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.

_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.

_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.

_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.

_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.

_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.

_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_.