton Manor,
Woodstock-road, Oxford. If you write to him he will think it
over and tell you his views.
_July 7, 1891._
It is very kind of you to give me the copy (received this
morning) of your beautiful and so very useful book.
[“Agriculture and Rural Economy of Australia and New Zealand.”]
I have been turning over a good many pages so as to have some
idea of the contents before writing to thank you, and I cannot
think how you could manage to collect all this very serviceable
information there, or find time to condense it into this clear,
readable form here. It is a very valuable addition to my
library, and I value it much for its own worth, as well as your
kind gift. How very honestly indeed you have acknowledged my
little Cockchafer block; it is quite a pleasure to me to have it
in your grand book.
I hope you have escaped the influenza, or had it favourably. It
has been a serious visitation to us. My sister and I, and our
housekeeper, Miss Hartwell, who acts as my amanuensis, were all
seriously laid up in our beds at once! Such a time of misery,
and inconvenience! I should like to write you about sundry
matters of interest, but as very likely you are on the other
side of the world, I had better postpone them.
_Somewhat Private._
_August 18, 1892._
I am very sorry to hear of your trouble in the loss of your
brother,[97] and with your grief, and also the effects of the
long hard run of work, you must be greatly needing a rest.
I hope and greatly desire to continue all my work, Home,
Colonial, and publishing; also to act as referee to our
Agricultural Journals just as before, but it is much more
comfortable working up important points, to having everlastingly
to be going over a routine often keeping one from attending to
what may be of importance. Who will they get to take my place
[at the Royal]? It seems to me a great pity that there is not a
properly paid and competent officer for the Board of Agriculture
and R.A.S.E. I am safe in saying this, for I never intend to
take office again, not for any amount of money that could be
offered, neither do I mean to do the work of Government or
Society under the polite name of “kindly co-operating!”
The only person I know who appears to me to be qualified to take
the post at the Royal Agricultural Society is Dr. Fream, and I
conjecture that his hands are much too full to allow it. Still I
should be glad if it were so. Professor Harker has great
knowledge of beetles, and indeed, I believe, of insect ways and
customs generally, but I should scarcely think his tastes would
lead him to this sort of work. However I have not the least idea
what the R.A.S.E. proposes to do.
_March 15, 1895._
As the time of your African trip is drawing near, I am just
venturing to remind you, with what pleasure (if consistent with
your own convenience) we would see you before you go. There
appears to me to be a Gordian knot, and a few words (spoken not
written) sometimes are invaluable on these occasions. I am
pulling well with the European centres, but there are places
where, much as I regret it, co-operation is not going on, and I
think I might very likely get, as on a previous occasion, some
most useful advice from yourself.
_April 9, 1895._
I am very sorry and disappointed to say that I am ailing and so
I do not know whether in your own hardly run time, you would
care (or could at all spare the while) to run down for an hour
or two on Thursday. The special trouble is that lately a very
small bit of glass jerked up from something I was doing at my
right eye. I thought it only hit the eye, but nearly a week
after I found injury resulted from the bit having embedded
itself in the upper part of the eyeball and formed a small
abscess. Of course it had to be operated on and I hope put all
right, but the very long, weary operation and the cocaine, &c.,
&c., have so tired everything concerned that I have not got over
it all yet. So I thought I ought to tell you. What I want to say
as distinguished from writing is more in detail.
_March 19, 1896._
I make no doubt that I shall hear from our good friend Dr. Fream
very shortly, or at least as soon as his much occupied time
permits, but meanwhile I do not like to delay thanking you for
kindly letting me know that the University Court had paid me the
very gratifying compliment of appointing me co-examiner with Dr.
Fream[98] in Agricultural Entomology. I think myself much
honoured and much pleased also by their selection. If I might
ask you to take the trouble, and it should be admissible, I
should much like you to express to the University Court my
grateful appreciation and assurance that I will endeavour to do
whatever may be required in the office to the best of my
ability.
_March 27, 1896._
I am really very greatly obliged to you for the clear and
full explanation you have spared time to give me, in your
letter received this afternoon, of the arrangement of my
co-examinership. It does please me very much to have even
this little post, for I look on it as a mark of approval of
your grand old University; also I am very glad that you
approved of my letter to the Secretary.
I never knew the injurious insects so active as they have been
this winter, in air, earth, and water—in the latter to the great
damage of watercress (chap. XVI.). I had yesterday, some good
specimens of great mischief from clover-stem sickness and for
the first time found a nice way of collecting quantities of the
_Anguillulidæ_ (eel-worms) for observation. Generally they hide
up in the rubbish, but I found that by teazing it out very
finely in water on the slide and then carefully lifting it all
away until the slide looked bare, that still such numbers of the
eel-worms remained that they could be thoroughly examined.
_April 4, 1896._
I am now writing to you on a point on which I think that you—_ex
officio_—are the first I should consult, and I should greatly
like your opinion; and next (if, as I hope, you approve of my
sister’s and my own proposed presentation), that you will kindly
tell me to whom to apply in requisite form. We have, by request
of the Council of the Bath and West Society, been preparing an
exhibit of Economic Entomology for their approaching Show here.
My sister’s part consists of twenty coloured diagrams, nineteen
injurious insects and their works, and one finger and toe—these
are very beautifully executed and fitted with loops all ready
for hanging; size 26 ins. long by 21 wide. My part is seventeen
cases—of which the enclosed slips, to be affixed on light
slanting strips of wood at end or side of the cases, give just a
general idea for observers without a catalogue (Appendix C.). I
have tried, you will see, to give just a few illustrations of
the main sorts of attack. Scientific names are used of course,
but it is essentially an Agricultural Entomological exhibition
made to help the plainest understanding, so I have not taken up
space with mere scientific details, and I have spared neither
trouble nor cost in procuring specimens, especially of the
various _Œstridæ_ (bot-flies). Also that there might be no
possible doubt as to accuracy of nomenclature I got Mr. O. E.
Janson to spend two or three hours in rigid investigation, and
the only error in naming he found was in the name, or synonym,
of a decayed wood-eating wireworm-beetle which I removed to make
all sure. Fifteen of the cases are white pine, with what I call
“detection” fittings outside. The glass is laid on the top but
is kept in place by a handsome narrow brass band. Thus the
inside of the case is at once accessible for any authorised
purpose; but those not knowing the arrangements would cause such
a clatter and disturbance that their misdoings would be very
public. The cases are all as nearly as may be 12 ins. by 8 by
2½. Two of them completing the seventeen are “Live Boxes” of
polished mahogany, same size, but of different make to prevent
escape.
Now, I much want you to tell us whether you think that after
exhibition here the collection, including my sister’s diagrams,
would be acceptable as a presentation to the museum of your
Edinburgh University. It is not for me to speak of my own work,
but I think it would be of use both in your work and Dr.
Fream’s, so I am writing to you first of all. If approved and we
can arrange comfortably, I contemplate sending it (at my own
cost) in charge of an expert who could repair damage. I shall
wait your reply with great interest.
_April 16, 1896._
Indeed, I thank you heartily for your kind letter of the 13th.
It is a very great pleasure both to my sister and myself that
you think our collection likely to be of use. I thought perhaps
you had started on your long tour, so I wrote to Dr. Taylor, and
yesterday we had a letter from him which pleased us exceedingly,
with the kindly expressed acceptance of the University Court;
and Sir W. Muir also was good enough to write, which we took to
be very kind of him. I shall hope now, all being well, to
collect, and (with permission) add as occasion allows. You would
notice that some of the great attacks, _Tipula_ (Daddy
longlegs), leather-jacket _grubs_, for instance, and _Charæas
graminis_ (Antler moth), were not represented, for they were not
about in the winter, but I shall hope to go on now. I should
like you to see the cases, and we should much like a chat before
you go; it is long since we met, and as the collection will not
be free to go down till a little after the beginning of June, I
suppose you will be far away then? I do not know the difference
between the University Court and the Senatus. Very ridiculous
you will think this; but I should like to understand about it.
_May 30, 1896._
Many thanks for your letter received this afternoon, with
address of Sir Robert Murdoch Smith [the curator]. From this I
understand that the collection is to be placed in the “Museum of
Science and Art,” Chambers Street, as the property of the
University Court of Edinburgh University? You will think me
tedious, but I was under an impression that there was a
“University Museum” _pur et simple_. I should not be easy at all
in sending the exhibit down excepting in skilled hands. I had
the great pleasure yesterday of showing them to the Prince and
Princess (p. 123), and to-day I hear there is such a crowd that
even our own people could only get a sight of two cases.
[Illustration:
PLATE XXVII.
Yours truly
Georgiana E. Ormerod
MISS GEORGIANA ELIZABETH ORMEROD.
_Photo by Elliott & Fry._
(_pp. 16, 30, 37, 88, 90, 123._)
]
_October 22, 1896._
I was very much pleased to see this morning that you had
returned safe from your long journey to Australia, and I hope
that besides the immense quantity of useful work which I make no
doubt you have done, that you have come back in better health.
You will have heard that my dear sister has gone from me; and
for her I can be very happy, but I do miss her exceedingly.
But I am now writing to you about a little bit of business. When
her failing health allowed, her great pleasure after you saw her
was to execute some more diagrams, beautifully done, and I am
sure there is no situation where she would have been more
gratified for them to be placed than in Edinburgh University—and
yesterday evening I had a truly kind letter from Sir Wm. Muir,
telling me of the acceptance of my offer of them by the Senatus
and University Court. But at present I am not able to lay my
hand on her list of what was formerly sent. Would you mind the
trouble of letting me have just the shortest possible notes of
the subjects—a couple of words to each as Hessian fly, Wireworm,
&c., would be quite enough—and then without fear of repetition I
can present all the others to the University (excepting two or
three which I should like to keep for her dear sake); and will
you kindly further help me by letting me know at your
convenience to whom I should address the package.
But though my dear sister did not work technically on my reports
any more than I did on her beautiful drawings, I greatly miss
her sympathy and colleagueship.
_November 24, 1897._
I cannot say that I am well. The worry and hard extra work and
my bad fall on the stone steps were not good for me, and I am
painfully lame, and have got the gout, my doctor said a day or
two ago, everywhere.
However, I am getting better, and hope to be much as usual soon.
To-day I am looking up “Pine beetle.” I think a trustworthy
record of a thousand acres of Pine without (so far as seen) a
tree not infested is a grand observation. This is a consequence
of the 1893 and 1894 gales.
_January 30, 1899._
I take it very kind indeed of you to write to tell me of the
University arrangements about the Examinership.[99] I consider
it a great honour to have held the office, and it has been a
most thorough pleasure also thus to be associated in work with
such a kind friend as yourself, as well as with Dr. Fream. But
still, though not now one of the staff, I can work in
colleagueship, and I have never forgotten the important help
that you gave me some years ago. I shall look forward very much
to a visit from you presently; besides the pleasure, it would
help me, to have a good talk.
I am intending to make an alteration about my yearly reports. It
seems to me that it would be the best course to bring the
present series to a close with this number, giving with it a
collective index of the whole series up to date. I should like
the twenty-two years’ work to stand complete, and not be liable
to detraction, gradually, as to regret about Miss Ormerod not
being this, that, and the other, which with advancing years is
likely. I think, too, that I need a little consultation as to
some slight alteration of plan. I do not like so much repetition
as I see elsewhere. I have difficulty in avoiding it, and I am
trying that my present Twenty-second Annual Report should be as
fresh as I can make it.
Kind regards from, yours sincerely,
ELEANOR A. ORMEROD.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAPTER XXIV
LETTERS TO PROFESSOR WALLACE ON THE LL.D. OF THE UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH
Announcement of the Honorary LL.D. to be conferred—Preliminary personal
arrangements—Miss Ormerod’s feelings of appreciation and of
anxiety—Letters of congratulation.
This chapter is unlike any of the foregoing chapters of correspondence
in its purely personal character. Interested readers will not fail to
recognise in it the genuine feminine feeling of anxiety at the approach
of a trying public ordeal to one so unaccustomed as Miss Ormerod to the
pageantry of academic functions. Nor will they fail to appreciate the
resolution with which she bore the physical strain put upon one whose
strength had been well-nigh spent in the cause of science under a load
of years and bodily infirmities.
_To Miss E. A. Ormerod._
UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH,
_February 24, 1900_.
DEAR MISS ORMEROD,—I hasten to announce to you without a
moment’s delay that the Senatus of this University have only a
minute ago agreed to do our University the distinguished honour
of asking you to accept the honorary degree of LL.D. of the
University. I may tell you without breaking any confidence that
you are not only the first lady who has ever been asked to
accept the degree, but it was in view of the necessity of
recognising the great and distinguished labours which you have
done for Science that regulations were made by which it became
possible for us to confer the degree upon a lady. Any little
share I had in this matter is more than rewarded by the great
gratification which I feel in connection with this proposed act
of the Senatus, of which I believe you will most probably hear
by the same post from the Principal. Should the announcement
come a day later this will serve as a private intimation to
yourself. It will be a still further triumph if you feel
physically able to come to receive the degree in the presence of
an assembly of about 3,000 people—the number who usually attend
our graduations. If you are not able to come, of course the
degree will be conferred all the same, but personally I would
rejoice, if it can be without your running a serious risk, to
see you among us and to get your name enrolled among the many
distinguished men—all men but yourself—who have distinguished
themselves in Science and Literature, and been pleased to accept
our degree.—I am, dear Miss Ormerod, yours very sincerely,
ROBERT WALLACE.
Dr. Fream, “Steven” lecturer on Agricultural Entomology in Edinburgh
University, wrote as follows:—
DOWNTON, _February 26, 1900_.
MY DEAR MISS ORMEROD,—As I have to catch a train I have only
time to write you my very warmest congratulations on the LL.D.
It was really settled a month ago, but had to be confirmed on
Friday. Of course the secret “burnt” a little, but I was pledged
to say nothing about it! It will appear in the University
Intelligence shortly. The honour was never better won, and long
may you enjoy it is the earnest wish of, in haste,—Yours very
sincerely,
W. FREAM.
_To Professor Robert Wallace, University, Edinburgh._
TORRINGTON HOUSE, ST. ALBANS,
_February 25, 1900_.
DEAR PROFESSOR WALLACE,—I feel wholly unable to express my
respectful and sincere gratitude to the Senatus for such a high
honour, and to yourself I am greatly indebted for your kind
friendship and also letting me hear so soon. I value the honour
exceedingly—the seal of approval of this highly scientific body.
When the letter arrives which you tell me is coming I will
endeavour to express myself to some degree adequately. To
yourself just quietly I may say it is a pleasure, and such an
unexampled honour that I am delighted. But still I feel that the
great point of my work always is utilising the exceedingly kind
help which is so cordially given me by my good, kind, scientific
friends, and the practical observations to sift into shape that
are given me as the foundation. If you were here I should like
to say so much, but I do not know how to write more at present
than that I am deeply grateful.
P.S.—I wish very much indeed to come, as you kindly suggest, but
my very great and painful difficulty in walking movement from
arthritis makes me fear that the risk would be too great, but
anyway I am going to ask my doctor.
_February 27, 1900._
Your exceedingly kind letter and the subject of it were such a
surprise to me that in all the ideas suddenly arising I hardly
know how to reply coherently. Now at least I can say I am
deeply, respectfully grateful for such an honour to be granted
me. I have written in reply to the formal notification from the
Senatus what I hope may be a proper reply. I also mentioned that
I trusted to be able to attend in person to receive this great
honour. But now I hope you will be so good as to allow me to ask
your help in arrangements. [Here followed a list of queries
which are not of general interest.] Of course on such, to me,
very great occasion I do not in the least mind expense.
The other matter is, Will you please tell me am I to wear Doctor
of Laws’ dress? and if so, will you kindly say to whom I should
write to order it? When I come I am hoping you will instruct me
in what to do, for unless you are good enough to help me with a
little (or a great deal) of instruction I am afraid I am likely
to be quite out of order.
Yours very sincerely,
ELEANOR A. ORMEROD.
UNIVERSITY, EDINBURGH,
_March 1, 1900_.
DEAR MISS ORMEROD,—I am delighted to see from your letter
received this morning that you are going to be able to come to
the graduation function, and that you have arranged to be well
cared for on the way up. I shall take full responsibility for
all necessary arrangements at this end. I should have done a lot
to-day and reported progress to you, but unfortunately I have to
go out of town to give a lecture on South Africa at Cauvin’s
Hospital, but I may tell you that I can easily secure the
accommodation you mention for yourself, Miss Hartwell, and the
doctor. You will wear a black cloak or graduation gown thrown
over your ordinary dress very much like a Minister’s robe. This
is hired for a few shillings from a man who supplies them
regularly to Honorary Graduates, and I shall arrange all about
that. A silk hood goes round the neck and hangs down the back.
It is put on by the head Servitor after you have been officially
capped by the Principal. It is part of the public function. You
must not feel the least anxious about the event, as you will be
surrounded by a host of people to whom your name is a household
word, who know well the value which your work has been to this
country, and who appreciate you accordingly. I shall be only too
pleased to answer any question of detail you may write and help
you in every way.
Yours very sincerely,
ROBERT WALLACE.
_March 2, 1900._
DEAR PROFESSOR WALLACE,—I am very glad to know some part of what
the form is on this great occasion. I hope that by following
whatever directions you give me quite exactly that all will be
right, _i.e._, that I may do all I ought to do! But I cannot
help being a little nervous; I feel the honour so very great
indeed, and also the kindness I am receiving. Your account of
the ceremony itself has made my mind much clearer. Walking
upstairs is a great difficulty to me, but on flat ground, with
my light ebony stick, I do not think my lameness is more than a
very little observable. I am as near as possible 5 feet 6
inches. This is relative to the graduation gown. My head really
is so full of this unprecedented distinction I am afraid I
trouble you too much.
_March 7, 1900._
I am very much obliged to you indeed for all the care that you
have been so kindly taking for me, and for making everything so
clear to me—amongst other points, your little note about
convenience of cheques. I think you have arranged everything as
nicely as possible for me. All matters for the journey I expect
my doctor will look after nicely. But when you write again,—I
suppose on the great occasion, as the cap is to be put on, that
I appear without a bonnet? I have now read your letter over
again that I may be quite sure that I thoroughly understand
everything.
P.S.—There is yet one more inquiry I am venturing to trouble you
with. My doctor [Dr. Eustace Lipscomb] is an M.B. (Cambridge);
on such a special occasion, should he wear his hood?
_March 3, 1900._
I shall be very much obliged if you would secure me rooms at the
Balmoral Hotel, as you mention. Namely, a sitting-room and two
bedrooms with doors opening one from the other, on the first
floor to the front, for Miss Hartwell [Private Secretary] and
myself, likewise a room for the doctor—from the evening (8 p.m.)
on Wednesday the 11th until about nine on the following Sunday
evening. I should like to be at the Balmoral; I have heard of it
as such a good hotel. I can manage, though the operation is
painful, to walk up just a few steps with the help of my stick
(I have been trying five at my door), if somebody be by me in
case I should slip, without, I think, attracting attention; and
if I were too lame after the long journey to manage nicely, then
I must be humble, and be thankful to be carried in a chair.
I feel greatly obliged to Sir Ludovic Grant for his kind
intention of asking me to stay at his house. It would have been
very pleasant, for thus, also, I should have doubtless seen many
kind friends; but besides the great difficulty of the stairs, I
am obliged to lie down a little each day, and I think after the
long journey I had best keep quiet to fit me for the great day
on Saturday.
But if the thing be possible without intruding on valuable time,
might I not hope to see some of my kind friends at the
hotel—yourself, of course, and I shall also be delighted to see
Dr. MacDougall. Could you arrange some time? I should not myself
see anything wrong in seeing friends on the afternoon of Good
Friday, but pray do not let me do anything that might be thought
not right. You and I will have a good deal to say at your best
convenience.
P.S.—I was greatly gratified to learn that my letter to Sir L.
Grant met with his approval. It was a matter of no small anxiety
to me to try at least to express my appreciation rightly.
_March 14, 1900._
I got a friend here to let me try on the square college cap
“mortar board,” and it fitted so nicely over my bow that I do
not think I should be at all troubled by ideas of anything
unusual being on my head; and I can take it off without trouble.
Through your kind help I think all these arrangements are in
perfect order, and I am looking forward much (preliminarily) to
our meeting at Balmoral Hotel.
_March 27, 1900._
I should have liked to beg a ticket besides the two which you
kindly mention for my nephew, Arthur Ormerod, who has just taken
his M.D., so I wired off to him at Oxford, but, to his great
regret, he cannot come. I hope the weather will be better, but
we have a good bright sunshine between the occasional light snow
showers, and both Miss Hartwell and myself have good furred
mantles, and with the snug small carriage all our own way, I
think we shall do very well.
What a sight the hall will be! also your small flock of aspirant
doctors; may be as anxious in their minds as some one I know of.
But I am really not alarmed. I am sure you will keep me right.
What time of day does the ceremony begin? And what happens
after?—do we retire respectively like rabbits to our own
burrows?
_March 29, 1900._
The pamphlet on the McEwan Hall [the number of the “Student”
describing the opening of the Hall] is a great boon to me, and
what a noble building!
While in Edinburgh my idea is to have lunch at one o’clock, my
usual time, and a sort of miscellaneous meal at 6.30, and rest
in the evening after it, and I shall think it a great compliment
and a very great pleasure if friends may do me the favour to
look in after, say, about two o’clock. It will be much safer for
me, under present circumstances of wanting to keep fresh and
strong for the day, not to go out, so I should be on the spot.
Sir Wm. Muir and his daughter, Mrs. Arbuthnot, kindly wrote that
they meant to look in, but it would be only a pleasure to me to
see any friends. Please to consider me as quite under your
guidance for this, to me, so very great occasion, and wholly
thankful so to be, excepting in the feeling of the great trouble
that you are kindly taking.
Yours very sincerely,
ELEANOR A. ORMEROD.
P.S.—Dr. E. L. thought it would be best for me to return by the
Sunday night sleeping train, and the Midland manager has given
permission for it to stop here on Monday morning.
_Professor Wallace to Miss E. A. Ormerod._
UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH,
_March 29, 1900_.
DEAR MISS ORMEROD,—The box containing your most valuable
contribution to the library arrived safely from Wesley & Son,
and the ten volumes, [of her own works] all in excellent order,
are standing on the Senate Hall table so that they may be seen.
The Principal, Sir Wm. Muir, and the Secretary, Sir L. Grant,
were the first, along with Professor Patrick and me, to inspect
them in their present position, and all the others excepting
myself were astounded at the magnitude of your work. I carried
the books first into the library and had them entered in the
catalogue before they went to the Senate Hall. They will have a
shelf for themselves, so that they can be kept together as the
“Ormerod Collection,” or rather “presentation.” I sent you a
“Student” giving details of the Hall in which you will be
capped. The capping is at 10 a.m., and after that, if you feel
able, you will go on to St. Giles’ Cathedral. I enclose one of
the ordinary tickets to give you an idea as to how the general
public are admitted.—(R. W.)
_March 30, 1900._
DEAR PROFESSOR WALLACE,—What can I say? I am very much used to
work just quietly in the hope of being of some service, but this
kind commendation from those whose opinions I hold in such
respect as those of the chiefs, whether the high officials or
professors in your great University, is indeed a gratification,
a comfort for troubles sometimes not light, and an encouragement
which I gratefully and deeply appreciate.
I should like, of all things, if you will take charge of me, to
attend the Commemoration Service after the capping. It will
delight me to be there, and if I am tired I can rest after. [The
graduation ceremonial was found to be quite enough for Miss
Ormerod’s strength, and no attempt was made to go to St. Giles’
Cathedral to the service.] I usually breakfast at 8.15, so that
I should be all ready at 10 o’clock. It seems to me that if the
“low-hung carriage” which you have kindly secured use of for me
were in attendance to convey us to the McEwan Hall, and when
wanted at intervals onward, this would be exceedingly
comfortable for me. But in everything of the arrangements I am
hoping that all I have to do is to quite precisely obey as well
as benefit by most thankfully all that you are good enough to
arrange for me, and will instruct me about presently.
BALMORAL HOTEL, EDINBURGH,
_April 12, 1900_.
I earnestly hope that Dr. E. Lipscomb will find you better. It
is a real grief to me that you should be going through such a
painful illness [an influenza cold which developed at a most
inopportune moment]. And, secondarily, not having all your kind
advice and help and your companionship in all, does take away
much of the pleasure of my honour.
We find the gown, hood, and trencher cap fit very nicely. This
cap suits me much better than the soft velvet one, and I am sure
that I should much prefer the black gown to the amazing
splendours of scarlet faced with blue. I think on formal
occasions, if desirable, I could get up my courage to wearing
the quiet black gown, but I should be terrified about the
brilliant garment. Dr. Lipscomb is going to tell you that, as
matters have progressed, I do not feel as if it were at all
necessary for me to have the convenience of a room in the Hall
you kindly procured for me, and if it were permissible for me to
“robe” here, and drive robed to the McEwan Hall, it would save
me a world of anxiety. I might, I think, carry my cap in my hand
until time for capping came. It is so exceptional a case that I
do not see any impropriety in being bare-headed for a while. But
I am truly anxious that I should appear before all the august
body preliminarily under your wing, or, if there was risk for
you, under the care of some other member of the University (if
they will adopt me).
[The graduation ceremonial (p. 95) passed off without a hitch of
any kind, and the students gave the first honorary woman
graduate a magnificent reception.]
TORRINGTON HOUSE, ST. ALBANS,
_April 17, 1900_.
DEAR PROFESSOR WALLACE,—I really do not know how to begin my
letter. There is so very much I want to say and to thank you
most heartily for. But first I should exceedingly like to know
that you are recovering, and were not seriously the worse for
your kindness in really and truly coming from your bed to look
after me. It would have taken greatly from my downright pleasure
if you had not been there. I was much impressed by the
ceremonial. I had not connected an idea of the perfect order,
and in some respects solemnity, with the function of graduation.
It is an impression never to be forgotten, any more than the
exceeding kindness with which I was received. “Dr. Ormerod” also
begs her best thanks for the most liberal supply of “Edinburgh
Evening Dispatch” and “Scotsman” received this morning
[containing accounts of the University function]. I am putting
your letter, the very first with address of “Doctorate,”
carefully away amongst the special treasures of my Academic
honour. I am trying to get, so to say, “into harness” again
amongst the consignments of boxes waiting.
Now I hope you will not think me absolutely carried away by the
feeling of the importance of the honour to myself, but amongst
letters of congratulation I have one from Dr. L. O. Howard, the
Entomologist of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which
pleases me very much. He says:—
Dating WASHINGTON, D.C., _April 7, 1900_.
“The receipt of your letter of 21st March and of your
admirable twenty-third Annual Report reminds me that I
have been remiss in fulfilling a strong intention to
write you at my earliest convenience and congratulate
you most warmly on the well-deserved honour which you
are to receive from the University of Edinburgh. You are
right; not only is it an honour to yourself, but it is
an honour to Economic Entomology, the force of which
cannot be over-estimated. I congratulate you very
warmly. An LL.D. from Edinburgh has always seemed to me
to be one of the highest honours which an Englishman (or
woman now) could gain.”
L. O. HOWARD.
Dr. R. Stewart MacDougall wrote:—
SCOTTISH LIBERAL CLUB, EDINBURGH, _Saturday_.
A telegram received in the morning made it impossible for me to
get to the McEwan Hall in time for my seat on the platform.
Among the audience, however, I had an excellent opportunity of
getting acquainted with “popular” opinion, and I only wished you
could have heard all the kind things that were said about you.
Somebody has said, “Beware when all men (and all women) speak
well of you.” Really I know no one so exposed to this temptation
(if temptation it be) as yourself. The honouring of our various
distinguished men naturally appeals most strongly to different
groups, but there is in addition about this latest honour to
yourself something which has touched the general imagination.
May you be long spared to wear the honour worthily.
I hope that on your return you will find yourself none the worse
for your plucky journey north and all the attendant fatigue.
R. STEWART MACDOUGALL.
Dr. Ritzema Bos wrote:—
AMSTERDAM, _March 16, 1900_.
DEAR MISS ORMEROD,—I was very much enjoyed to read in your kind
letter of 12th March that the Senatus of the Edinburgh
University will confer on you the Honorary Degree of Doctor of
Laws, as an acknowledgment of the great merits you have for the
advancement of Economic Entomology. I am glad to hear that the
important work you have done since so long years for Science and
for Agriculture will be recompensed in this way. I hope that you
may remain still for many years, what you have been already for
so long time, the first Economic Entomologist of your country
and one of the most famous Economic Entomologists of the world.
My wife asks me to offer also her kind congratulations to you.
December 19, 1899, it was twenty-five years since I received the
Degree of Doctor of Natural Philosophy. On this day a deputation
of representatives of our Dutch Agriculture and Horticulture
came to me and offered me a statue of bronze—the genius of
Science, with the subscription, “Ad lumen.” It was presented to
me in the name of many agriculturists and horticulturists in
Holland and in Dutch India. The General Director of Agriculture
came also to me, and told me that H.M. our Queen offered me the
grade of Knight of the Dutch Lion (Ridder in de Orde von den
Nederlandsche Leeuwen). It was a beautiful day for us indeed.
With many kind regards, believe me, yours very truly,
RITZEMA BOS.
Lord Grimthorpe wrote:—
ST. ALBANS, _Ash Wednesday, 1900_.
DEAR MISS ORMEROD,—“I lose not a moment” (as the story is) in
congratulating you, or myself, on the honour of our becoming a
brother and sister in _Laws_, as one of my nieces points out in
a newspaper. The Princess of Wales has only the inferior
position of a sister in Music, and those in Medicine are quite
common now. I am sorry that we, neither of us, dare venture to
go out and pay our duty in person in this weather—as unique as
your new position—and I was sorry to miss you the last time you
came here. My dear wife, who has been worse than I am though
more capable of recovery, is slowly doing so. She was in an
alarming state for some time under the abominable influence of
the general pest, influenza.
Though I write badly and with difficulty, I am better in general
strength, but shall never be well. However, I am thankful to be
no worse, and to have a nice series of benevolent relations of
two generations here, and to be here instead of London or Bath.
Tea generally goes on at 4½ now, and we shall hope not to be
disappointed if you look in again, wearing your _red hood_ when
you have acquired it. With very kind regards and rejoicings from
all our ladies.
I am, yours ever,
GRIMTHORPE.
N.B.—I hope you are duly elated at the prospect of a Dean and
Chapter here. I defied the late Archdeacon Grant who agitated
for it, to tell us definitely any single practical bit of good
it could do, and he declined to try.
Mr. L. O. Howard wrote again on:—
_May 10, 1900._
MY DEAR MISS ORMEROD,—I am greatly pleased to receive your
letter of April 30th with the newspaper clippings. I had read
substantially the same account in American newspapers, but did
not know, of course, of your pleasant meeting with Mr. Choate.
He is a man who is highly esteemed on this side of the Atlantic,
not only for his legal ability but for his tact and other good
qualities. I do not know him personally, but he is a national
character. His name is known from one end of the country to the
other, and his clever sayings are repeated from Seattle to Key
West, and from Portland to San Diego. In March I attended the
annual banquet of the trustees of the Shaw Botanic Gardens in
St. Louis, and responded to the toast of Henry Shaw. The man who
sat at my right, a distinguished college president, told me many
Choate stories, and succeeded in filling my mind so full of Mr.
Choate that when I was called upon to speak I had almost
forgotten what I had intended to say. We are all of us here
delighted about your doctorate. Entomology and Economic
Entomology have been steadily assuming a higher place in the
minds of the people during the past twenty years, and this
honour which has come to you is the culmination of our advance
up to the present time. Wishing you many more years of work and
happiness (work must mean happiness to you), believe me, my dear
Miss Ormerod, sincerely yours,
L. O. HOWARD.
_April 21, 1900._
DEAR PROFESSOR WALLACE,—It is a bright day when I see your
handwriting outside the envelope, and I am truly glad your cold
is better; it was no slight matter that wanted mending. My
journey was not so successful as I hoped. The wind was very cold
on St. Albans’ platform and I got a chill, but I was up again
yesterday, and hope to be just as usual in a day or two. I shall
be so very glad to see you. Please fix your own time, and if you
would tell me a little beforehand, I would try to get General
and Mrs. Bigge to come to lunch. He I think knew Sir Wm. Muir in
India, when he (General Bigge) was in military command. He would
of all things enjoy a talk with you about horses.
One day (if you please that is) we would drive over to Batch
Wood to tea, and Lord Grimthorpe will certainly come in and have
a chat if he be well enough. In a parenthesis, would you care to
drive over to Rothamsted? I know Sir Henry and Lady Gilbert and
Mr. Warington.
I shall so like to be able to have a good quiet talk with you
about various of my plans. I feel (may I be forgiven if I am too
presumptuous) that now I have a real scientific home, and though
I would not for the world intrude, I may I think ask my good
colleague’s advice. As you will be here so soon I think I had
best not write to Sir W. Muir, as he kindly gave me leave to do,
about my father’s set of volumes of drawings. When you come you
will guide my views as to whether they would be what might be
liked for acceptance.
_April 23, 1900._
I am doing just as you bid me, and after a little look at Mr.
Garton’s paper,[100] which I am sure must contain a deal of
solidly valuable information, I have laid it aside to wait your
helpful guidance. I have a letter just now from Dr. Fream saying
he would like very much to come to meet you (as I begged him),
but cannot manage it. I am looking forward exceedingly to much
useful and pleasant talk. I generally go to church at St.
Michael’s (where Lord Bacon is buried) in the morning, but there
is much good music at the Abbey close by, and you would do
everything I hope just exactly as you like best. Yours very
sincerely,
ELEANOR A. ORMEROD.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAPTER XXV
LETTERS TO PROFESSOR WALLACE AFTER THE GRADUATION
London Farmers’ Club Notice—Volumes of George Ormerod’s drawings and a
painting of Miss Ormerod presented to the University—Handbook of
“Forest Insects”—“Recollections of Changing Times”—Papers on “Stock
Flies.”
The letters in this chapter, written between the end of April and the
middle of November, 1900, cover a period of extraordinary literary
activity. Encouraged by the gratifying manner in which her academic
distinction had been acknowledged by friends and public bodies, Miss
Ormerod began with renewed vigour, and with something almost akin to
prophetic instinct of what was to come in the not-far-distant future, to
produce and to arrange for the production of, the literature that was
needed to complete her life-work and to be a record of it. Another
conspicuous feature of this chapter is the practical means she adopted
to immediately show gratitude to the University for the perspicacity
shown by conferring its degree, which was treasured by her above all
things as the highest possible recognition of her scientific labours.
_To Professor Robert Wallace, University Edinburgh._
_April 29, 1900._
DEAR PROFESSOR WALLACE,—I have been reading parts of the
“advance” proof of your paper [to be read before the London
Farmers’ Club in April, 1900], and it seems to me capital, and
to meet the needs plainly and practically. I wish you much
success. I can speak from personal knowledge as to want of
dipping being excellent for increase of _Melophagus ovinus_ [so
called sheep tick] (fig. 25).
Mr. Druce [Secretary of the Club], writes me kindly that he
intends to propose a vote of congratulation to me to-morrow on
the honour conferred on me by the Edinburgh University, and this
would be a great pleasure to me, for I feel it a very great
honour indeed. From many good quarters I am receiving letters on
this point, also on the benefit to agriculture which the
approval of Edinburgh will give.
_April 30, 1900._
I am arranging with Elliott and Fry, the photographers, 55,
Baker Street, that they should send down a “representative” on
Monday with proofs of photos, the bearer to be here by train
arriving at about half-past ten a.m. But the truth is, that if
you think I might ask acceptance, just as their first Hon. Lady
LL.D., I should very much like to offer to the University one of
Elliott and Fry’s life-size chalk or oil portraits executed in
their best way as a remembrance of the 14th of April. Do you
think I might?
I am glad to know they spoke kindly of me at the Farmers’ Club.
I am sure I have some good friends there, and I thought it very
kind of them to send me their vote of congratulation on my great
honour.
[The London Farmers’ Club, at its April meeting, 1900, passed
with acclamation the following resolution:—“That the hearty
congratulations of the Club are hereby offered to its Honorary
Lady Member, Miss Eleanor A. Ormerod, upon the distinguished
dignity of LL.D. recently conferred upon her _honoris causa_ by
the University of Edinburgh.” A copy of the resolution was
transmitted by the Secretary to the Senatus of the University of
Edinburgh.]
_May 11, 1900._
DEAR PROFESSOR WALLACE,—I had the books very carefully packed
and sent off to-day, by luggage train, as they made rather a
heavy consignment. [Volumes of her father’s drawings, and copies
of the “Manual of Injurious Insects” for free distribution.]
You will see I put a little note into the copies of the Manual,
at “Red Spider,” just in some degree to bring the matter of
position of the spinning glands up to date; I do not know of any
other point that needs correcting.
I enjoyed your visit exceedingly, and not only that, but you
would hardly believe what a great amount of useful information
you conveyed to me in the course of our conversations, as to
many matters at Edinburgh. All these I have carefully noted, for
though I do not really hold any post among you, yet I like to
think myself now not wholly separate, and I should be entirely
thankful should need occur at any time to avail myself of your
permission to apply to you for advice. My friends greatly
enjoyed all you said at lunch, and I shall hope you will come
again presently.
I have written to Sir Wm. Muir about my father’s books of
sketches, but in real truth I feel such a fear of intruding on
his high official position that I only just said what I thought
was quite needed, but I entered a little more on the matter to
Mrs. Arbuthnot.
ELEANOR A. ORMEROD.
[Illustration:
PLATE XXVIII.
ORMEROD HOUSE, LANCASHIRE.
_From an outline sketch by George Ormerod, 1808_.
]
The Librarian wrote:—
LIBRARY, UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH,
_May 16, 1900._
DEAR MADAM,—I really do not know how to thank you for the honour
you have done our University Library by making it the custodian
in _perpetuitatem_ of the delightful collection of sketches and
water colours, the arrival of which has made the 15th of May a
red-letter day for the Librarian at least. You will, I hope, be
pleased to know that the priceless volumes have been placed in a
room already rendered a sanctum by relics of such notable names
as Shakespeare and Burns, Hus and Knox, Queen Mary of Scotland,
King James VI., Queen Elizabeth, &c., not to mention
Halliwell-Phillipps and David Laing, both of whom, I doubt not,
Dr. George Ormerod would have recognised as his colleagues and
peers. Professor Wallace has duly received his volumes. The
drawings have been shown to Sir William Muir, who, I believe, is
to thank you personally and who will lay them on the table at
the next meeting of the University Court.
H. A. WEBSTER.
Sir William Muir wrote:—
UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH,
_June 29, 1900._
DEAR MISS ORMEROD,—Your six volumes of drawings were yesterday
shown to the University Court (as they already had been to the
Senatus), and were well received and valued by them. And I was
asked to communicate their obligations to you for them. They
will be placed in the Library, and will be remembered as the
gift of our First Lady Graduate, LL.D.
W. MUIR.
_May 24, 1900._
DEAR PROFESSOR WALLACE,—Will you kindly accept the enclosed
photograph. It does not seem to be quite me, but “me” does not
quite know myself yet in cap and gown. At least it may remind
you sometimes of most hearty gratitude for all your kind care
which enabled me to come to personally receive the great honour
symbolised.
Dr. MacDougall was good enough to send me some splendid
specimens of bark infested by _Hylesinus crenatus_ (Greater
ash-bark beetle), which have enabled me to figure this attack. I
should like very much indeed to form a “Handbook of Insects
Injurious to Forest Trees,” and I have a mass of material in my
Annual Reports bringing the subject, I think, up to date, and a
beautiful supply of figures, but there is such a run of
application and correspondence that I do not see my way to doing
it myself—and yet it seems a pity for the information to be
lying comparatively idle.
_May 29, 1900._
Now I must say that you wrote exactly what I was wishing about
my proposed book, “Insects Injurious to Forest Trees.”[101] In
case Dr. MacDougall would not think me taking a liberty in
suggesting the plan, I should very much indeed like to have the
benefit of his skilled help in preparing the book, that is
bringing it out in collaboration with him, and with our names on
the title-page. Would you kindly take the trouble when you see
him to lay the matter before him, for I scarcely like to come
upon him suddenly without, so to say, a “sponsor.” My idea is
that the forest attacks would work out much like the papers in
my “Handbook,” of which of course I would gladly send a copy for
his acceptance as well as material, _i.e._, Annual Reports or
sometimes, if more convenient, extracted papers and a copy of
“General Index.” I would undertake all expenses, _i.e._,
printing, publishing, furnishing figures, and the like. I think
I have of my own nearly as many of good up-to-date illustrations
as we should need to illustrate every attack, but where
additions are needed I propose (as I am doing now from one of
Dr. MacDougall’s specimens) to have them figured from life by
Mr. Knight.[102] I fancy the book would be about twothirds as
long as my “Handbook of Orchard Fruits,” but being intended at
first for University services, possibly the plan would be
different. This he, you, and possibly Colonel Bailey [lecturer
on Forestry in Edinburgh University] might have a word to say
about. I should like very much to hear from you on the subject,
and perhaps from Dr. MacDougall.
_June 5, 1900._
You will tell me presently when you can come, but would not Mr.
John Garton [of Newton-le-Willows, Lancashire, the originator of
the scientific system of producing new breeds of crop plants by
multiple-crossing] come too? I should like it very much if it
were agreeable to him, as there are so many points of interest
we three could go over together. You could assure him that he
can be as quiet as ever he likes, and rest in his own room, just
as he pleases. Will you both come on Saturday for Sunday? When
you come we can have a good talk about the “Forestry Insect Text
Book.” I am very glad to have it from you that Dr. MacDougall
likes the idea of colleagueship. I have had a very nice letter
from him with promise of one of details to follow, but when I
found that he had been collecting notes for some years, I felt
so very uneasy lest he should think me intruding on his projects
(in fact very presumptuous) that I wrote him specially on this
head. I shall be delighted to put every morsel of observations,
and blocks, and all I can to help at his service, but it is to
his skill that I look to form the book into what he knows, much
better than I, will suit University needs.
The weather surely needs a little putting to rights. It caught
me rather sharply, and I have had to spend some days in bed, but
I am up again now, and getting some good observations.
P.S.—I have some such nice letters from Edinburgh about my
photo. A very charming one from Sir Ludovic Grant, also from
Professor Seth.[103] I mean to keep them as great treasures.
_June 14, 1900._
I am in receipt of a long letter from Dr. MacDougall about the
text-book of “Forest Insects,” and it seems to me that his plan
is excellent. For my good folks, who want the plainest facts
fairly driven into their heads in the very plainest words, I
think it would be too scientific in the possession of special
entomological chapters, but I quite think in the present case
these are needed, and my only fear is lest he should wish me to
collaborate in these. All the rest I think I should be quite at
home in, and I am going to write him about it, as I should very
much like the joint work.
I am writing down bits (long or short as they come into my head)
of “Recollections,” on pages with appropriate headings in my
letter book, which usually lies on the table most of the day, so
is at hand; and most miscellaneous reminiscences go in which I
feel sure I should not have courage to think of giving excepting
on our plan. I rather think they might be interesting, and I
mean to see in good time about the shorthand writer. The head
reporter of our best local paper can take down well a report
from my dictation. Do not you think that if we can get the
“Recollections” (how would “Recollections of Changing Times” do
for a title?) into shape that—instead of publishing as I usually
do with any amount of trouble and little return for the
expense—it would be a good plan to offer the MS. to some
publisher, who might, I think, take it off my hands on terms to
be agreed upon? But when next we meet I hope we shall go into
all these matters comfortably, as you say, “after dinner.”
P.S.—The French medal (plate XXII.) appeared to-day in a
registered letter. I wonder whether Professor Ewart has got his?
I have information of the worst attacks of eel-worms in broad
beans that I ever saw, after oats in the spring of 1898 and of
1899.
_July 18, 1900._
I feel sure, wherever you are, that you are so much occupied
that you have not a morsel of spare time, but if you could
presently give me a little advice it would be of great value to
me. I was urged to let my name be put on the Agricultural
Education Committee, and agreed, and by way of something solid I
suggested that I should form a set of papers on “Common Fly
attacks to Farm Stock,” and I set to work. But as I go on I
really think that they are more fitted for regular agricultural
work, and I should value a few words of guidance from you very
much. The subjects I am thinking of taking as what I know
personally are: Sheep—Nostril fly, with note of “Gad” as
different, and “Spider” fly; Horse—Bot fly, Forest fly;
Cattle—Warbles, Gad fly, and anything else that might occur.
Nostril fly and Horse Bot fly shape (as I think you also would
consider) nicely, brought up to date; and in _G. equi_ (Horse
Bot fly, fig. 10) I have really handled the only bit of the
subject that was not pleasant, so that I do not think anybody
could object. The two above-mentioned papers are about ready for
press. But what I wish very much is that you would kindly let me
know your view of it. Would it be better to print the subjects
in my usual way, as leaflets, or make them into a little
pamphlet? _G. equi_ would fit nicely into a four-page leaflet.
_œ. ovis_, (Sheep Nostril fly), I think would be shorter; and
the short papers which would go nicely along with their more
important brethren in a pamphlet rather puzzle me how to deal
with if in leaflets. I have excellent figures, and in an idea
(possibly erroneous) of bringing the sequence out for the
Agricultural Education Committee, I wrote a sort of little
“fresh” preface on the creatures collectively. As I am sure you
will allow me the pleasure of thinking myself in some degree a
colleague of yours (and if I drive well at work I should hope to
have it ready for your winter session), I should be exceedingly
obliged if you would tell me whether you think pamphlet or
leaflet would be best. [The pamphlet form was ultimately
adopted, and it was published as “Flies Injurious to Stock,”
&c., price sixpence.]
[Illustration:
1, Fly, magnified, line showing natural length; 2, maggot; 3, mouth
hooks of maggot; and 4, tail segment, showing spiracles, and lobes,
acting as organs of progression—all magnified. (After Brauer.)
FIG. 76.—SHEEP’S NOSTRIL FLY, _ŒSTRUS OVIS_, LINN.
]
_August 2, 1900._
I am very glad that Dr. Fream gave a good notice in the “Times,”
of your intended series of lectures on Colonial and Indian
Agriculture—it will be a noble work, and I am glad you are
enjoying the preparation.
“Reminiscences” are lying in a drawer, for there is such a
quantity of work there is no spare time. When I have got the
first sheet of “Flies Injurious to Stock,” I should like to send
one to you, please; not to trouble you, but just that you may
see how it is getting on.
_August 25, 1900._
Mr. Elliott tells me that “the oil painting” is to be quite
ready on (or about) the fourteenth September, and I have ordered
one of their best “rich” gilt frames in which it is to come down
here. I hope much that I may somehow or other, be able either
before completion or here, to secure the saving of anxiety to my
mind by your seeing it. But I have not as yet written to submit
my suggestion of acceptance to Dr. Taylor, for may be I had
better see what I look like first.
Enclosed are two sheets of my progressing little pamphlet.
Please do not trouble yourself by reading them, but, if at any
time you care to glance over them, I hope you will like them. I
had no idea till I set regularly to work what need there was of
bringing the matters up-to-date. I think the brochure seems
likely to run to about three and a half sheets, with Index. When
you come you shall tell me, please, whether you will let me
offer some for your class. I should very much like to—and you
will tell me too, about Manuals.[104]
_September 4, 1900._
It was a great pleasure to me to receive both your letters, but
I was afraid of intruding too much on your time, so I put off
thanking you for them till I received the enclosed proof this
morning. It is a real comfort to me that you can approve of my
little pamphlet, for I have been very anxious over it, and I
hope you will think sheet “D” right. I am delighted to be
allowed to send it to you.
At page 33 you will see I have utilised the colouring of
the eyes of the _Tabanidæ_ (Gad flies), specially for
identification. I do not think this point is much brought
forward, and I found it very useful. Many thanks for your
two pamphlets and suggestion _re_ dips. I have been
studying your S.S.,[105] and mean to try to get a little
bit into my paper as an addendum. Also I want to study
your “Nature Knowledge” [opening lecture to a class of
teachers.] I don’t seem to understand this subject yet,
and your address, I feel sure, will help me very much.
Yesterday I had a long letter from Mr. E. P. Stebbing,
Chittagong, Bengal, accompanying a large pamphlet on “Injurious
Insects of Indian Forests,” published by the Indian Government.
He wrote that he was taking up the subject of Injurious Insects
(agricultural as well as forest), and that the Indian Government
having “put him on special duties for two years to tackle the
question,” he wanted me to advise him on a number of points. I
am sure I do not feel competent. However, I wrote him as well as
I could, and had to look up the shorthand writer we have talked
about, and get him to put it in typewritten form—so I helped
myself, at least. When I get the copies I propose just to put
one in an envelope for you to see what I have been suggesting.
But I only send it because you are so very importantly engaged
in Indian, &c., work. I should like you to be able to look at
it, if you like, but only if you like. Pray put it in the
rubbish basket if it is the least trouble.
_September 25, 1900._
Here is “Prevention and Remedies,” and the other odds and ends
for “Stock Flies.”
“The picture” has come, and I think that as Mr. Elliott said, it
is really a “great success.” I hardly know how to comment on my
own appearance, but if you should be writing to Dr. MacDougall
he would tell you about it. I almost think I shall be glad when
it goes on, it is such a curious feeling to have my own eyes
looking at me so steadily. I suppose when we get into the next
month I may write in form to Dr. Taylor, to inquire if I may be
permitted to ask acceptance.
I very much enjoyed Dr. MacDougall’s visit. We talked Entomology
most pleasantly, and I think arranged very satisfactorily all
necessary preliminaries for our proposed Forest Insect book. The
little visits which have been given me this summer have helped
me very much, as well as being a great enjoyment—though none so
much as yours—and it is a fact, as you mention, that if the
ladies come too, it perplexes the talk very much! I want to
learn all I can in the time.
_September 27, 1900._
I was very much surprised yesterday to receive about six dozen
large Plant bugs,[106] with a communication from the Chinese
Minister Plenipotentiary (in London), over his own signature,
begging for information as to how to prevent their ravages in
the lee-chee orchards in China. It seems very odd (in the
present state of affairs especially) that the Chinese Government
should consult me.[107] However, the treatment wanted was plain,
so I hope I did not do wrong in replying as he wished.
_October 16, 1900._
Lord Grimthorpe is very much interested about your Indian Famine
lecture, and he would very much like to have a copy.[108] I
think he will do what he can to study it, likewise expect me to
give him so much as I can; not much this, I am afraid.
I assure you your little visit was a great pleasure to me. These
excellent talks freshen me up delightfully for dry work. I shall
look forward to some more in due time.
_October 21, 1900._
I do not know how to thank you for this kind gift.[109] I know
how to value such a literary treasure, and to me it is of
exceeding interest also; but as your gift to me I treasure it
much, and gratefully thank you for your kind thought. The twelve
copies of “Indian Famine” preceded it an hour or two yesterday
afternoon, and I am reading it carefully and slowly (that I may
thoroughly appreciate it), and with great admiration; indeed, I
think such a clear condensation of the mass of information to be
dealt with is splendid. I have sent copies to Lord Grimthorpe,
the Bishop of St. Albans, &c.
With my very kind regards and grateful thanks for all the help
you give me, which is a great deal more than probably you have
any idea of.
_October 26, 1900._
I am delighted to read both the letters you send, but what an
especial pleasure it must be to you to have the nice courteous
message of acceptance sent by our good Queen. [In acknowledgment
of a copy of the address on “Famine in India.”] I congratulate
you exceedingly. How much you must treasure it! Thank you very
much for letting me see it, and also that from the Chancellor
[of the University, the Right Hon. A. J. Balfour].
My people have been much pleased to receive the copies you
kindly let me give them, and Dr. Lipscomb has asked me to thank
you for him. But I do not know that any one has been more
interested than Mr. T. P. Newman. He, as one of the “Friends,”
has been working in their society to help, and I find they
collected £27,000. [The Friends’ Foreign Mission Association
collected this sum to use in relief of the famine of 1900].
_October 29, 1900._
I have, with much pleasure, written to Messrs. West, Newman &
Co., to send you (to University, Edinburgh) one hundred copies
of each of the two pamphlets. Please write when some more (or
Manuals) would be at all acceptable.
I am placing your Famine pamphlet carefully, so I have some
still on hand, but I will not fail to ask you if more could go
out well, _viâ_ my presentation. I have been studying it to the
best of my power. I am not able to condense such a mass of
information fully, but this is what I think I have learnt. These
famines originate meteorologically, the crops consequently
failing for want of moisture. The only places (three districts
if I remember rightly) exempt from them, are so, consequent on
climatic circumstances or irrigation. The chief preventive
measure, being irrigation, is not always easy of application,
as, for instance, the possibility of a canal raising the height
of the water-table too much. I follow to some degree the
difficulty of bringing relief arrangements to bear on special
bodies of men, as the weavers, for instance. It is also very
interesting to read of the method of dealing with the “Wild
Tribes,” their power of finding wild food, and of bringing in
wild forest products adapted for sale. Some information as to
details of kinds of food and preparation, also of the sums of
money represented by Indian names, must surely remain adherent
to one’s mind, but one special thing is the splendidly arranged
work of our Government, which is a comfort to think of. I
inflict the above on you, that you may see I have really been
trying to benefit by your grand work, and I do congratulate you
on the result of your heavy labour.
_November 8, 1900._
I should be very thankful if you would tell me where Professor
Jablonowski might safely apply for sulphate of copper at “an
acceptable price”! I could, I suppose, look him up some sort of
an address, but I should not feel sure it was trustworthy, and
he is such a centre of work, also an old correspondent, I should
much like to help. I should be very much obliged if you could
conveniently tell me, or him—he is director of the Government
Entomological Station, Budapest—where he could get a price list
and a supply.
I have been ailing with some sort of slight feverish and gout
attack, but nothing serious, and I am up again.
To-day Mr. Newstead is come to see what the experimental black
currants are doing [in the garden]. I gather that even soaking
the cut-down plants, roots and all, in methylated spirit has not
proved a wholly certain means of prevention of Gall mite (fig.
65). If so, I incline to think that I had best make an end of my
black currant hospital, there is no use in simply bringing in
infestation.
_November 9, 1900._
I shall be delighted to see you at next week’s end, Saturday to
Monday, 17th to 19th, as you mention. Many thanks to you for
helping me to an answer to the Budapest professor about the
sulphate of copper. I fancy “the picture” would arrive this
morning at the University. I hope it will give satisfaction, and
I make no doubt that it will have great honour done to it in the
hanging. Perhaps some day I may see it!
“Reminiscences” had not been getting on, on paper, but when your
letter arrived I took up a pen and wrote like a very whirlwind
some points that were in my mind regarding the beginning of my
insect studies. I wonder what you will think of them. I hope to
have some progress to show you. I am having twenty feet
accommodation for books put up in my dining-room. I think this
will look well and be very convenient.
Yours very sincerely,
ELEANOR A. ORMEROD.
The Rev. Professor Taylor, Secretary of the University Court, wrote:—
_November 10, 1900._
DEAR MISS ORMEROD,—The portrait has arrived uninjured. It is an
excellent likeness, and with gown, hood and cap, vividly recalls
what is in reality an event of historical importance as well as
a most interesting graduation ceremonial. I propose to have it
placed so that it may be on view, so to speak, to the members of
the University Court on Monday at their meeting of that day, and
to the members of the Senatus Academicus when they next meet.
Thereafter it will no doubt find a permanent place on our walls.
I would venture to tender anew the thanks and best wishes of the
University Court, and with the assurance of my profound esteem,
beg to remain, dear Miss Ormerod,
Sincerely yours,
M. C. TAYLOR.
_November 14, 1900._
DEAR PROFESSOR WALLACE,—This is very kind of you; it is a great
pleasure to me to know that I am allowed to hold such an
honourable place, and I thank you very much for all the trouble
that you have been taking. I really do not know how to express
what I feel about all the kindness shown me, but you, knowing
how I have been situated till the University of Edinburgh showed
me such honour and kindness, will believe the heartfelt comfort
and encouragement it is to me to have their authoritative
approval and support. But this is private to you. “The
Chancellor” and Secretary might think I was _tête montée_ if I
wrote in such a fashion. I have had some nice letters, two from
Dr. Taylor and a charming little letter last evening,
delightfully worded, from Sir Wm. Muir. I am going to look at
the picture of Lord Inglis again in your beautiful book (“Quasi
Cursores”), that I may see whom I am allowed to sit next to in
this very distinguished company, but I am writing to catch the
post now, so I only thank you also for the papers which I have
not yet had time to give my head to. With most kind regards and
hearty thanks.
_November 15, 1900._
I feel I gave a very insufficient acknowledgment (writing in a
hurry last night) for all the kind care and, I feel sure, no
small trouble you have been taking about putting my
“representation” nicely on view. I have refreshed my memory of
Lord Inglis, and indeed I feel I have a right to be proud that
my portrait is allowed to be placed by such a grand
representation of such a distinguished man. I am glad the
“Court” liked the picture in itself (I urged all concerned to
good execution), and indeed it is a pleasure to me to think that
the memory of endeavours at least to work of E. A. O. will be so
markedly protected by the University.
Yours very sincerely,
ELEANOR A. ORMEROD.
P.S.—My new arrangement of books is so convenient, it helps me
almost as much as an assistant! (E. A. O.)
[Illustration:
PLATE XXIX.
ELEANOR ANNE ORMEROD, LL.D., F.R. Met. Soc.
FIRST WOMAN HON. GRADUATE OF THE UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH,
1900.
_From the oil painting (Academic costume) in the University
Courtroom_,
(_p. 306._)
]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAPTER XXVI
LETTERS TO PROFESSOR WALLACE (_concluded_)
The “Reminiscences” and the last Annual Report—Warnings of serious
illness—Proposed pension—Gradual loss of strength—Death.
This closing chapter records the peaceful close of the wonderful career
of a remarkable gentlewoman who devoted her life to work in the
successful effort to benefit her fellow men. The pages are replete with
human nature and human sympathy, and full of unselfish interest in the
interests of others whom she numbered among her sympathetic friends and
trusted confidants. The “Reminiscences” on which she did but desultory,
yet interested, work, during the intervals of temporary respite from the
burden of disease and increasing physical exhaustion, were as she
feelingly expressed it “a perfect blessing.” Her letters belonging to
this period are a noble record of fortitude and resignation during a
trying struggle for health and life, and the close is touchingly
pathetic.
_To Professor Robert Wallace, University, Edinburgh._
_November 19, 1900_, Monday evening.
DEAR PROFESSOR WALLACE,—I return Sir W. Macgregor’s letter[110]
with many thanks for letting me see it, for it is very
gratifying. It is a great pleasure to me to see how those who
understand appreciate your work. I am very glad you are able to
tell me that you enjoy your visits to me, but next time I hope
that our going to church may be of a less airy sort. I hope that
you did not get serious harm?[111]
I feel much pleasure (not to say relief) at results of our
“Reminiscence” work, and at all those papers being safely lodged
in your hands.
P.S.—I am working steadily on the twenty-fourth Report, but if a
bit [of “Reminiscences”] comes into my head (the “awen,” as the
Welsh say), I mean to put down the ideas.
_December 5, 1900._
Here comes such a long story [here cut short] about the
“Reminiscences.” I hope it will not be quite too tedious, but
really I think we are thriving.
A messenger has just been down from London, and carried off
material for ten illustrations.
The materials for letterpress are appearing fairly out of holes
and corners also, the chief prize a book of Memoranda for 1891,
by my sister Georgiana, giving numbers of dates of my letters,
&c.
I was glad to see the “Creameries”[112] in the “Times,” and glad
to see also that it was properly placed at the top of the
column. I thought you wrote very firmly and well.
P.S.—I have not sent [copies of the Manual] (though you kindly
said I might) to the Clubs. I have not the courage; so many of
the members might not care for Economic Entomology.
_December 15, 1900._
I think I am being very good! in seldom letting the
“Reminiscences” meddle really with work, but rest time (wet
afternoons) helps. One thing more, I remembered I had a part
given me by my mother of my father’s “queue” (Anglice,
“pigtail”) cut off in the year of their marriage, 1808, and I
think this might come in nicely.
_December 21, 1900._
I quite forgot to thank you for your Indian Examination
questions,[113] which was wrong of me, for I like very much to
have all the information they point to, though I am afraid there
are scarcely two I could answer.
_January 18, 1901._
My account of myself is—I am fairly well all but rheumatism;
only, last Saturday the disaster happened of a blood-vessel
breaking in my left eye. These affairs seem seldom of
consequence, but this time my doctor told me (after two or three
days) that he did not remember excepting from external
circumstances that he ever knew such a great breakage. So I was
an absolute spectacle for some time, but the sight is not at all
injured, and the organ recovering well, and I may write as much
as I like. I now enclose six more illustrations—I think in their
way they are all nice.
_January 27, 1901._
As you kindly say that even more than a good report of
“Reminiscences” you would like to hear I am better, I am truly
thankful to say that I am quite as usual again, and my eye
recovered. There has been some sort of illness about but I had
it very lightly. I hope the very bad day for His Majesty’s
Proclamation brought no serious harm to yourself. An Edinburgh
“inquirer” informed me that he thought numbers of the spectators
would catch their deaths of cold. I was truly pleased to see
that the King duly promised to support “The Church of Scotland,”
a matter I have more at heart than on my tongue here! You will
value Her Majesty’s approval of your “Indian Famine” lecture
more than ever now. I certainly should have liked myself to have
a tiny bit even of approval.
“Reminiscences.”—This is just for your best leisure (and
pleasure) to advise me on, but I very much need a good “paper
talk” with you to start me on a reasonable plan. I quite believe
that in a fortnight or sooner I may begin regularly.
But now—publisher! Messrs. A— B— wrote me that the book would be
so sound it would be sure to command public approval and they
would like to publish. Mr. Newman wrote he thought I had best go
to the top of the tree, and suggested John Murray. I answered
that in real truth the very idea of applying to such a leading
man made me quite uneasy—and yesterday he replied that as he
understood you were aiding me in the work, that my best course
would be to ask you whether when the time comes you would act on
my part with a publisher. I am sure he is right—I am as ignorant
as a reasonable person can be of how to “approach” a publisher,
but, if I am not asking too much, it would indeed be a relief to
my mind if you think fit to give me this help.
If it is possible I certainly should much like to print with
Messrs. West, Newman & Co. Is it possible to have a part of the
book printed before beginning negotiations just to show what it
is like?
_February 4, 1901._
I feel sure you will be pleased to hear that this morning I sent
Messrs. West, Newman & Co. all that I believe is needed for my
present Annual Report, excepting for completion of Index; and I
have really begun “Reminiscences.” Will not my best way be to
take any subjects that I think I have enough material for, and
work them up just as I think they might go to press? Thus you
would see how you like the writing and suggest improvements, and
there would be something, if you please, to show a publisher.
Turning to your letter—I think that if at your very best leisure
you would kindly let me have the parcel of MS. which you were
good enough to take for safe custody it would help me now.
How dreary the past week has been with our national sorrow and
all the anxieties. I hope we may be more cheerful now.
_February 8, 1901._
Your beautifully secured parcel has arrived safely, and I have
locked it up carefully in my safe, with a very legible
inscription that the contents are the property of Prof. Wallace,
University of Edinburgh. There is nothing like making sure, in
case of as people say “anything happening”! I should like to
think that this mass of documents which I have been accumulating
should pass to your hands.
I hope the work for your lecture[114] on the twelfth prox. is
getting on quite to your liking. It is always a great pleasure
to me to hear your plans are prospering.
_February 14, 1901._
It has been very much on my conscience that I did not say a word
in my hasty letter about your beautiful and valuable
present.[115] How very pretty it must be, and a very great
pleasure to yourself as a kindly acknowledgment.
About the “Reminiscences”—what you suggest about typewriting is
just what I should like, but I did not care to trust MS. here.
Before parleying with the typewriters, I should like very much
indeed to read to you all the papers that I can get ready before
the ninth. I feel a little anxious about the new style of
writing.
_February 21, 1901._
I have made up a good bit on “birth, childhood, and parentage”
(chap. I.) not forgetting with “an action of humility”! Edward
I., and Eleanor of Castille. At present I have “Series of Annual
Reports” (chap. IX.) on hand,—very pleasant work.
But now I want you, please (and very much indeed), to be kindly
thinking of some advice about my entomological work that I am
sure you could help me greatly with when we meet. The burthen
has become so very great that it seriously affects my health. I
am in bed now with another of these attacks; the constant
pressure of work to suit other people’s time and convenience,
and maybe a tremendous worry, brings on painful and exhausting
illness. I hope to be up again to-day, but the doctor is very
anxious I should—may I call it?—“Take in sail.” My wish is that
the present Annual Report should be the last of the series with
an addendum slip of explanation inserted. There is not the
important information needed or forwarded that there was twenty
years ago, and working hard for months over so much repetition
is dreadful drudgery. I heard lately from Dr. Fream, and he very
strongly advises me to drop it. If your opinion—which I
thoroughly trust—is the same, I should have no doubt. The
difficult thing is to moderate the applications, but I think I
see my way to that very nicely by having plenty of the addendum
slip printed and sending a copy to an unreasonable applicant. I
do not want to give up Entomology entirely.
How nice it must have been to have a good turn at curling!
_February 24, 1901._
In answer to your very kind letter I must tell you I am much
better. It was quite my fault that I got so out of sorts; I
ought to have asked my doctor weeks ago what was amiss, and then
the difficulty of how I, “all of my own head,” was to get that
“old man of the sea”—the Annual Reports—off my shoulders, came
on me like a brain shock. However, now I hope things are getting
quite nicely into order again. Meanwhile I am trying to arrange
what can hardly fail to be a rather explosive announcement. When
I came to set to work it did not seem to me that an addendum
slip would do. It would have been on such different lines to the
statements in the Preface that folks would have wondered what
could have happened! So I mean to have a Cancel, and hope all
will be nice.
One word which I forgot—I quite hope to pass on quietly as much
Economic Entomology as I possibly can to Dr. MacDougall.
_March 1, 1901._
This is very kind of you, and if you are very much shocked at my
explicitness please consider yourself an extra nephew, M.D. for
the occasion, and put this in the fire.
I have had a kidney attack. I believe something “gouty” (?) has
been wrong for weeks, but I had not asked the doctor until such
pain set in that there were no two ways about it, I had to go to
bed; and he put me on a “course” (of alkalis, I believe) to get
out the enemy. Of course this was very weakening, but I was soon
up—and really absolutely, I believe that if it were not for a
nasty barking cough—very tiresome by day, and more so by night—I
should be much as usual. I should be grievously disappointed if
you did not come for any reason connected with me. Speaking very
selfishly, and besides all the good the pleasure of one of your
visits does me, I do not feel as if I could settle comfortably
until I have the benefit of your sound and skilled advice about
how to rearrange my entomological work.
“Reminiscences” are in enough trim to show you something of even
now.[116]
_March 2, 1901._
I am so sorry regarding what I am writing that I hardly know how
to put it, but I find to-day I am so much pulled down that I am
obliged to tell you. It would be a sad disappointment to me if I
did not see you, but my nights are so bad from this cough that I
cannot depend on not having to ring to call Miss Hartwell to
attend to me, and this makes a great commotion. I believe, as I
wrote you yesterday, that the illness (as well as the pain) has
gone, but it is the cough which has been keeping me pulled down,
more than I knew.
_March 4, 1901._
Indeed, you are quite too kind and good to me, and now I want to
say that my doctor says he does not see any reason why I should
not be able to enjoy your visit on Sunday next without any
difficulty or risk whatsoever. If it was convenient to you,
would the train suit that would bring you to St. Albans about a
quarter before 11 from St. Pancras, and could you stop till the
(I think) 8.30 train? I am truly sorry not to be looking forward
this week to a whole week-end, but I am still obliged to get up
and go to bed at unusual hours; but, indeed, I am very much
better—the pain went, but one of the bad sort of cold or cough
attacks followed and I could not sleep properly for three nights
nor rest lying down. Now I can rest and sleep again.
_March 7, 1901._
Please do not think that a good talk tires me or is any strain.
It is the want of conversation that I find so wearing, and there
is so very much that it will be quite a delight and a rest for
me to be allowed to go over with you.
I am writing this to-day so that you may know that (so far as
anything in this world is certain) there is no possible reason
why I should not look forward to the pleasure of our meeting
next Sunday. I am not able to give you my doctor’s verdict for
the good reason that he did not think I needed looking up
yesterday.
_March 12, 1901._
You do not know how good and kind I think it of you to let me
rest on you for advice in this way, and it brings a great
brightness when you come and I can hope you are making yourself
at home. I am glad you like Mr. Newman. I always feel that he is
a quite true and well-judging friend, very kindly, but at the
same time so grave that I do not at all times feel free to
express all I am thinking about! I fancy that you “not being a
lady” he would feel freer to express what was uppermost.
Thank you for all you say about Mr. John Murray, and very
especially indeed for your good advice. I do really mean, and am
trying to act on it, but cannot you imagine the difficulty in
not working as hard as body and mind will allow?
However, I have made a thorough beginning; amongst various
points, returning to Mr. Newman a great bundle of proofs sent to
be looked through, just think, unlooked at. I also disposed of a
regular onslaught with special letters from Lady Warwick and
Miss Edith Bradley, &c. I am minding what you said [about
curtailing work] very nicely.
I am thankful to say I am feeling better every day, and I am
looking forward very much to being a better kind of hostess if
you will kindly spare me a week-end by and by.
7 p.m.—You are, I conjecture, just beginning your lecture [on
“Agriculture in South Africa”]. I hope it will be thoroughly
pleasant and satisfactory and that you will have a comfortable
journey home. Please accept the enclosed [the twenty-fourth and
last Report]. I have only received a parcel late to-day, but I
want to send you a copy “from the writer.”
_March 18, 1901._
I am very glad your colonial lecture was successful. It is no
good my not telling you, for some way or other you would have an
idea, but I have not been thriving. Of course there was a flood
of letters about discontinuing the Annual Reports, and, however
kind (and some were very kind indeed) yet not being in full
working order, they were rather too much, and I got feverish
“rigors” (though not bad) with temperature 100°, and the doctor
on Saturday ordered me straight off to bed. Here I am still, but
as far as I know, now only as a matter of precaution. I would
not have said anything about it, but I was sure you would have
an idea.
Now about something much nicer. I wrote to Miss Ashworth (28,
Victoria Street, London) and had a most pleasant and
businesslike reply. She told me that publishers preferred quarto
size and typed a few lines to show the size of type and style
they like best; and I sent up the “Chartist Outbreak” (chap.
VII.) and asked her to type it for me accordingly, and to let me
have one copy and two carbon copies. Thus there would be one for
you, one for me, and the third would be useful for the
publisher. I should be very much obliged if you would kindly
tell me how to offer a copy of my twenty-fourth Report to the
University Library. Would it be sufficient just to send a copy
c/o The Librarian. I do not want to give more trouble than I can
help about such a little thing.
P.S.—I assure you I mean to attend to your kind advice of not
making what might be a great pleasure into a toil.
_March 20, 1901._
Here comes the first instalment of “Reminiscences” and I hope to
forward more to you in due course. The history of “Rise and
Progress of Annual Reports” is in Miss Ashworth’s hands. Indeed,
I am very thankful to you for helping me about the typewriting.
I had no idea of the helpful difference it makes even to me.
Please, I earnestly beg of you, do not think that your
delightful and helpful visit, only too short, had anything to do
with my having to call in the doctor again. I am sure he does
not. But I am sure, too, you will understand how very trying
indeed, though mostly very kind, the outbreak of newspaper and
private comment on what they call “my retirement” was. So to get
my cough really cured, and drive constitutional coincidences out
of the field I went to bed with the best possible effects
(really). I think the doctor will let me get up to-morrow, but
he wants me to keep safe from snow chills.
_March 24, 1901._
Here is another bit [of autobiography] begging your reading when
you are inclined, and now “Birth, Parentage, &c.,” is gone up to
London. I should so very much like (if not too much trouble) if
you would make some sort of mark on the margin of your copy,
wherever you think some alteration is needed, and then when I
have the pleasure of seeing you here we could go comfortably
into it.
Now (as the fates permit) I am working on “The Severn and the
Wye” (chap. V.), and I think it will be interesting, there is
such a variety of fresh observation, “Fish, fishers, and
fisheries,” some specialities in zoology and semi-marine botany,
and something of a good many sorts of things.
I am much mended and doctor says I may tell you I am getting on
all right, but the long illness has pulled me down very much so
that I am only allowed at present to be up in my own room—such a
little thing brings the cough back and we have snow showers
still—but as soon as ever I can get about again I have no reason
to doubt I should be much as usual.
_March 29, 1901._
I seem very unlucky this winter, but on Tuesday, when I hoped I
was pretty well again, a chill so bad and so strangely sudden
seized me, that breathing got hurried, I could not speak with
comfort, and an acute pain set in in my right side. Doctor set
to work and did not mention that congestion of the lungs was
present, but taking affairs at once did great good, and the
enemy was routed; still, I am a good deal pulled down, and do
not mean risking another chill at present. I had greatly hoped
this time not to tell you any long stories about my health, but
it is no good pretending, so please you must let your friendly
sympathy in my troubles be my excuse.
I wonder what you will think of the enclosed [“copy”]. I incline
to think the subjects are rather nice, but that as we get on
bits of this may fit into future papers, or of future papers
here? It seems to me best to write whatever I can as well as I
can manage, and sift by and by. “Am not I ’umble” (as Uriah Heap
says) about Edward I.? (page 13).
_April 1, 1901._
I know I shall always have your kind sympathy in these
unpleasant visitations, and I wish they did not come to intrude
so often. But this time I really and truly do hope, unless some
luckless draught gets hold of me, that I shall pick up quickly,
and not have such dreary stories to tell you.
Dr. Lipscomb says that it is just having let my health run down
that is the reason, and I mean to be very careful. I am up in my
room part of the day comfortably, and hope to get downstairs
to-morrow.
I greatly look forward to a good talk by and by over many
matters, and I was very sorry that Dr. MacDougall could not come
this week, but further on I hope we shall have a chat. You will
doubtless (or very likely) have seen flourishes in the papers
about a testimonial! to my unworthy self—but to my horror
yesterday I had a letter from Mr. —— stating that he was trying
to procure a pension for me; and the Member for H—— and (I
understood Lord ——) would most likely use their influence.
Just think what could possess him—what a to-do there would have
been. But I wrote earnestly representing how misappropriate such
a grant would be to a person so well off as myself, and it being
such a troublesome matter, I got Dr. L. to read my letter. I
hope I may have quite stopped his operations (and politely), but
assuredly I should feel inexpressibly lowered if I accepted a
“pension.”
I have been collecting for “Reminiscences” very fairly well, but
I have been afraid to prepare whole papers lest
_April 2, 1901._
I must write a line to give, I believe, a soundly good report of
myself in reply to your letter, which arrived 4.50; it is very
good of you to write so kindly. I have been down to-day for
about six hours, and I do hope now to steadily regain my
strength.
You will let me have your address, will you not? And I shall
hope to write something more worth reading.
Mr. —— has on my urgent representation stopped his applications
as to a pension.
P.S.—The typewriting seems to me beautiful, and I hope soon to
have more work ready.
_April 8, 1901._
You will know from your own experience the deluges of
publications which come—what can I do with them? They might be
measured by feet, if not by yards. Some valuable, some ——!
Would not it be my best way to keep them all until you will, as
I hope, come some day—and you could see if there are any that
you would like. Besides what are of no very obvious use, there
are quantities of amazingly learned entomological treatises
which, in case they do not float in the way of our good friend
Dr. MacDougall, he might at least like to place on his shelves.
You will tell me, will you not, some time what you advise?
Meanwhile, with all possible good wishes and kind regards, &c.
_April 19, 1901._
I should like to give you a better account of myself, but for
weeks back I could not think why I got on so slowly, with
“relapses,” and it is only just lately that I have extracted out
of my good doctor that the illness I had was that horrid
influenza, and I am going through the weeks and weeks of “after
effects”! I am not allowed to go down, but sit up a few hours in
my room, and am certainly better, but I am told I must not
expect to be well for a long time. One of my doctor nephews
looked in yesterday, and he told me that a characteristic of
some of the influenzas which have been about is that they do not
seem much at the time, but they leave those detestable effects
on the system.
You will believe how very pleasant (as I get stronger) I find
looking up bits for “Reminiscences.” Miss Hartwell brings me
books, and I can “rummage” and copy. Now I enclose you some
pages, of which I think some part is right, but I did not feel
as if I could put the whole paper right until I had it
typewritten.
I should very much like too if you would give a thought to my
“Scriptural Commentary” (page 21). I do not see how the
description I object to can be right. I hope you will think the
paper is hopeful. I am not up yet, therefore please excuse this
stupid scrawl, and with my very kind regards and best wishes,
&c.
_May 2, 1901._
How I long for the day to come when I may tell you that I am
well, and am going on as usual. But this disgusting, tenacious
remains of influenza seems to be always coming back. I had got
on to coming down on Friday last a little after 9 a.m., and was
full of hope and absolutely striving to recover, but yesterday
something went wrong, so I am on a treatment of milk and
seltzer-water and bed, but I felt I must write you, and hope
soon to send you a much better letter.
“Reminiscences” are a perfect blessing, and I enclose two
portraits of my father received yesterday to show the
illustrations are getting on. Is not the one of him as a little
laddie of about five years old, charming? (plate xxx.)
_May 15, 1901._
Many thanks for the additional copy of your lecture,
“Agriculture in South Africa.” It is so interesting, I am sure I
can find a home where it will be welcome. I was glad to find you
were out in the country, and I hope the bracing air will enable
you to work on this load of papers without killing yourself.
For myself, I really am afraid that, excepting hope, I have a
very indifferent account to give you. I was always getting
better off and on! But the result was, that I got weaker and
weaker, until on Saturday Dr. Lipscomb wired for Sir Dyce
Duckworth. He was away, but my nephew, Dr. J. Arderne Ormerod,
who is taking Sir D. D.’s practice at present, came down, and I
think the change of treatment that they arranged is really doing
good. The trouble was that, though there did not seem any reason
why, what they call the “after effects” of influenza should not
move off (the sort of gastric catarrh and its detestable
allies), yet they didn’t, and my medical tormentors made up
their minds that it might be from “Liver.” The plan has been
altered as to treatment, and at my urgent request I am allowed
to take one glass of port a day, and I do think it is doing me a
great deal of good. But excuse more now, for sitting up at my
writing-table tires me.
_May 22, 1901._
I am very sorry to tell you in reply to your kind letter that I
am very ailing. I seem to get fairly well of the influenza, and
go down and sit for a few hours in the dining-room in the easy
chair by the fire. Then, as sure as can be, in a very few days I
get a “recurrence” of illness and have to go to bed for days. I
think I am now going through about the fifteenth. Dr. Lipscomb
says he does not know the reason, but it is very like the
recurrence of Indian fever. I know that there may be scentless
or other sewer gas, and from what Mr. R—— F—— told me some time
ago of the recurrence of a very parallel attack to the Duchess
of C—— from gas under her invalid sofa, I mean to have the
matter properly seen to. I know there may be reason close to my
door.
P.S.—Since the above was written Dr. Lipscomb has been called
and thinks the present attack was caused by a chill; and with
staying in bed a few days Miss Ormerod hopes to be better.—A.
HARTWELL.
[Illustration:
PLATE XXX.
MISS ORMEROD’S FATHER, ABOUT FIVE YEARS OLD.
_From a Miniature of 1790._
(_p. 323._)
]
[Illustration:
MISS ORMEROD IN CHILDHOOD.
_From a Silhouette, date 1835._
]
_May 28, 1901._
I am afraid I have seemed very negligent, but my varying illness
made it very difficult to tell you, and now I do not want to go
away without telling you my deep gratitude for all the great,
helpful, affectionate kindness you have showed me. And about the
“Reminiscences,” which I hoped would be our pleasant joint work,
I have a large collection of material which I give to you for
your own property to use as you please—with the requisite paper
[dated 1st March] with it. I believe myself the end may come any
time now, but I go in happy hope, and that it may please God to
bless you is the prayer of your affectionate friend.
_June 4, 1901._
I pencil a few lines to say what a delight your visit yesterday
was to me. I longed very much to see you again, and also I was
wanting to give you the various documents about the
“Reminiscences.” To-day Miss Hartwell has been rummaging out for
me what I think must be nearly all the material I have more,
including the “Edinburgh book” [relating to the LL.D.], which
please accept from me as a keepsake. It was left you in my will,
so will not there be a hunt? And now I should much like to write
more, but I feel too weak, and with every good wish.
P.S.—Please notice I give you all the contents of the box sent
to-day—as well as the documents we looked out yesterday.
_June 8, 1901._
I was delighted with your letter—that you had a nice talk with
Mr. Newman—and besides such an interview with Mr. Murray. This
is a great pleasure. I am miserably weak, but I am trying to do
as the doctors tell me, and lie here waiting for—what I am sure
will be for the best.
My very kindest regards. Yours most sincerely,
ELEANOR A. ORMEROD.
[The _Times_ of Saturday, July 20, 1901, published an admirable record
of her life and work in the sympathetic obituary notice, from which we
have made the following brief extract: “We regret to announce the death
of the accomplished entomologist, Miss Eleanor A. Ormerod, which took
place at her residence, Torrington House, St. Albans, after a severe
illness. She had been gradually sinking for the last six weeks from
malignant disease of the liver. Her loss is not to this country alone,
but to the whole civilised world, though the farmers of the United
Kingdom will feel in a special degree that a trusted friend has been
taken from them. Many people will feel that such a magnificent record of
unselfish work as she has left behind ought to have received some
official recognition of a national character. Nevertheless, almost the
last honour bestowed upon her, that of the honorary degree of Doctor of
Laws in the University of Edinburgh, was peculiarly grateful to her,”
&c., &c.
Having regard to the special interest which Miss Ormerod took in the
progress of Economic Entomology in Canada and the United States, and the
high appreciation in which she was held by the enlightened exponents of
the subject on the other side of the Atlantic, we conclude with an
extract from the September number of the “Canadian Entomologist” for
1901:—
“Entomology in England has suffered a great loss through the
death of this talented and estimable lady, who died at her
residence, Torrington House, St. Albans, on Friday, July 19th.
Practical entomologists throughout the world are moved with
profound regret that a career so remarkable and so useful should
be brought to a close, but one could hardly hope that the aged
lady would long be able to sustain the burden of increasing
infirmities and the trials of a painful and protracted illness.
Miss Ormerod was one of the most remarkable women of the latter
half of the nineteenth century, and did more than any one else
in the British Isles to further the interests of farmers,
fruitgrowers, and gardeners, by making known to them methods for
controlling and subduing their multiform insect pests. Her
labours were unwearied and unselfish; she received no
remuneration for her services, but cheerfully expended her
private means in carrying out her investigations and publishing
their results. We know not now by whom in England this work can
be continued; it is not likely that any one can follow in the
unique path laid out by Miss Ormerod; we may therefore cherish
the hope that the Government of the day will hold out a helping
hand and establish an entomological bureau for the lasting
benefit of the great agricultural interests of the country.”]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A (p. 37).
_Salmon Fishery_.—Both locally, and thence to the country at large, the
bay beneath the Beachley and the Sedbury Cliffs was very important, as
being one centre of the Severn Salmon Fisheries. The following notes by
Mr. Frank Buckland,[117] Government Inspector of Salmon Fishing for
England and Wales, are interesting: “The visitor will observe in the
lower estuary stretching for a considerable distance into the water from
the muddy banks, rude piers made entirely of wicker work, which look
like large eel-baskets; these are called ‘ranks’ of ‘putchers.’ Each
putcher is about 5 ft. 6 in. long, and 21 inches across the mouth. A
framework is made by driving stakes into the mud, and the putchers are
then fastened together in rows one above the other, often to the height
of 10 feet or more; these great walls of baskets look not unlike, as my
friend the late John Keast Lord remarked, ‘a gigantic wine rack filled
with bottles, encased in wicker work.’ As the salmon come along with the
tide in the thick muddy Severn water, they run their noses into the open
mouths of the putchers, and speedily get jammed up at the narrow end;
the poor things cannot turn, and the more they struggle to get out, the
firmer they become wedged in; as the tide recedes they are left high and
dry. I have often observed that wasps wait about till the tide goes
down, and then take first cut at the salmon. A great many first-class
Severn salmon are caught in these putchers and sent to the London
market.”
With regard to another form of baskets used for catching flat fish, &c.,
at p. 368, he says:—
“Besides the putchers another kind of basket is used which is called
putts; ... the wicker work is much closer in this instance than in the
other. The putt in its most special form consists of three parts, the
large part or mouth, called the ‘putt’; the middle called the ‘butt’;
and the small end or bag, called the ‘firwell.’... The diameter of the
opening is about 5 feet, and the length from 12 to 13 feet; they are
used to catch flat fish, &c.” The illustration (fig. A, page 36), given
by Mr. Buckland shows the putt, with the small end or “firwell” removed.
The above technical description of the arrangement, measurement, &c., of
the “putts” and “putchers,” corresponds in most points with the details
of the long rows (three or four in number) running out into the river
beneath the Sedbury cliffs (plate X.).
APPENDIX B (p. 67).
The following notice appeared in the “Times” of March 11, 1901:—
_“Miss Ormerod’s Retirement from Entomological Work.”_
“Widespread regret will be felt, both at home and abroad, at the
announcement which we are able to make, that Miss Eleanor A. Ormerod,
after many years of unremitting toil, has decided to discontinue the
Annual Reports on injurious insects and common farm pests, which she has
prepared for a period now extending to close upon a quarter of a
century. When in the year 1877 she issued the first of these annual
records, and thus placed at the disposal of the public the fruits of her
intimate acquaintance with many departments of natural history, very
little systematic work had been done in the direction of saving crops
and live stock from the ravages of insect and other pests. In this
respect the position of the farmer and the stock-keeper to-day, as
compared with what it was in the middle of the seventies, is vastly
improved. It is true that the farmer may still lose his turnip and swede
crops through the ravages of the active little beetle, which is
perversely termed the ‘fly’; that fruit-growers may bewail the loss of
their apples and plums owing to the abundant presence of the winter
moth; and that stock-keepers may view with dismay the damage both direct
and consequential that their cattle incur through the activity of the
warble fly. But these and similar losses are entirely preventable,
provided that there be no careless indifference, and that time and
trouble be devoted to the object it is sought to attain. It is to Miss
Ormerod’s persevering efforts that this change is due; it is to her
persistent enquiry year after year into the causes of mischief and into
the means of removing them that the subject of agricultural entomology,
which so long had languished in this country, gradually forced its way
to the front, until it has become recognised that some serviceable
knowledge of it is indispensable to the mental equipment, and cannot be
omitted from the technical training of the aspiring agriculturist.
Readily and gratuitously she has answered day after day all inquirers,
whilst for twenty-four consecutive years her pen and pencil have been
devoted to the preparation of the annual reports, every one of which she
has generously published at a nominal price, which year after year
involved a substantial loss. ‘But the work was hard,’ she now tells
us—and the simplicity of her words renders them eloquent—‘for many years
for about five or six months all the time I could give to the subject
was devoted to arranging the contributions of the season for the Annual
Report of the year.’ In spite of indifferent health, at times
accompanied by much physical suffering, Miss Ormerod has carried on her
self-imposed task, and the result is that she has revolutionised the
subject of agricultural entomology, as it was understood in this country
twenty-five years ago. Not only at home, not only throughout the British
Empire, but in all progressive countries Miss Ormerod’s name takes first
rank amongst the Economic Entomologists of the day, and correspondence
reaches her from beneath almost every flag that flies. And, now that the
time has come when this talented lady feels it expedient to no longer
work at the high pressure which has so long been maintained, all who
have benefited by her disinterested labour—and they are very many—will
join in the hope that she may long live to enjoy the comparative leisure
to which she is looking forward.”
APPENDIX C (p. 143).
_Contents of Insect Cases Shown at the Bath and West of England Show at
St. Albans (May, 1896), now the Property of the University of
Edinburgh, kept along with Miss Georgiana Ormerod’s Diagrams in the
Museum of Science and Art, Edinburgh._
CASE I.—WEEVIL ATTACKS TO PEAS, BEANS, AND CLOVER-SEED, AND LEAFAGE. 1.
Infestations of Pea seed. 2. Infestations of Bean-seed. 3.
Clover-seed “Pear-shaped” Weevils. 4. Leaf-eating Weevils, and
gnawed Leaves.
CASE II.—ATTACKS TO CORN STEMS. 1. “Gout Fly” attack to young Barley,
also to ear and stalk. 2. Hessian Fly attack, showing Wheat-stems
elbowed at point of feeding of Maggot.
CASE III.—INFESTATIONS OF STORED CORN AND MEAL. 1. Granary Weevils in
Wheat. 2. Granary Moth in Wheat. 3. Meal and Flour Beetle in Meal.
4. Mite in Granary Rubbish.
CASE IV.—STORED CORN. Common Granary Weevil in Barley.
CASE V.—INFESTATION OF WHEAT MILLS AND STORES. Mediterranean Mill Moth,
and Flour felted together by its Caterpillars. (A very bad Mill
Pest).
CASE VI.—WASTE MATERIAL CLEANED OUT OF IMPORTED CORN. 1 and 2. “Rubble.”
3. “Hencorn.” 4. Broken Bits, used for bedding Pigs. 5 and 6. Uses
not given; supposed to be used for Adulteration.
CASE VII.—INFESTATIONS IN IMPORTED OR STORED FODDER; ALSO SPARROW’S
FOOD. 1. Locusts in Lucerne from Buenos Aires. 2. Hay-stack Moth
from Clover or Sainfoin Stacks. Food from Sparrow’s Crop containing
Corn.
CASE VIII.—FIELD CROP AND GRASS-ROOT INFESTATIONS. 1. “Click Beetles”
and their Grubs, known as “Wireworms.” 2. Turnip “Flea” Beetles and
Mustard Beetles. 3. Chafers and their Grubs.
CASE IX.—FIELD CROPS, ROOT, AND LEAF INFESTATIONS. 1. Cabbage and Turnip
Moths, and their “Surface” Root-feeding Caterpillars, also Cabbage,
and Pea-leaf Caterpillars. 2. “Mangold-leaf Fly” Maggot attack. 3.
Death’s-head Moth Potato-leaf Infestation.
CASE X.—APPLE INFESTATIONS. 1. American Blight. 2. Codlin Moth. 3.
Winter Moths, and their “Looper” Caterpillars, also Cabbage and
Pea-leaf Caterpillars. 4. Goat Moth, of which the Caterpillars feed
in Wood. 5. Lappet Moth, and its leaf-eating Caterpillars.
CASE XI.—PINE INFESTATIONS. 1. Pine-sheets distorted by Tortrix Moth
Caterpillar attack. 2. “Timberman” Beetle, with longest horns of any
European kind. 3. Pine beetle infestation in bark and shoots.
CASE XII.—ELM AND ASH-BARK INFESTATIONS. 1. Attacks of “Common” Elm-bark
Beetle, and of “Lesser” Elm-bark Beetle. 2. Attacks of “Ash-bark”
Beetle.
CASE XIII.—INSECT INJURIES TO WOOD AND LEATHER. 1. Sirex Tunnellings in
live Silver Fir. 2. “Death-watch” Beetle’s Borings in Oak and Beech
Timber. 3. Injuries of Maggots of another kind of Death-watch Beetle
to manufactured leather.
CASE XIV.—INFESTATIONS PARTLY BRED IN PONDS AND DITCHES. 1. Water
Beetles injurious, in Beetle or Grub state, but chiefly in both, to
young Fish in Ponds. 2. Liver-fluke of Sheep, and “Pond Snails,” in
which it lives in its early condition.
CASE XV.—FLY ATTACKS, INJURIOUS TO CATTLE, HORSES AND SHEEP. 1. Forest
Fly; also Sheep Spider Fly (popularly known as “Sheep Tick.”) 2. Bot
Flies, Common Horse Bot Fly, and Sheep-nostril Bot Fly. 3. Gad or
Breeze Flies.
CASE XVI.—OX AND DEER WARBLE. 1. Ox Warble Fly and Deer Warble Fly, in
different stages, with Maggots in spirit. 2. Piece of young
Red-deer’s Skin, showing swellings caused by Warble Maggots in the
under side.
CASE XVII.—INJURIES TO CATTLE HIDE, FROM OX WARBLE. 1. Pieces of Hide,
showing swellings with Maggots within, from the under-side; also
perforations in the outside, leading down to the Maggot-cell; also
sections of Hide, showing Channel down through the Hide, and
Maggot-cell cut through. 2. Pieces of Tanned Warbled Leather.
APPENDIX D (p. 182).
_Injury by Xyleborus dispar in England._
Professor Riley, in “Insect Life” (the U.S.A. Official Entomological
Journal), says:—“Miss E. A. Ormerod wrote us on September 23, 1889, as
follows: ‘... The beetle which is considered one of the rarest of the
British Coleoptera, _Xyleborus dispar_, Fab. (formerly known as
“Bostrichus” or “Apate,” Fig. 46) has appeared in such great numbers in
plum-wood in the fruit grounds at Toddington, near Cheltenham, as to be
doing very serious injury. I found, on anatomising the injured small
branches, that one of the galleries which the horde of beetles (packed
as closely as they can be) forms or enlarges, passes about two-thirds
round in the wood, more or less deeply beneath the bark, whilst another
of the tunnels, likewise occupied with its closely packed procession of
beetles, was in possession of about two inches of pith, so that the
rapid destruction of the tree was fully accounted for. The attack
appears, as far as I can see, to disappear usually very rapidly, but I
am advising owners to make sure. This disappearance, I conjecture, may
arise from the excessive rarity of the small male of this species.
Amongst about sixty ♀(female specimens) which I extracted from the
tunnels I only found one ♂ (male).’”
APPENDIX E (p. 223).
Professor Charles Valentine Riley was killed by a fall from his bicycle
in the streets of Washington. He was riding, as usual, to his office in
the morning, accompanied by his young son. It was down-hill, and he was
evidently going rather fast, when his wheel struck a stone carelessly
left in the roadway after repairs. He was thrown violently, and died
from the effects of the fall a few hours afterwards.[118]
‘Biologist, artist, editor, and public official, the story of his
struggles and successes, tinged as it is with romance, is one full of
interest. Beginning life in America as a poor lad on an Illinois farm,
he rose by his own exertions to distinction. His nature was a many-sided
one, and his success in life was due to sheer will-power, unusual
executive force, critical judgment, untiring industry, skill with pencil
and pen, and a laudable ambition, united with an intense love of nature
and of science for its own sake. This rare combination of varied
qualities, of which he made the most, rendered him during the thirty
years of his active life widely known as a public official, as a
scientific investigator, while of economic entomologists he was _facile
princeps_.
‘He was born at Chelsea, London, September 18, 1843. His boyhood was
spent at Walton-on-Thames, where he made the acquaintance of the late W.
C. Hewitson, author of many works on butterflies, which undoubtedly
developed his love for insects. At the age of eleven he went to school
for three years at Dieppe, afterwards studying at Bonn-on-the-Rhine. At
both schools he carried off the first prizes for drawing, making
finished sketches of butterflies, thus showing his early bent for
natural history. It is said that a restless disposition led him to
abandon the old country, and at the age of seventeen he had emigrated to
Illinois, and settled on a farm about fifty miles from Chicago. When
about twenty-one he removed to Chicago, where he became a reporter and
editor of the entomological department of the “Prairie Farmer.”
‘Near the close of the war, in 1864, he enlisted as a private in the
134th Illinois regiment, serving for six months, when he returned to his
editorial office.
‘He also enjoyed for several years the close friendship of B. D. Walsh,
one of our most thorough and philosophic entomologists, with whom he
edited the “American Entomologist.” His industry and versatility, as
well as his zeal as an entomologist, made him widely known and popular,
and gave him such prestige that it resulted in his appointment in 1868
as State Entomologist of Missouri. From that time until 1877, when he
left St. Louis to live in Washington, he issued a series of nine annual
reports on injurious insects, which showed remarkable powers of
observation both of structure and habits, great skill in drawing, and
especially ingenious and thoroughly practical devices and means of
destroying the pests. It goes without saying that this prestige existed
to the end of his life, his practical applications of remedies and
inventions of apparatus giving him a world-wide reputation. In token of
his suggestion of reviving the vines injured by the Phylloxera by the
importation of the American stock, he received a gold medal from the
French Government, and he afterwards received the Cross of the Légion
d’Honneur in connection with the exhibit of the U. S. Department of
Agriculture at the Paris Exposition of 1880.
‘The widespread ravages of the Rocky Mountain locust from 1873 to 1877
had occasioned such immense loss in several States and Territories that
national aid was invoked to avert the evil. The late Dr. F. V. Hayden,
then in charge of the U. S. Geographical and Geological Survey of the
Territories, sent Dr. P. R. Uhler to Colorado in the summer of 1875. Mr.
Walsh had made important suggestions as to the birthplace and migrations
of the insect. Meanwhile Riley had since 1874 made very detailed studies
on the migration and breeding habits and means of destruction of this
locust. Dr. Cyrus Thomas had also been attached to Hayden’s Survey, and
published a monograph on the locust family, _Acrididæ_. As the result of
this combined work Congress created the United States Entomological
Commission, attaching to it Dr. Hayden’s Survey, and the Secretary of
the Interior appointed Charles V. Riley, A. S. Packard, and Cyrus Thomas
members of the Commission. Dr. Riley was appointed chief, and it was
mainly owing to his executive ability, business sagacity, experience in
official life, together with his scientific knowledge and practical
inventive turn of mind in devising remedies, or selecting those invented
by others, that the work of the Commission was so popular and successful
during the five years of its existence. In 1878, while the Report of the
Commission was being printed, Riley accepted the position of
Entomologist to the U. S. Department of Agriculture, but owing to the
lack of harmony in the Department, he resigned, Professor J. H. Comstock
being appointed. Congress meanwhile transferred the cotton-worm
investigation [on which Riley had been engaged] to the Entomological
Commission. Dr. Riley was reappointed to the position of U. S.
Entomologist in June, 1881. Mr. L. O. Howard said of the administration
of this office: “The present efficient organisation of the Division of
Entomology was his own original conception, and he is responsible for
its plan down to the smallest detail. It is unquestionably the foremost
organisation of its kind at present in existence.” Again he writes:
“Professor Riley’s work in the organisation of the Division of
Entomology has unquestionably advanced the entire Department of which it
is a part, for it is generally conceded that this Division has led in
most matters where efficiency, discipline, and system were needed.”
‘His Division published the first bulletin, and in “Insect Life” began
the system of periodical bulletins, which has since been adopted for the
other Divisions of the Agricultural Department. In an address, says
Howard, before the National Agricultural Congress, delivered in 1879, in
which he outlined the ideal Department of Agriculture, Professor Riley
foreshadowed many important reforms which have since become accomplished
facts, and suggested the important legislation, since brought about, of
the establishment of State Experiment Stations under the general
government.
‘His practical, inventive genius was exhibited in his various means of
exterminating locusts, in the use of kerosene oil emulsified with milk
or soap, and in his invention and perfection of the “cyclone” or
“eddy-chamber” or Riley systems of nozzles, which, in one form or
another, are now in general use in the spraying of insecticide or
fungicide liquids.
‘Although the idea of introducing foreign insect parasites or
carnivorous enemies of our imported pests had been suggested by others,
Riley, with the resources of his division at hand, accomplished more
than any one else in making it a success. He it was who succeeded in
introducing the Australian lady-bird to fight the fluted scale.
‘Riley’s scientific writings will always stand, and show as honest work.
He was not “a species man” or systematist as such; on the contrary, his
most important work was on the transformations and habits of insects,
such as those of the lepidoptera, locusts and their parasites, his
Missouri reports being packed with facts new to science. His studies on
the systematic relations of Platypsyllus as determined by the larva
evince his patience, accuracy, and keenness in observation and his
philosophic breadth.
‘His best anatomical and morphological work is displayed in his study on
the mode of pupation of butterflies, the research being a difficult one,
and especially related to the origin of the cremaster, and of the
vestigial structures, sexual and others, of the end of the pupa.
Whatever he did in entomology was original. He was also much interested
in Aëronautics, and took much delight in attending séances of
spiritualists and exposing their frauds, in one case, at least, where
another biologist of world-wide fame, then visiting in Washington, was
completely deluded.
‘Riley was from the first a pronounced evolutionist. His philosophic
breadth and his thoughtful nature and grasp of the higher truths of
biology are well brought out in his address on “The Causes of Variation
in Organic Forms,” as Vice-President, before the biological section of
the American Association for the Advancement of Science in 1888. He was
a moderate Darwinian, and leaned, like other American naturalists,
rather to Neo-Lamarckism. He says: “I have always had a feeling, and it
grows on me with increasing experience, that the weak features of
Darwinism and, hence, of natural selection, are his insistence (1) on
the necessity of slight modification; (2) on the length of time required
for the accumulation of modifications, and (3) on the absolute utility
of the modified structure.” Riley, from his extended experience as a
biologist, was led to ascribe much influence to the agency of external
conditions, remarking, in his address: “Indeed, no one can well study
organic life, especially in its lower manifestations, without being
impressed with the great power of the environment.” He thus contrasts
Darwinism and Lamarckism: “Darwinism assumes essential ignorance of the
causes of variation and is based on the inherent tendency thereto in the
offspring. Lamarckism, on the contrary, recognizes in use and disuse,
desire and the physical environment, immediate causes of variation
affecting the individual and transmitted to the offspring, in which it
may be intensified again both by inheritance and further individual
modification.”’
‘“Evolution shows that man is governed by the same laws as other
animals.” “Evolution reveals a past which disarms doubt and leaves the
future open with promise—unceasing purpose—progress from lower to
higher. It promises higher and higher intellectual and ethical
attainment, both for the individual and the race. It shows the power of
God in what is universal, not in the specific; in the laws of nature,
not in departure from them.”’
------------------------------------------------------------------------
INDEX
=A=
_Abraxas grossulariata_, Magpie moth, 114 (Fig.)
_Accentor modularis_, Dunnock or Hedge-sparrow, 162
_Acrididæ_, 333
“Agriculture and Rural Economy of Australia and New Zealand,” Professor
Wallace’s, 280
Agriculture, Board of, Miss Ormerod’s aid to the Adviser given and
withdrawn, 202
Agricultural College (Royal), Cirencester, Miss Ormerod’s lectures at,
83;
Professor Harker at, 83;
Principal of, 201
Agricultural Education Committee, 271, 272, 273
Agricultural Education in the Elementary School, 271
Agricultural Entomology, progress of, 200;
work on, 276;
Miss Ormerod, Co-Examiner in, 282
Agricultural lectureship proposed in Oxford University, 225
Agricultural Society (Royal), Miss Ormerod’s diagrams for, 88;
work for discontinued, 212
“Agricultural Zoology,” by Dr. Ritzema Bos, translated by Professor
Ainsworth-Davis, 222
_Agrotis exclamationis_, Heart-and-dart moth, Linn., 101 (Fig.)
_Agrotis segetum_, Ochsenheimer, Turnip moth, 101 (Fig.)
“Alder Killer,” German name of Mottled Willow Weevil, 267
Aldersey schoolboys, 113, 119, 127
Alfalfa (lucerne) hay infested with locusts, 228, 229
_Alopecurus pratensis_, 244
Altum, Dr. Bernard, _Forst Zoologie_, 61
American Ambassador, congratulations of the, 193
American blight, _see_ _Schizoneura lanigera_, 142, 143, 144
American clover-seed midge, 198
American migratory locusts, South, 229
Anbury, club-root, or finger and toe, _see_ _Plasmodiophora_, 196, 213
Angoumois moth, 188
_Anguillulidæ_ (eel-worms), 198, 282
_Anguillula radicicola_, 213
Annual Reports, _see_ Reports
_Anobium paniceum_, 253
_Anthomyia ceparum_, 60
Antler moth, _see_ _Charæas graminis_
Ants, black, 138
“Ap Adam” oak, 93, Pl. xxi
_Aphides_, 79;
attack of, 222, 250, 257
Aphis, woolly, _Schizoneura lanigera_ 144 (Fig.)
Apple-bark beetle, _see_ _Xyleborus dispar_, 199
Arbuthnot, Mrs., 292, 301
Architects, practice of, 7
Arderne of Alvanley, family of, 13
_Argyresthia conjugella_, 247
Arkwright (J. H.) of Hampden Court, Herefordshire, 76
Armstrong, Dr., 28, 29
Army worm _(_Leucania unipunctata_)_, paper on, by Dr. L. O. Howard,
184
Arnold, Dr., of Rugby, 3
Arsenite of Copper, 201
Artists, the Misses Ormerod as, 18, 74
Ash-bark beetle, _see_ _Hylesinus_
Ashworth, Miss, letter from, 320
_Aspidiotus perniciosus_, San José scale, 242
Assistant, reasons for refusing an, 79
_Astynomus ædilis_, 224
_Atomaria linearis_, Mangold beetle, 230 (Fig.)
Aust “Bone bed,” 40
Aust cliffs, 39, 40
Austen’s opinion on “Deer forest fly,” Mr., 261
Australian thrips, 183;
larvæ, 277
Autumnal breeze fly, _see_ _Tabanus autumnalis_
Avian Rat, nickname for the sparrow, 160, 168
Axe, Professor, 85
=B=
Bacon fly, _see_ _Piophila casei_
Bacon, Lord, burial-place, 298
Badam’s Court, 93
Bailey, Colonel, 303
Bailey, Mr., Editor of the _Dumfries Herald and Courier_, 106
Bailey, Mr. William, letters to, 109-127;
letter from, to the Duke of Westminster, 111
Barley, Hessian fly on, 132 (Fig.)
Barnes Cottage, 7
Barnesville, 7
“Bat beetle,” _see_ _Harpalus ruficornis_
Bath and West of England Society Show, Misses Ormerod’s insect cases
and diagrams at, 283, 284
Bathurst’s, Mr., paper on “Orchards,” 273-274
Bean-beetle, _see_ _Bruchus_
Beans and peas attacked by Eel-worms, 304
Bean-seed weevil—sad-coloured _(Bruchus tristis)_;
red-footed _(B. rufipes)_;
red-horned _(B. brachialis)_, 271, _see_ _Bruchus_
Beans infested with beetles, 269, 270
Beaufort, Duke of, 7
Becker, Miss Lydia, as an upholder of “Women’s Rights,” 86
Beckett, Edmund, Lord Grimthorpe, 91, _see_ Grimthorpe
Bee, Mason, 174
Beet carrion beetle, _see_ _Silpha opaca_, 142, 220
Beetles in the Argentine territories, 222
Beetles (water), killing of, 54
Bethnal Green Museum, connection with, 87
Bethune, Rev. Dr., letters to, 73, 90, 213, 227-231
Bigge, General and Mrs., 298
Biographical sketch of Miss Ormerod, by the Editor, 73
_Bipalium kewense_, a land planarian, 192 (Fig.)
Birth, childhood, and education, Miss Ormerod’s, 1
Black-currant gall mite, 153, 154, 155, 156, 177, _see_ _Phytoptus_
Bladder or pocket plums, 176 (Fig.)
Bodleian Library, 58
Bolivar’s, Señor Don Igo, assistance on locust specimens, 218
“Bone Bed,” the Aust, 40
Books, lending of, 29
Boot beetle, _see_ _Anobium paniceum_
Boot-upper injured by beetle, 254 (Fig.)
Bos, Dr. Ritzema, 79, 131, 132, 156, 189, 204, 296;
letters to, 232-237
_Botanical Magazine_, drawings for, 74
Botfly, the, _see_ Hypoderma
“Bottle-nosed whale,” or dolphin, capture of, 38, 39
Bradwall Hall, Cheshire, 11
Brauer’s, Dr., frontispiece to his “_Œstridæ_,” 149, 150
Breathing tubes of maggot, of ox warble fly, &c., 112 (Fig.)
Breeze flies, _see_ _Tabanidæ_
Brighton, Miss Ormerod refers to taking a villa at, 264, 266
_Bruchus_, the pea and bean Weevil, 268, _rufimanus_, &c., 269 (Fig.)
270, 271, _see_ Bean-seed weevil
Bruner, Lawrence, Locust Investigation Commission Report, 229
_Bryobia prætiosa_, gooseberry and ivy red spider, 220, 221 (Fig.)
Buckland, Frank, on “Putts,” 37, 327, 328
Buckler, Mr. William, 107
Buckton, G. B., on _Aphides_, 79, 80
Bunbury Parish, work done by schoolboys of, 111
Burd, Rev. Percy, 29
Burdett-Coutts, Baroness, letters from, 214
Bury, Lancashire, 9
Buttington, battle of, 23
=C=
Cabbage green fly, 101
Caddis fly, _see_ _Mormonia nigromaculata_, 152
Caddis worms attacking water-cresses, 151, 152, 282
Cadelle, the, _see_ _Trogosita_
Caerwent, 7, 174
_Calandra (Sitophilus) granaria_, granary weevil, 191, 262 (Fig.), 267;
_C. oryzæ_, 262
Calwer’s “_Käferbuch_,” 270
“Canadian Entomologist,” quoted, 202, 211, 223
Canadian friends, Miss Ormerod’s, 73
Cauvin’s Hospital, Editor’s Lecture at, 289
_Cecidomyia destructor_, Hessian fly, 129, 131 (Fig.), 132, 143, 147,
182;
_C. tritici_, 131;
_C. leguminicola_, 198
_Cecidomyia (Diplosis) equestris_, 137
Centipede and millipede, 143 (Fig.)
_Cephenomyia rufibarbis_, Red-bearded botfly, 149, 150, 151
_Cephus pygmæus_, Corn sawfly, 147 (Fig.)
_Cerostoma xylostella_, Curtis, _see_ _Plutella cruciferarum_
_Ceuthorhynchus contractus_, Charlock weevil, 130 (Fig.)
Chapel of St. Tecla, dimensions, 34, ruins, Pl. x
_Charæas graminis_, Antler moth, 104, 105 (Fig.), 185, 284
Charlock weevil, _see_ _Ceuthorhynchus contractus_
Charlotte, Princess, “the people’s darling,” death of, 6
Chartist Rising, 47-52;
map of district, Pl. xv
Cheese-fly, _see_ _Piophila casei_, 125 (Fig.)
_Cheimatobia brumata_, 121, 146, 183
Chepstow, 15, 30, 33, 43, 53, Pl. xvii
Chepstow Bridge, Pl. xiii
Chepstow Castle, Pls. ix., xvi.
Chepstow Parish Church, Plate vi.
Cheshire, _see_ Chester
Chest, oak, from Hulgreve Hall, 58, Pl. xviii
Chester, Dr. Ormerod’s “History of the County Palatine and City,” 8,
13, 58
Chinese Minister Plenipotentiary, 307
Chinese naturalist and Miss Ormerod, 75
Chittenden’s, Mr., paper on Household Insects, 266
_Chlorops tæniopus_, Meigen, Gout fly, 132, 133 (Fig.), 147
Choate, Mr., meeting with, 193;
characteristics, 297
_Chrysops cæcutiens_, small blinding breeze fly, 136 (Fig.)
Church customs, old, 23
_Cidaria dotata_, Linn., spinach moth, 231 (Fig.)
Clayden, ancestral oak at, 121
Cleg, or small rain breeze fly, _Hæmatopota pluvialis_, 136 (Fig.)
Clergy, old local, 27
Cliviger township, 8
Clothing Club, 30
Clover-stem sickness, 226, 282
Club-root, Anbury, or Finger and toe, 196, 213
_Coccinella bipunctata_, 2-spotted lady-bird;
_C. septempunctata_, 7-spotted lady-bird, 234 (Fig.);
_C. ocellata_, eyed lady-bird, 237 (Fig.)
Cockchafer beetle and grubs, _Melolontha vulgaris_, 209, 233 (Fig.),
277, block, 280
Codlin moth, prevention, 277
Coleman & Sons, Messrs. W. J., letters to, 177
Collection of specimens of injurious insects, 87
“Common Fly Attacks to Farm Stock,” by Miss Ormerod, 304
Conger eels, 35
Connold, Mr. Ed. T., letters to, 175, 241
Contribution, Miss Ormerod’s first, to scientific literature, 59
Contributions, Miss Ormerod’s recognition of, 62, 66
Copleston, Bishop, 15
Copper, arsenite and arseniate of, 201
Cormorants, 35
Corn fly, Ribbon-footed, _see_ _Chlorops tæniopus_
Corn sawfly, 147
Correggios, “Marriage of St. Catherine,” 16
Correspondence, steadiness of, Miss Ormerod’s, 78, 79, letters, 97
Cosby, Sir Henry, 7
_Cossus ligniperda_, Goat moth, 268 (Fig.)
County dinner party, formality of, 15
Courage, Miss Ormerod’s, 92-94
Coussmaker, Colonel, letters to, 99-104
Cranefly (Daddy longlegs), _Tipula_, 64, 284
Crawford, Mr. Frazer, of Adelaide, 210
Croft, Sir Richard, 6
Cross-fertilisation (multiple), 298
_Cryptorhynchus lapathi_, L., mottled willow weevil, 267
Crystal oil, 181
_Cucujus testaceus_, 263
Currant and gooseberry scale, _Lecanium ribis_, 214 (Fig.)
Currant, black and red, 156, 157
Curtis, John, “Farm Insects,” 63, 276;
work, &c., 184
Cutworms, or caterpillars of the dart or turnip moth, 100, 101 (Fig.)
_Cynips_ galls, 177
=D=
Daddy longlegs, _see_ _Tipula_
Dalquhairn, Holm of, 105
Damsons, curiously formed, 175
Danysz’s, J., paper on _Ephestia_ (Flour moth), 216
Dart or turnip moth, _see_ _Agrotis segetum_
Darwinianism, 276
Darwinism, 335
Davis, Professor Ainsworth, translation of Ritzema Bos’s _Agricultural
Zoology_, 222
Dean, Forest of, lawlessness in, 38
Death, Miss Ormerod’s, letters in prospect of, 325
Deer forest fly, _see_ _Lipoptera cervi_
Deer warble fly, _see_ _Hypoderma diana_
Degrees and medals, Miss Ormerod’s, 95, _see_ LL.D.
Dell & Son’s information, 275
Diagrams, Miss G. Ormerod’s, 88;
coloured, published by R.A.S.E., 99
Diamond-back moth, _see_ _Plutella cruciferarum_
_Dicranura vinula_, Linn., 103 (Fig.)
Diptera, Westwood’s use of “_Insecta Britannica—Diptera_,” 136
Dipterous parasites, 107
Dogs as message-bearers, 11;
Miss Ormerod’s adventures with, 92
Dolphin, Bottle-nosed (_Delphinus tursio_), 38
Druce’s, Mr., proposed vote of congratulation, 300
Drawings and water-colours, set of Dr. George Ormerod’s, 298, 300, 301
Dunn, Malcolm, assistance of, 61
Dunnock, the hedge-sparrow, _Accentor modularis_, 162
Durobrivian ware, 8
Dyer, Professor Bernard, as a helper, 200
_Dytiscus marginalis_, water beetle, 54, 124 (Fig.)
=E=
Earwig, _see_ _Forficula_
Edinburgh University, bequest to, 283, 284, 285;
text-book for, 303;
Miss Ormerod appointed external examiner in Agricultural Entomology,
123
Eel-worms, 186, 198, 282, 304
Electros bought from Messrs. Blackie & Son, 63
Elliot & Fry’s portraits, 300
Elm-bark beetle, _see_ _Scolytus destructor_, 169, 170 (Fig.)
Entomological Society of Ontario, 73
Entomological Societies, Miss Ormerod’s communications with, 78
Entomologist, consulting, to the Royal Agricultural Society of England,
75
Entomology, Miss Ormerod beginning the study of, 53;
first step in, 2;
lectures on, in Edinburgh, 279
Entomology, economic, progress of, 206
_Ephestia kuhniella_, Zell, 180, 198, 202, 212, 262, 263
Evans, Mrs., 91
Evesham Committee work, 204
Evolution, Professor Riley on, 335
Exhibition in the Palace of Industry, Paris, August, 1868, 54
_Exoascus pruni_, Professor Marshall Ward on, 175
_Exorista lota_, parasite of Lepidoptera, 107
=F=
Family dispersal, 56
“Famine in India,” by Wallace, 308
“Farm Insects,” by Curtis, 184
“Farm Pests,” leaflets on, 65
Farm stock, fly attacks on, 65, 304
Fernald, Dr., 187
Ferry, Old Passage, 38, 44, 45, 50
Fielding, Copley, 16
Finger and toe, _see_ _Plasmodiophora brassicæ_
“Flacherie,” the, 106, 107, 186
Flatworm, 192
“Flax-seeds,” 131, 142, 197
Fletcher, Dr., 188;
letters to, 77, 116, 195-227
“Flies injurious to Stock,” Miss Ormerod’s, 65, 305
Flour beetle, rust-red, _see_ _Tribolium ferrugineum_
Flour infestation, 69, 179, 191, 220, 261, 263, 266
“Flowering,” or Palm, Sunday, 25
Fly weevil (U.S.A.), 188
Font (leaden) at Llancaut, 20;
at Tidenham, Pl. vii
Fonts (leaden), A. C. Fryer’s paper on, in _Archæol. Journal_, 20
Foot, Hippoboscal, Pls. xxiii., xxiv.
Forest fly, 65, 133, 134 (Fig.), 138, 139, 304
Forest flies, Indian, 224
Forest Hundreds, 33
Forest of Dean, 33
Forest Peninsula, 33, 34
“Forestry,” text-book of, proposed, 227, 303
_Forficula minor_, Linn. (Earwig) 189 (Fig.)
“Formalin,” 220
_Formica fuliginosa_, 138, 139
Forshaw and Hawkins, Messrs., 266
Fowler (Canon) on _Helophorus rugosus_, 108, 267
Fream, Dr., references to, 203, 208, 279, 281, 282, 298, 305, 317
Frost and other leaders of the Chartist rising in Monmouth, 47-52
Fruitgrowers’ Convention, 206
_Fucus serratus_, 34
Fuller, Mr., 267;
letters to, 257
=G=
Gadflies (_Tabanidæ_), 118, 137, 138, 304, 306
Gamma or silver moth, 178 (Fig.)
Gardener, an old, on Miss Ormerod’s work, 75
“Gardeners’ Chronicle,” 54, 55, 276
“Gardeners’ Friends and Foes,” series of diagrams, 88
Garton course of lectures, Edinburgh University, 118, 208
Garton, John, 298, 303
Gas lime as a top dressing, 195
_Gastropacha quercifolia_, Linn., 158
_Gastrophilus equi_, Fab., 117 (Fig.), 118, 305
Gawsworth, Cheshire, 12
Generosity, Dr. Lipscomb on Miss Ormerod’s, 94
_Geophilus longicornis_, Centipede, 235 (Fig.)
George, A. W., letter to, 174
Gibbs, Sir Brandreth, 76
Gilbert, Sir Henry and Lady, 298
Gnat midge, _see_ _Cecidomyia leguminicola_
Goat moth, _see_ _Cossus ligniperda_
Golynrode, 10
Goodall on _Tabanidæ_, 138
Gooseberry red spider, _see_ _Bryobia prætiosa_
Gout fly, _see_ _Chlorops tæniopus_
Grain beetles, _see_ _Calandra (Sitophilus) granaria_
Granary weevil, _see_ _Calandra granaria_
Grant, Sir Ludovic, 96, 291, 303
Grease-banding, 207, 277
Grease-proof paper, 277
Great ash-bark beetle, 172 (Fig.)
Great midge, “red maggot of,” 137
Great ox gad fly, 135, 136
Great tortoiseshell butterfly, _see_ _Vanessa polychloros_
Grimshaw, Percy H., 108;
letters from, 149, 151
Grimthorpe, Lord, letter from, 297, 298, 308
Grouse fly, _see_ _Ornithomyia_
“Guide to the Methods of Insect Life,” Miss Ormerod’s, 81, 85
Gulls, _see_ _Larus ridibundus_ and _L. canus_
=H=
Hacking, 10
_Hæmatobia connicola_, 213
_Hæmatopota pluvialis_, 136
“Hair-worms,” 225
“Handbook of Orchard Fruits,” Miss Ormerod’s, 303
Hargreaves, Col. John, 8
Harker, Professor Allen, references to, 79, 80, 201, 277, 278, 279, 281
_Harpalus ruficornis_, Bat beetle, 223 (Fig.)
Hartwell, Miss, Miss Ormerod’s private secretary, 88, 280, 289, 291
Heart-and-dart moth, _see_ _Agrotis exclamationis_
Heather “frosted,” 149
_Helophorus rugosus_, 108
Henry VI. Coronation, 58, Pl. xviii
Hessian fly, 74, 129, 131, 132, 142, 143, 147, 148, 182, _see_
_Cecidomyia destructor_;
Miss Ormerod on, 86
_Heterodera schachtii_, 186;
_H. radicicola_, Müller, 213 (Fig.)
Hibernation of insects, 226
“Hill-grub,” the, 104, 105 (Fig.)
_Hippobosca equina_, 133, 134, 136, 137, 138, 140, 265 (foot of fly,
Pls. xxiii., xxiv.);
_H. maculata_, 139
Hippoboscid on a lamb, 264
Hooker, Sir Joseph and Lady, 73, 74
Hoopoe, the, 139
Hop aphis, 206
Hope Professorship of Zoology at Oxford, 215
Hops, nettle-headed, 237
Hornet, capture of, 92
“Hornet Clearwing,” _Trochilium (= Sesia) bembeciforme_, 103
Horse bot fly, _Gastrophilus equi_, Fab., 117 (Fig.), 118, 305
Horses’ illness after eating locust-infested lucerne, 228, 229
Horticultural Society (Royal), collection of injurious insects, 55
Howard, Dr. L. O., letters to and from, 184-194, 295, 297
Hulgreve Hall, 58
Hunt, the artist, 16
Huntspill, Somerset, 10
Huxley, Professor, 78;
letters from, 85, 88
_Hybernia defoliaria_, 146
Hydrophobia, strange treatment for, 45
_Hylesinus crenatus_ (large ash-bark beetle), 172 (Fig.), 173, 302;
tunnels, 173 (Fig.)
_Hylesinus fraxini_, ash-bark beetle, 171, 174;
tunnels, 171 (Fig.)
_Hylurgus piniperda_, pine beetle, 263
_Hymenoptera_, 174
_Hypoderma__bovis_ and _H. diana_, 150;
_H. lineata_, 116;
_H._ or _œstrus_ experiments, 183
=I=
_Icerya purchasi_, 79
_Ichthyosaurus_, 41
Index to Reports, 64, 191
“Indian Agriculture,” Wallace’s, 275
Inscription on Llancaut font, 22
“Insect Life,” 201, 267
Insect, Professor Westwood’s definition of, 84
“Insects Injurious to Forest Trees,” 302;
“to Orchard and Bush Fruit,” 274;
“to Stored Grain,” 191
Isleworth, 73;
meteorology, 80
=J=
Jablonowski, Prof. Jos., on _Phytoptus ribis_, 156;
letters to, 156
Jacobite officers, 11
Janson’s reports, Mr. Oliver E., 71, 72, 200, 283;
letters to, 259-271
Jenkins, Mr. H. M., Secretary R.A.S.E., 76
Johnson, Thomas, survivors of the children of, 11
_Julus guttatus_ (= _pulchellus_), Leach;
_J. londinensis_;
_J. terrestris_, 143 (Fig.)
_Juncus articulatus_, the flowering heads of, or “spret,” 104
=K=
Ked or Kade, _see_ _Melophagus ovinus_
Kerosene as an insecticide, 120, 181, 220
Kew Gardens, 73, 86
King and Queen, 122
King George and King James, toasts to, 11
Kingston Park, old name of Sedbury Park, 7
Knox, John, quotation from, 110
=L=
_Labia minor_, Leach, 189 (Fig.)
Lady-bird, Australian, 334
Lady-bird, _see_ _Coccinella_
_Læmophlœus ferrugineus_, 263
Lamarckism, 335
_Lamellicornes_, beetle grubs of the, 277
Languages, Miss Ormerod’s knowledge of, 78
Lappet Moth, _see_ _Gastropacha quercifolia_, Linn.
_Larus ridibundus_ and _L. canus_, 105
Latham, Diana, on Sedbury, 14-19
Latham, John, M.D., 12, Pl. iv, 57
Latham, Peter Mere, 13, 57
_Lathyrus_ (White), 221
“Leaden Fonts,” 20;
Alfred C. Fryer on, 20
“Leafage caterpillars,” 146
_Lecanium ribis_, Fitch, 214
Lecture at Institute of Agriculture, South Kensington, Miss Ormerod’s,
84;
at London Farmers’ Club, 102
Lecturer, Miss Ormerod as a, on Economic Entomology, at Royal College,
Cirencester, 83
Lectures, ten, by Miss Ormerod, on “Orders of Insects,” 85
Lee-chee (lichi) orchards, 308
Legal experiences, samples of Miss Ormerod’s, 69
_Lepidoptera_, American lists of, 181
Lesser earwig, _Forficula minor_, 189 (Fig.), 261
Lesson book for village schools, 207
Letter or letters from William Bailey, 102;
Dr. Ritzema Bos, 296;
Dr. Fream, 298;
Lord Grimthorpe, 296;
Sir Joseph Hooker, 87;
L. O. Howard, 295, 297;
T. H. Huxley, 85;
J. A. Lintner, 81-82;
Dr. R. S. MacDougall, 295;
Sir William Muir, 301;
Rev. Prof. Taylor, 310;
Professor Wallace, 287-293;
J. O. Westwood, 81
Letter or letters to William Bailey, 109-127;
Rev. C. J. S. Bethune, 227-231;
Dr. Ritzema Bos, 232-237;
Messrs. Coleman, 177-178;
E. T. Connold, 175-177;
Colonel Coussmaker, 99-104;
Dr. J. Fletcher, 195-227;
Claude Fuller, 257;
A. W. George, 174;
D. D. Gibb, 128-148;
P. H. Grimshaw, 149-151;
L. O. Howard, 184-194;
C. P. Lounsbury, 252-257;
Rev. John Martin, 169-174;
J. C. Medd, 271-274;
Dr. A. Nalepa, 247-252;
Dr. E. Reuter, 244-247;
Dr. W. M. Schöyen, 237-243;
Robert Service, 106-8;
W. B. Tegetmeier, 159-168;
Professor Wallace, 275-325;
C. D. Wise, 151-159
Letters, destruction of, 97
_Leucania unipunctata_, 185
Lias, frontage of, 40, 41
“Licked” beef, 116
_Limnæa truncatula_, 144
_Limnephilus flavicornis_, 152
Lindeman, Dr., 197, 209, 212, 263
Lintner, Dr., 207;
letters from, 81, 82
_Lipoptera cervi_, Von Siebold and Loew, 140 (Fig.), 141 (Fig.), 180,
259, 265
_Lipoptera_ or _Lipoptena_, confusion between, 140
Lipscomb, Dr. Eustace, 194, 290, 293, 294, 322, 324;
on benefits of Miss Ormerod’s work, 75
_Lithobius forficatus_, “thirty-foot,” 235
Little, Professor Herbert, 76, 110, 279
Llancaut Church, 21, Pl. viii
LL.D. of Edinburgh University, 95, 193, 287, 289;
letters on, 294-297
Loch Dungeon, 104
Locust, capture of a strange, 53
Locust, South American migratory, _see_ _Schistocerca paranensis_
(Fig.)
Locusts, 144, 214, 218, 229
London, annual visit to, 16
London Farmers’ Club, lectures, 102, 299;
request, 110;
resolution, 300
London-purple, 183, 205
“Loopers,” 121, 146
Lords of Committee of Education invite Miss Ormerod to advise them, 87
Loudon’s “Arboretum,” 103
Lounsbury, C. P., 118, 187;
letters to and from, 193, 252
Loyalty, Miss Ormerod’s, 94
“Lyde, the,” 35
Lyell, Sir Charles, on the Aust “Bone Bed,” 40
=M=
“Mabie Moss,” _nom de plume_ of R. Service, 104, 106
MacDougall, Dr., 227, 291, 295, 302, 303;
as a colleague, 302, 303, 307, 317, 322, 323
Magpie moth, Currant and gooseberry, _see_ _Abraxas grossulariata_
Mail coach, Pls. xii., xiv.
Mails, the Newport, 50
Man, Dr. de, 79
Mangold attacked by _Atomaria linearis_, 230
“Manual of Injurious Insects,” Miss Ormerod’s, 65, 276, 300
Martin, Rev. John, letters to, 169-174
Mayer, Rev. Peter, 12
McEwan Hall, the, 292
Meade, Mr., of Bradford, 107, 205
Medals and Miss Ormerod’s other public distinctions, 95;
key to, 98, Pl. xxii
Medd, Mr., 259;
letters to, 271-274;
letter to on the Warble question, 116
Mediterranean flour moth, _see_ _Ephestia kuhniella_
_Melolontha vulgaris_, cockchafer
209, 233 (Fig.)
_Melophagus ovinus_, Linn., 141 (Fig.)
_Mermis_, 186;
_albicans_, 106
_Merodon narcissi_, Fab., 157, 158
_Meromyza_, 276
Meteorological observations at Isleworth, 80;
station, Pl. xx
_Miana_, 186
_Micrococcus bombycis_, 106
Midge, great, 137
Mik, Professor, on _Tabanidæ_, 20, 138;
on Deer Forest fly, 261;
decease of, 271
Mill Moth, _see_ _Ephestia kuhniella_
Millepede, 143 (Fig.)
Mite, _see_ _Phytoptus_
Modelling in plaster of Paris, Miss Ormerod’s taste for, 95
Moles at strawberry roots, 153
Morris, Little and Son’s emulsion, 121
_Mormonia nigromaculata_, 152 (Fig.)
Mosley’s models and figures of insects, 279
Mottled Umber moth, _see_ _Hybernia defoliaria_
Muir, Sir William, 284, 285, 298;
letter from, 301
Murray, Mr. Andrew, secretary, Royal Horticultural Society, 75
Murray, Mr. John, xx, 315, 319, 325
Murtfeldt, Miss, 256
Music, Miss Ormerod’s knowledge of, 95
Mustard beetle, _see_ _Phædon betulæ_
=N=
Nalepa, Dr., letters to, 247;
on the _Phytoptidæ_, 155, 218;
publications of, 176
Narcissus fly, 157
“Nature Knowledge,” 306
“Nature Study,” Mr. Medd’s, 259
Needlework, Miss Ormerod’s skill in, 95
Newman, Mr. T. P., 309, 325
Newstead, Mr. Robert, 64, 68, 84, 310
_Niptus hololeucus_, 262
Nixon, Mr., 145
Norman’s microscopic slides, Mr., 264, 265, 267
Nostril fly, of sheep, 304
=O=
Oak, “Ap Adam,” and “Hedgehog,” Pl. xxi, 93
Oak-leaf roller moth, _Tortrix viridana_, 145
Oak-leaf seaweed _(Delesseria)_, 39
Oak-trees injured by caterpillars, 222
Observations, Miss Ormerod’s arrangement of, 60, 61
_Œstridæ_, 118, 283
_œstrus ovis_, 76 (Fig.)
“Offa’s Dyke,” 18
Oilcakes and granary weevil, 262
_Oligotrophus alopecuri_, 244
Ontario Entomological Society, 73
“Orchard and bush fruits, Handbook of insects injurious to,” Miss
Ormerod’s, 229
Orchard growers, experimental committee of, 183
Ormerod, Arthur, 57;
the M.D., 291
Ormerod, Charlotte Anne, 8
Ormerod, E. L., M.D., author of “British Social Wasps,” 9, 57, 93
Ormerod, Eleanor Anne, birth, childhood, and education, 1-6;
fondness for animals, 7;
religious experiences, 27;
biographical sketch, 73-97;
courage, 92-93;
kindness to servants, 94;
medals, 97;
death, 325;
retirement, 328;
portraits, frontispiece, Pls. xx., xxix.
Ormerod, George, D.C.L., LL.D., author of “History of the County
Palatine and City of Chester,” 8, 11, 18, 19, 23, 28, 53, 56, 57,
Pls. ii., iii., xxx.
Ormerod, Mrs. George, 3, Pl. iii
Ormerod, Georgiana, 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 16, 17, 18, 30, 73, Pl. xxvii
Ormerod, Rev. G. T. B., 57
Ormerod, Henry Mere, 34, 58
Ormerod, John Arderne, 13, 57
Ormerod, Laurence, 8
Ormerod, Oliver, 9
Ormerod, Thomas Johnson, 57
Ormerod, Wareing, 58
Ormerod, William, 57
Ormerod demesne and mansion, 8, Pl. xxviii
Ormerod family, descent from Edward I., 13;
branches of, 8-9;
dispersal of, 56
_Ornithomyia avicularia_, Linn. (Grouse fly), 264, 265 (Fig.)
_Osmia_ (Mason bee), 174
Ostrich parasite, 196
“Our Programme” leaflet, 272
Owen, Professor Richard, report on an _Ichthyosaurus_, 41
Oxford, Port Fellowship, 13, 57;
Tractarian Movement, 28
=P=
_Padina Pavonea_, 39
Palm Sunday or “Flowering Sunday,” 25
“Papist,” “The picture of a,” 10
Paraffin, 181
Parasites of _Lepidoptera_, 107, 108
Parasites of silkworm, 106
“Parentalia,” Dr. George Ormerod’s, 9, 13
“Paris-green,” 153, 183, 201;
as an insecticide, 203, 204, 205, 206;
pamphlets on, 207, 208
_Passer domesticus_, 159, 160 (Fig.), 188
_Passer montanus_, 162 ( Fig.)
Pea-weevil, _see_ _Sitones_
Peacock seaweed _(Padina pavonea)_, 39
Pension proposed for Miss Ormerod, 322
_Phædon betulæ_, 215 (Fig.)
Philips, Sir Thomas, mayor of Newport, 50
Photographs of Miss Ormerod, 227, 300, 302
_Phylloxera_, 155, 210
_Phytoptidæ_, 250
_Phytoptus galls_, 177
_Phytoptus pyri_, 249 (Fig.)
_Phytoptus ribis_, 153, 156, 251 (Fig.)
Pillischer’s preparations, 261
Pine beetle attack, 263, 264, 285
_Piophila casei_, Linn., 125 (Fig.), 256, 265
Plagiarism, prevention of, 62
Plan of work, Miss Ormerod’s, 78, 90
_Plasmodiophora brassicæ_, 213
Plum-wood, Shot-borers from, 200
_Plusia gamma_, Linn., 178 (Fig.)
_Plutella cruciferarum_, 130, 210, 211 (Fig.)
_Polydesmus complanatus_, 143 (Fig.)
Port Fellowship, Brasenose College, 13, 57
“Post-horn” beetle attack, 224
Potter, Professor M. C., 144
“Proceedings of the Convention of Fruit Growers,” 206
_Ptinus_, 263
Pupation of butterflies, 334
“Puritan,” “The picture of a,” 10
Puss moth, _see_ _Dicranura vinula_
Putcher for catching salmon, 36, 327, 328
“Putts” or “putchers,” 36 (Fig.)
_Pyrethrum_, 216
=Q=
“Quasi Cursores,” Hole’s, 308, 311
=R=
Rabies, an instance of, 92
Railway travelling, 46
Rassam, Mr. Hormuzd, 205
Red-currant mite, 157 _see_ _Phytoptus_
Redenhall-cum-Harleston, 57
“Red spider,” 145, 221 (Fig.), 300
Redwater “tick,” 193
Reports (annual), plan of preparations, 78;
discontinued, 66
_Retinia buoliana_, “Post-Horn,” 224
Reuter, Dr., letters to, 244
_Ribes nigrum_, 156
_Ribes rubrum_, 157
Rice weevil, _see_ _Calandra oryzæ_
Riley, Professor, 78, 80;
letters to, 179-184;
resignation of, 221, 223;
sketch of, 332, app.
Ritzema Bos, _see_ Bos
Roberts, Margaret, 17
Roman coins found near the Severn Cliffs, 174;
military station, 7;
pottery, 8, 174;
Pl xi.
Rothamsted, 203, 217, 298
Roundell, Charles, the “Rural Reader,” 273
Rural Economy, Sibthorpian Professor of, at Oxford, 225
“Ruricola,” _nom de plume_ of J. Curtis, 184
Rust-red flour beetle, _see_ _Tribolium ferrugineum_
=S=
Saddle fly, _Cecidomyia (Diplosis) equestris_, 137 (Fig.)
St. Bartholomew’s Hospital, 57
_Salix caprea_, 103
Salmon fishing on the Severn, 36
Samian cup, 175
San José scale, _see_ _Aspidiotus perniciosus_
Sap-wood beetle, _see_ _Scolytus pruni_
Saurian remains, 41, Pl. xi
Scale insects, 242, 257
Scarabæid beetles (rare), 222
Schaŭmerde, a sugar by-product, 236
“Scheele’s-green,” 201
_Schistocerca paranensis_, 229 (Fig.)
_Schizoneura lanigera_, Hausm, American blight, 142, 143, 144 (Fig.)
Schools, coloured diagrams for elementary, 99;
_see_ Diagrams
Schöyen, Dr., letters to, 237-239;
notes on wasps from, 218
Science and Art Department, invited to help, 87;
diagrams for, 88;
official plagiarism, 88
_Scolytus destructor_, Oliv., 169, 170 (Fig.);
_S. pruni_, Ratz., 270, 271 (Fig.)
Seaweeds, 39
Sedbury Park, 7, 14-19;
reminiscences of, 15;
routine of life at, 17, Pl. i
Servants, Miss Ormerod’s kindly treatment of, 94
Service, Mr. Robert, letter to, 99;
notes by, 104, 105
_Sesia bembeciformis_, _see_ _Trochilium_
Seth, Professor, letter from, 303
Severn and Wye, the, 33, Pl. ix
Severn, cliffs, Pl. x;
colour of, 35, 41;
shipping of, 36
“Shag” or “Chog,” 197
Sheep spider fly, or “ked,” 141 (Fig.);
nostril fly, 304, 305;
_see_ _Melophagus_
“Sheep Scab,” paper on, 299, 306
Shell-(snail)-slug, 191 (Fig.), 192
Shells, Miss Georgiana Ormerod’s love for, 3
Shot-borer, _see_ _Xyleborus dispar_
Signoret’s, Dr., opinion, 79
Silk, moths injuring, 219
_Silpha opaca_, Linn., 142 (Fig.)
_Silphidæ_, 219
“Silver-top” wheat, 197
Simpson, Mr. Wm., letter from, 72
_Sirex juvencus_, 81;
_S. gigas_, 81
_Sitones_ (pea-weevil), 226
_Sitophilus granarius_, 262;
_S. oryzæ_, 262
_Sitotroga (Gelechia) cerealella_, 188
“Slime” fungus, 213
Smirke, Sir Robert, 7
Smith and Co.’s flour, Messrs., 266
Smith, John B., 257
Smith, Sir Robert Murdoch, reference to, 284
Snail-slug, 191 (Fig.), 192
Snellen, Mr., on “Great” and “Small” tortoiseshell butterflies, 131
Sparrow, Hedge, 162
Sparrow, House, _Passer domesticus_, 160-168, 160 (Fig.)
Sparrow leaflet, 163, 166, 167, 225;
extract from, 164
“Sparrow, Spare the,” 165
“Sparrow, The House,” Tegetmeier’s, 167, 168
Sparrow, Tree, _Passer montanus_, 162 (Fig.)
Sparrows, repeal of laws in America protecting, 161
“Spider” fly, 304
“Spinach moth,” 231
“Splint,” a sap-wood beetle, _Scolytus pruni_, 271 (Fig.)
Sprayers, 208
Spret, _Juncus articulatus_, 104
St. Alban’s Show, Prince and Princess of Wales at, 123;
exhibit for, 123
Stebbing, E. P., 307
Stein, or Hartman quoted by Stein, 260
Stem eel-worms, 209 (Fig.)
Steven lecturer, on Agricultural Entomology in Edinburgh University,
282, _see_ Fream, Dr.
Stewart’s, Prince Charles, march to Manchester, 10
St. Petersburg International Exhibition, 19
Stock flies, 304, 307
Strathconan Deer Forest flies, 260, 261
Strawberries, moles at, 153;
eel-worms at, 204;
beetles at, 223
Strigul, ancient name of Chepstow, 8
“Strigulensia,” George Ormerod’s, 7, 21
Subpœna, a, 69
Sufferings, political, of “Tyldesley” in 1745, 10
=T=
_Tabanidæ_, 138, 141, 145, 150
_Tabanus autumnalis_, 136;
_bovinus_, Linn., 135 (Fig.), 136
_Tachina_ fly, 106;
larvæ, 186
Taschenberg’s, Dr., “Die Praktische Insektenkunde,” 277
Taylor, Dr., 284;
letter from, 310
Tecla, St., chapel of, 33
Tegetmeier, Mr., letters to, 159-168
_Tenebrioides mauritanicus_, 70
Teriacus, Tecla, or Treacle, Saint, 33
_Testacella haliotidea_, Draparnaud, shell-slug, 191 (Fig.), 192
Texas fever, 193, 257
Thackeray, death of Mrs., 6
“Thrips,” 185, 197
Thursby, John Ormerod Scarlett, 9
Thursby, Rev. William, 9
Thursby, Sir John Hardy, 9
_Thysanoptera_, 185
Ticks causing “redwater,” 193, 257
Tidenham church, 18, 21, 22, 24, 25, 26, 29, Pl. vii
Timberman beetle, 224 (Fig.)
Time-table, mail coach, 44
Tintern Abbey, Pl. v
_Tipula_, daddy longlegs or crane fly, 64, 284
Toasts of the rival kings, 11
Toddington Experimental Committee, 201, 203, 204, 207, 248, 277, 333
Tomato root-knot eel-worm, 213 (Fig.), 214
Torquay, 73
Torrington House, St. Albans, 19, 73, Pl. xix;
an “at home” at, 86
Tortoiseshell butterflies, 129, 131
_Tortrix viridana_, 145 (Fig.), 146
Townhead Farm, Closeburn, Dumfriesshire, 104
Transportation of wingless females by winged males, 183
Travelling in olden times, 43-46
Treacle, or Tryacle, Island, 33
_Tribolium ferrugineum_, Fab., 70, 72, 266 (Fig.)
Trinity College School, Port Hope, Canada, destruction of by fire, 227
_Triton cristatus_, Miss Ormerod’s paper on, 59
_Trochilium bembeciforme_, 103
_Trogosita mauritanica_, 70, 72
Trout crammed with “hill-grub,” 105
“Tulip root,” 65, 209 (Fig.)
Turnip caterpillars, 101;
fly or flea beetle, 76;
mud beetle (_Helophorus rugosus_), 108;
saw fly, 211
Tyldesley, 1, 7, 10
_Tylenchus devastatrix_, 79, 190, 209 (Fig.);
attacking clover, 226
=V=
_Vanessa polychloros_, Great Tortoiseshell butterfly, 129 (Fig.), 130,
186
“Venus” shells, 40
Verney, Sir Harry, 121
Verrall’s List of British Diptera, 157
Vere Street Chapel, London, preachers at, 26, 27
Voelcker, Dr. A., on gas lime, 195
Voles, report on, 104
=W=
Wales, Prince and Princess of, 123, 124
Wallace, Professor, an ally and friend, 227;
letters to, 275-325
Wallace, Dr. Quintin, M.A., death of, 281
Warble fly, _see_ _Hypoderma bovis_
Ward, Mr., 125
Warington, Professor, Sibthorpian lecturer, 225, 298
Wasps, 17, 218, 220, 273
“Wasps, British Social,” by Dr. E. L. Ormerod, 93
Wasp’s nest, 241 (Fig.)
Watercresses attacked by Caddis worms, 151, 282
Waterloo, news of battle of, 31
Waterloo Station, accident at, 77
“Water moth,” _see_ _Mormonia nigromaculata_
Water-snails, 144
Weed seed for adulterating imports, 276
Weevil, _see_ _Bruchus_, injuries to bean and pea seed, 143
Weevils in flour, 72, 262
Westminster, Mr. Bailey’s correspondence with the Duke of, 111
West, Newman & Co., Messrs., 277, 302
Westwood, Professor, 78, 80, 205, 279, 280;
letter from, 81
Whalley, Whitaker’s history of, 8
Whateley, Archbishop, 27
Wheat cleaning, 275;
“silver-top” or “white eared,” 197;
wheat with Hessian fly maggot, 131 (Fig.)
Whipple’s experiment with larvæ, 211
White ants destroying cocoa trees, 268
Whitehead, Mr. Charles, 76
Wild tribes of India, 309
William IV., 1
William of Worcester quoted, 34
Willow weevil, 267
Winter moth, 146 (Fig.), traps, 183;
_see_ _Cheimatobia_
Wire worm, 206
Wise, letters to Mr., 151, 152
Woburn report on mite-galls, 157;
Experimental Fruit Grounds, 226
Wood leopard moth (_Zeuzera æsculi_), 102 (Fig.)
Woolastone, 22
Woolly aphis, 144
Work, plan of Miss Ormerod’s, 78
Writing, Miss Ormerod’s early love for, 2;
specimen of, 89
Wye, free railway passage over, 208;
map of lower valley, Pl. ix;
railway bridge on, Pl. xxvi
=X=
_Xyleborus dispar_, Fab., 182, 198, 199 (Fig.), 331 (App. D)
_Xyleborus pyri_, 198
_Xyleborus saxeseni_, 188, 263
=Y=
Yeats, Dr. John, on saurian remains, 41
=Z=
_Zeuzera æsculi_, Linn., 102 (Fig.)
Zimmermann, A., trials with “formalin,” 220
Zoology, Dr. Claus’ text-book of, 276
Zoology, Hope Professorship of, at Oxford, 280
LONDON: WEST, NEWMAN AND CO., HATTON GARDEN.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FOOTNOTES
-----
Footnote 1:
See letter to the Editor dated June 14, 1900, p. 304.
Footnote 2:
Figs. C. and D. (pp. 160 and 162) are borrowed from Yarrell’s _British
Birds_ by permission of Messrs. Gurney & Jackson.
Footnote 3:
About that period it was the practice for men who became leading
architects to undergo a thorough classical training, including a
lengthened course of practical study on the continent of Europe—the
results of which are in evidence in so many public buildings then
erected in London.
Footnote 4:
See George Ormerod’s _Strigulensia, Archæological Memoirs relating to
the district adjacent to the confluence of the Severn and Wye_ (1861).
Footnote 5:
See pp. 345, 355, 3rd edition.
Footnote 6:
See _Parentalia, Genealogical Memoirs_, by Geo. Ormerod, D.C.L.,
F.R.S., pp. 3-8, for records and evidences regarding successive
generations of the family from 1311 onwards, as existing in
Inquisitions; Pedigrees in College of Arms; Duchy Records; Clithero
Records, and other official sources quoted in the work.—(E.A.O.)
Footnote 7:
Anne, born 1739, by a first marriage, married Charles Ford.
Footnote 8:
_Hist. Ches._, vol. i. p. 43.
Footnote 9:
For details and genealogical tables of descent (accompanied by
armorial bearings) regarding the above-named families, and many others
of the old families of the Counties Palatine of Lancashire and
Cheshire, now more or less passed away, see _Parentalia_, by George
Ormerod, cited _ante_ in note, p. 9, with an absolutely enormous
amount of reference to documentary evidence, often in itself of much
antiquarian interest (E.A.O.).
Footnote 10:
The daughter of Mr. Henry Latham, resident in Italy.
Footnote 11:
Sarah Ormerod died in 1860 aged 75 years.
Footnote 12:
_Strigulensia Archæological Memoirs relating to the District adjacent
to the confluence of the Severn and the Wye_, by Geo. Ormerod, D.C.L.,
F.R.S., of Tyldesley and Sedbury Park, MDCCCLXI., pp. 84-88.
Re-arranged from a Memoir in _Archæologia_ (by above author), XXIX.,
p. 17.
Footnote 13:
Alfred C. Fryer, Ph.D., M.A., begins an admirable, fully illustrated
paper on “Leaden Fonts” in the _Archælogical Journal_, March, 1900,
with the following statements: There are 27 leaden fonts situated in
12 counties in the south, east and west of England—8 in Gloucester, 3
in Berks, 3 in Kent, 3 in Sussex, 2 in Oxford, 2 in Hereford, 1 in
Derby, 1 in Dorset, 1 in Hants, 1 in Lincoln, 1 in Norfolk and 1 in
Surrey. Several of these date from the latter part of the 11th and the
12th centuries. A few belonged to the 13th, 14th and 15th centuries,
and the latest has the date 1689 impressed upon it. They are all
tub-shaped, with the exception of two, namely, a hexagon and a
cylindrical bowl. The older fonts all possessed covers, and several
retain the markings to which the locks were attached. The deepest bowl
(outside measurement) is 16 inches. The most shallow bowl is at Parham
in Sussex, and it is only 8½ inches in depth. The diameters also vary
considerably from 32 inches to 18½ inches.—(ED.).
Footnote 14:
“And I saw in the right hand of Him that sat on the throne, a book
written within, and on the backside sealed with seven seals.”
Footnote 15:
“The Oxford Movement” or “Catholic Revival” was initiated as a result
of statutory changes in the position of the Church of Ireland, which
it was feared might ultimately be extended to England. The position
and possible danger of the Church were fully discussed in the _Tracts
for the Times_, ninety in number, issued from Oxford during the nine
years, 1833-41, and chiefly written by Newman, Keble, Pusey, Williams,
and Froude. The object of the movement was to rouse the members of the
whole Anglican Community to promote corporate reforms in the Anglican
Church as a National Institution—changes which the Evangelical Revival
of the end of the eighteenth century had failed to introduce. The line
adopted in the movement has been described as “a _via media_ between
Roman Catholicism and Reformation doctrines.” (ED.).
Footnote 16:
Afterwards Bishop of Grahamstown, Cape Colony.
Footnote 17:
My notes are taken from the copy of a plan (now before me) by my
brother Henry Mere Ormerod, solicitor, Manchester: see page 58.
Footnote 18:
The _Sailing Directions for the West Coast of England_, published by
the Hydrographic Department of the Admiralty, says:—“Depths: There is
a depth of about 46 feet in the river to Chepstow at high water
springs, and 36 feet at high water neaps.” “Tides: It is high water,
full and change, at Chepstow at 7 h. 30 m. local or 7 h. 41 m.
Greenwich time; mean springs rise 38 feet and neaps 28½ feet. The tide
has, however, been known to rise as high as 56 feet.” (E.A.O.)
Footnote 19:
See Appendix A.
Footnote 20:
See quotations in _Hist. of British Quadrupeds, including the
Cetacea_, by Thomas Bell, F.R.S., &c. pp. 469-472.
Footnote 21:
_Manual of Elementary Geology_, by Sir Charles Lyell, F.R.S., fifth
edition, 1855, pp. 337, 338.
Footnote 22:
For some years previously the possibility of transmission, at a low
rate of speed, of goods or mineral products had been established by
George and Robert Stephenson, against great opposition in some cases.
Footnote 23:
Chartism was an excited, and, in some instances, violent political
movement which occurred in Great Britain consequent upon the dire
distress and poverty of the labouring classes in the thirties of the
nineteenth century, and their disappointment with the results of the
Reform Bill of 1832. In June, 1839, a monster petition was presented
to the House of Commons with 1,280,000 names attached. Its
unsympathetic reception fanned the rebellious spirit abroad among the
working classes and led to an increase of unruly disturbances, and to
the outbreak at Newport, here described. The movement collapsed in
1848, and with the development of the industrial prosperity of the
country, largely due to the use of steam power in manufacturing
centres, and the vast improvement of the economic and social condition
of the people, together with greater political freedom, any return of
the perfectly natural, if not even justifiable, spirit of discontent
became impossible. (ED.).
Footnote 24:
_The Trial of John Frost for High Treason_ under a Special Commission
held at Monmouth, in December 1839, and January, 1840, (p. 58).
London, Saunders and Benning, Law Booksellers, 43, Fleet Street, 1840.
(E.A.O.)
Footnote 25:
_Manual of British Coleoptera, or Beetles_, published by Longmans,
Green & Co., 1839. In Miss Ormerod’s copy is a pencil note: “J.F.S.,
died 1853.”
Footnote 26:
He had resigned the Archdeaconry in 1868.
Footnote 27:
Miss Ormerod had been a contributor to scientific literature for some
years before this date. Writing in 1900 she says:—“My first regular
paper was printed in the Journal of Linn. Soc., vol. xi., No. 56,
Zoology, July 18, 1873, on _The Cutaneous Exudation of the ‘Triton
cristatus.’_ I think it is sound and unusual!”
Footnote 28:
To such of my readers as possess some portion only of the early
series, it may be of interest to point out that the observations, up
to those for 1880 inclusive, were arranged, not as afterwards, as
detached papers, placed alphabetically under the heading of the names
of the crops to which they referred, but under the numbers given in
the successive preceding guide lists issued for the use of
observers—as for instance, “6, _Anthomyia ceparum_, Onion fly;” or
“25, _Abraxas grossulariata_, Magpie moth” (fig. 9).
These were arranged numerically, from “1” onwards, all the
observations on one kind of insect attack being arranged successively
in a long unbroken paragraph under the selected number, together with
the name of the pest. For want of better knowledge of the requisites
for a readable as well as useful report, I condensed the information
into as few words as possible, with few, if any, breaks in the long
paragraphs, and so, until 1880, the results (excepting to technical
readers) could not be considered “taking.” If any of my entomological
readers will turn to a very useful work, the _Forst Zoologie_, of Dr.
Bernard Altum, they will see in the second division of the “Insecten”
at pp. 36, 37, and again at pp. 162, 163, the difficulties that are
thrown in the way of comfortably grasping the subject, by the matter
being printed continuously without breaks. This, however, as well as
many other things, I had then still to learn. (E.A.O.)
Footnote 29:
This consideration induced the Editor to introduce many figures of
insects into the chapters of correspondence in the present volume.
Footnote 30:
Messrs. Horace Knight and E. C. Knight, of the staff of Messrs West,
Newman & Co., 54, Hatton Garden, London.
Footnote 31:
Curator of the Grosvenor Museum, Chester.
Footnote 32:
On November 26, 1899, Miss Ormerod wrote to Mr. Newstead:—
“I am delighted with our index—the more I examine it the better I like
it. Some acknowledgments have come in already, and they are most
pleasantly cordial. All are delighted to have such a good reference
work.... One recipient suggests the index would be more serviceable to
him if he had a complete set of my reports! He absolutely enclosed a
list of deficiencies, but I thought he had best buy, and only sent him
that for 1896.”
Other letters she wrote about the index “were on much the same lines,
and one refers to the cordial letter received from the Board of
Agriculture” (ED.).
Footnote 33:
Preface to “Twenty-fourth Report of Observations of Injurious
Insects.” By E. A. Ormerod, LL.D., p. vii.
Footnote 34:
See Appendix B.
Footnote 35:
The Entomological Society of Ontario was originated by Dr. Saunders
and Dr. Bethune nearly forty years ago. Its headquarters are in
London, Ontario, and it has branches in Toronto, Montreal and Quebec.
Its publications are the monthly _Canadian Entomologist_, now in its
thirty-fifth volume, and thirty-three annual reports to the
Legislature of Ontario on _Noxious and Beneficial Insects_. Miss
Ormerod was an Honorary Member.
Footnote 36:
Details were given in a letter to Colonel Coussmaker of August 1,
1885, p. 99.
Footnote 37:
See “Letters from Huxley,” pp. 85-87.
Footnote 38:
The late Allen Harker, Professor of Biology at the Royal Agricultural
College, Cirencester.
Footnote 39:
Who died in Rome while on a visit to Europe.
Footnote 40:
The Editor, having been present, is able to give this statement on his
own authority.
Footnote 41:
The organiser of and first Senior Examiner in the Agriculture
Department, South Kensington.
Footnote 42:
Edmund Beckett, K.C., LL.D., J.P., 1st Baron (1886), Chancellor and
Vicar-General of York, 1877-1900. The work of the restoration of St.
Albans Abbey was carried out under his direction. (See p. 296.)
Footnote 43:
In addition to the individual appreciation of her correspondents and
fellow-workers, Miss Ormerod’s position in the world of science was
recognised by scientific and educational bodies in a manner which was
most gratifying to her. She was Honorary Doctor of Laws of the
University of Edinburgh; Fellow of the Royal Meteorological Society,
London; (for ten years) Consulting Entomologist to the Royal
Agricultural Society of England; (for three years) Examiner in
Agricultural Entomology in the University of Edinburgh (1896-8);
Fellow of the Entomological Society, London; Hon. Fellow of the
Entomological Society, Stockholm; Member of the Entomological Society,
Washington, U.S.A.; Member of the Association of official Economic
Entomologists, Washington, U.S.A.; Hon. Member of the London Farmers’
Club; Honorary and Corresponding Member of the Royal Agricultural and
Horticultural Society of South Australia; Hon. Member of the
Entomological Society of Ontario, and Corresponding Member of the
Field Naturalists’ Club of Ontario, Canada; and Member of the Eastern
Province Naturalists’ Society, Cape Colony.
Footnote 44:
List of the Hon. Graduates of 1900, given in the alphabetical order in
which they graduated:—(1) Horatio Robert Forbes Brown, J.P., Editor of
the Calendars of State Papers (Venetian) for the Public Record Office.
(2) His Excellency the Hon. Joseph Hodges Choate, Ambassador for the
United States of America, London. (3) Miss Eleanor A. Ormerod,
F.R.Met.Soc., F.E.S. (4) C. D. F. Phillips, M.D., LL.D. (5) The Rev.
Thomas Smith, M.A., D.D., lately Professor of Evangelistic Theology in
the Free Church College, Edinburgh. (6) William Ritchie Sorley, M.A.,
Regius Professor of Moral Philosophy, University of Aberdeen. (7)
Anderson Stuart, M.D., Professor of Physiology in the University of
Sydney.
Footnote 45:
“ROYAL AGRICULTURAL SOCIETY OF ENGLAND.
“Coloured Diagrams of Insects Injurious to Farm Crops, suitable for
Elementary Schools. Prepared by Miss E. A. Ormerod, F.R.Met.Soc., Hon.
Consulting Entomologist to the Society. A series of Six Diagrams,
viz.: Large White Cabbage Butterfly; Turnip Fly or Flea Beetle; Beet
Fly; Wireworm and Click Beetle; Hop Aphis or Green Fly, with
Lady-bird; Daddy Longlegs or Crane Fly. In various stages, with
methods of prevention. On paper, 5s.; for each Diagram, 1s. Mounted on
linen and varnished, 8s.; for each Diagram, 1s. 6d. Procurable from
the Secretary.”
Footnote 46:
These observations are extracted from part of a series published under
the geographical _nom de plume_ of “Mabie Moss,” this (sometime) moss
district having been long under the observation of Mr. Service—not a
young lady, as Miss Ormerod conjectured, but a well-known
ornithologist who also takes a considerable interest in Economic
Entomology (ED.).
Footnote 47:
_Vide_ Report of the Departmental Committee appointed by the Board of
Agriculture to inquire into a plague of field voles in Scotland (Sir
Herbert E. Maxwell, M.P., Chairman). Eyre and Spottiswoode, 1893.
Footnote 48:
Of the “Dumfries Herald and Courier.”
Footnote 49:
Disease caused by _Micrococcus bombycis_.
Footnote 50:
In _Larvæ of British Butterflies and Moths_ (Ray Society).
Footnote 51:
_Exorista lota_, “not an uncommon fly, and parasitic on several
_Lepidoptera_.”—Meade.
Footnote 52:
Recent record of Warbles extracted by the Aldersey Schoolboys and
brought to the Headmaster:—
1895, 1,022; 1896, 2,596; 1897, 3,965; 1898, 1,706; 1899, 2,252; 1900,
1,851; 1901, 1,391; 1902, 1,066—Total, 15,849.
Footnote 53:
Mr. Bailey writes in August, 1902:—“The Haberdashers’ Company are the
Governors of my school, and at our Midsummer distribution of prizes in
June, 1882, Mr. Curtis, who was a member of the deputation who visited
us in that year, suggested that it would be a good thing to give
instruction to the boys on Injurious Insects. Failing to obtain a
lecturer through South Kensington, at my suggestion, he called on Miss
Ormerod. She suggested that I should take the subject, and added that
she would give me all the assistance in her power. From that day up to
the day of her death she took the kindest interest in our work. She
presented to the school many books, beautiful diagrams, and a series
of insect cases [prepared by Mosley of the Huddersfield Museum, after
the cases arranged by Professor Westwood and Miss Ormerod for the S.
and A. Museum at Bethnal Green], and was a liberal donor of prizes at
Midsummer from 1885 to 1901 (both inclusive). Every Midsummer she
kindly wrote a letter to be read on that occasion to the boys. I think
I ought to add that the Haberdashers’ Company were good enough to make
a grant of £25 to start us with this new subject, and have since
generously supported the carrying on of the work.”
Footnote 54:
Continuation of Miss Ormerod’s letter to Mr. Bailey.
Footnote 55:
See Chaps. xix.-xx. for letters to Dr. Fletcher.
Footnote 56:
See Chap. xxii.
Footnote 57:
Letters to Mr. Bailey continued.
Footnote 58:
This refers to Bunbury only, where we had nearly a “clean bill” in
that year. The maggots brought were found in the adjoining parishes. I
have in late years granted the boys a “roving commission.” _On their
bicycles_ they visit farms which are many miles away from their homes.
(W. B.).
Footnote 59:
See Appendix C.
Footnote 60:
Now “Kirkdale,” Spencer Road, Bournemouth.
Footnote 61:
The attack is caused by the small black and yellow fly, figured above.
She lays an egg on the barley sheath; the maggot from this attacks the
ear, then eats a channel down one side of the stem to the first knot,
and then turns to chrysalis state within the leaves.—(E. A. O.)
Footnote 62:
The victim was a resident in the New Forest district, and the sting or
bite was followed by severe local inflammation. Blood poisoning
supervened and caused death. (ED.).
Footnote 63:
See also a paper on Deer botflies, in _Entom. Monthly Magazine_, 1898,
by Mr. E. E. Austin, Brit. Museum.
Footnote 64:
Extracted from a letter of Miss Ormerod to Mr. D. D. Gibb. (See Chap.
XV.)
Footnote 65:
This, or its equivalent, the immediate and diligent pinching of
infested buds with finger and thumb, has proved the most practical
remedy (ED.).
Footnote 66:
A great authority on the life history of animals; author of a standard
work on pheasants, and numerous works on poultry, pigeons, and horses,
mules, and mule-breeding; on the staff of “The Field” for nearly half
a century; an old Member of the “British Ornithologists’ Union.”
Footnote 67:
_The House Sparrow_, published by Vinton & Co., at 1s., contains Miss
Ormerod’s original leaflet as an appendix.
Footnote 68:
The author of _Farm Insects_ (to this day the most beautifully
illustrated standard work in English on the subject) died at Islington
on 6th October, 1862.
Footnote 69:
The larva of a noctuid moth which now and then appears in great
numbers in America, marching over the country and destroying young
grain crops, grasses, &c.
Footnote 70:
Printed by King, Sell, & Railton, Limited, 12, Gough Square, and 4,
Bolt Court, E.C.
Footnote 71:
This was a purely metaphorical expression (ED.).
Footnote 72:
An arseniate is a salt of arsenic acid, while an arsenite is a salt of
arsenious acid.
Footnote 73:
See letters to Mr. Wise in chapter XVI.
Footnote 74:
See Appendix E.
Footnote 75:
This reference is to the destruction by fire of the main building of
Trinity College School, Port Hope, Canada, of which Mr. Bethune was
Head Master for a period of 29 years ending 1899.
Footnote 76:
Containing Miss Ormerod’s Meteorological Observations.
Footnote 77:
The death of her sister Georgiana.
Footnote 78:
State Entomologist of New York.
Footnote 79:
Mrs. Bethune was killed in a carriage accident in July, 1898.
Footnote 80:
“Schaŭmerde,” is a product of the fabrication of sugar, which contains
the mineral parts, the salts, of the sugar beet. Therefore it is good
for manuring this crop. (J. R. B.)
Footnote 81:
This species described by me later under the name _Oligotrophus
alopecuri_, n. sp. (Zwei neue Cecidomyinen, Acta Soc. pro Fauna et
Flora Fennica xi., No. 8, 1895, p. 3-9, Taf. i, Fig. 1-9) (E.R.).
Footnote 82:
The larvæ of this species infested badly the apple fruits in the whole
of Finland in the summer of 1898. (Cfr. “Ent. Rec.,” xi., No. 2, 1899,
pp. 37-39, and “Can. Ent.,” xxxi., 1899, pp. 12-14).—E. R.
Footnote 83:
Miss Ormerod had recommended Mr. Fuller for the appointment he secured
in Natal.
Footnote 84:
This note refers to a fire in Mr. Lounsbury’s department and to the
investigation of red water fever in cattle produced by ticks.
Footnote 85:
With one possible exception the most destructive beetle of British
forestry.
Footnote 86:
A favourite West Country expression of Miss Ormerod.
Footnote 87:
The caterpillars of the Goat moth feed in poplar, willow, elm, oak,
lime, and beech, as well as in apple, pear, walnut, and other trees.
(E. A. O.)
Footnote 88:
The Agricultural Education Committee, 10, Queen Anne’s Gate,
Westminster, S.W., was formed in the autumn of 1899, with Sir W.
Hart-Dyke, Bart., M.P., as Chairman, and the Rt. Hon. Henry Hobhouse,
M.P., as Hon. Secretary. (J. C. M.)
Footnote 89:
One of the leaflets issued by the Agricultural Education Committee.
Footnote 90:
Another leaflet of the series issued by the Agricultural Education
Committee, but one which Miss Ormerod did not appreciate.
Footnote 91:
The paper on “Wasps” was lent by Mr. Medd to Mr. Chas. Roundell who
incorporated it in his unique little volume, the _Rural Reader_,
Horace Marshall & Co. (ED.).
Footnote 92:
Issued by the Agricultural Education Committee.
Footnote 93:
_India in 1887._ Published by Oliver and Boyd.
Footnote 94:
Miss Ormerod did not latterly oppose Darwinianism, but we are not
aware that she ever accepted it. (ED.).
Footnote 95:
See note ante p. 79.
Footnote 96:
Of Mosley’s Insect cases with a view to suiting the Agriculture
Department, Edinburgh University.
Footnote 97:
Quintin MacAdam Wallace, M.A., a Graduate (1st Class Honours) in
Medicine and Surgery of Edinburgh University.
Footnote 98:
Dr. Fream had been, as a result of the recommendation of Miss Ormerod,
appointed Steven Lecturer on Agricultural Entomology in Edinburgh
University.
Footnote 99:
After a full term of three years, by ordinance, an examiner is not
immediately eligible for re-appointment.
Footnote 100:
“On the Production of New Breeds of Crop Plants by Multiple
Cross-fertilization.”
Footnote 101:
A suggestion that Dr. MacDougall should collaborate with Miss Ormerod
in bringing out the book.
Footnote 102:
Messrs. Knight, one or other, have been my artists for many years. I
should like the printing to be, as usual, in the hands of Messrs.
West, Newman & Co. Mr. T. P. Newman has superintended my printing for
so many years. (E. A. O.)
Footnote 103:
Professor James Seth delivered the address to student graduates at the
ceremonial at which Miss Ormerod received the LL.D.
Footnote 104:
One hundred copies of Miss Ormerod’s _Manual of Injurious Insects_,
were distributed gratuitously to persons specially selected by us as
likely to be interested in the subject matter and capable of spreading
a knowledge of it (ED.).
Footnote 105:
Lecture at the London Farmers’ Club on Sheep Scab.
Footnote 106:
_Tessarotoma papillosa_, Dravy. (O. E. J.)
Footnote 107:
We were at the time actually at war with China, although nominally the
united Powers of Europe were fighting the Boxers.
Footnote 108:
A digest of the Indian Famine Commission Reports down to October,
1898, read as the Inaugural Address on the opening of the course of
“Garton Lectures” on Colonial and Indian Agriculture. Published by
Oliver and Boyd, Edinburgh.
Footnote 109:
A copy of _Quasi Cursores_, portraits of the high officials and
professors of the University of Edinburgh and its Tercentenary
Festival. Drawn and etched by William Hole, A.R.S.A. David Douglas,
Edinburgh, 1884.
Footnote 110:
From the Governor of Lagos arranging a personal interview.
Footnote 111:
This reference was made to a cold draught experienced in church.
Footnote 112:
A letter written to defend the position of the Board of Agriculture
for Ireland against an unwarranted attack of a Cork correspondent of
the London “Times” (ED.).
Footnote 113:
The first examination paper set in connection with the “Garton” course
of lectures (ED.).
Footnote 114:
A paper on “Agriculture in South Africa,” read before the Royal
Colonial Institute on 12th of March, 1901.
Footnote 115:
A silver tea service of Indian work presented in recognition of a
public service.
Footnote 116:
On this date a note of instructions was left to Miss Ormerod’s
trustees to deliver to us the “Reminiscences” papers, &c. The end of
the note is as follows:—
“And I request Professor Wallace, being a friend in whom I
feel complete confidence, to accept the above, and use or not
use them for the purpose precisely as in his good discretion
he may think fit.”
Footnote 117:
See _Log Book of a Fisherman_, &c., by Frank Buckland, M.A., pp. 366,
367.
Footnote 118:
The substance of the foregoing statement was supplied by Dr. Bethune.
The following (condensed) obituary notice by Professor A. S. Packard,
of Brown University, and referred to by Miss Ormerod, appeared in
“Science,” and subsequently in the “Canadian Entomologist.”
------------------------------------------------------------------------
● Transcriber’s Notes:
○ Missing or obscured punctuation was silently corrected.
○ Typographical errors were silently corrected.
○ All footnotes have been gathered and moved to the end of the book.
○ Inconsistent spelling and hyphenation were made consistent only
when a predominant form was found in this book.
○ Text that was in italics is enclosed by underscores (_italics_);
text that was bold by “equal” signs (=bold=).
○ The use of a caret (^) before a letter, or letters, shows that the
following letter or letters was intended to be a superscript, as
in S^t Bartholomew or 10^{th} Century.
*** End of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "Eleanor Ormerod, Ll. D., Economic Entomologist : Autobiography and Correspondence" ***
Copyright 2023 LibraryBlog. All rights reserved.