1898] THE ZOOLOGICAL CONGRESS 261 
by the exhibition of sample plates. That comparatively little of 
the time of the Congress was wasted in this way is no doubt 
due to the courage with which the secretaries had rejected the 
more obviously useless papers. Among the exhibits those of Mr 
Graham Kerr, Mr Stanley Gardiner, Mr Willey, and Mr Rousselet 
are especially worthy of mention. 
On Saturday morning a business meeting was held, at which it 
was arranged that the next meeting should be in Germany during 
1901. The Congress then adjourned to London for visits to the 
Zoological Gardens and British Museum (Natural History), where 
on the Saturday evening Sir John Lubbock gave a reception. On 
Monday a large number of members went to Tring to see Mr 
Rothschild’s magnificent museum, and on Tuesday a smaller party 
under the guidance of Mr Lydekker inspected the Duke of Bed- 
ford’s collection of deer at Woburn Abbey. 
In such a varied course of proceedings it is difficult to draw 
any general conclusions as to results. Thanks to the skilful plans 
of the secretaries, Professor Jeffrey Bell, Mr Sedgwick, and Mr 
Bourne, and the tactful arrangements of the secretaries of the local 
reception committee, Dr Harmer and Mr Shipley, the Congress 
was held without a hitch. The opinion was generally expressed 
that the scientific standard of the papers was much higher than 
usual. The discussions were especially enjoyed, and will no doubt 
henceforth be regarded as a chief feature of future meetings. 
From the proceedings three impressions seem to have been gener- 
ally felt. First, the scanty attendance of entomologists and ornithol- 
ogists may indicate the increasing separation of those branches of 
zoological work. The ornithologists have a congress to themselves, 
and the entomologists also will not improbably start one, to settle 
their own difficulties without the interference of specialists in other 
subjects. Secondly, the greater importance attached to palaeon- 
tology, and the increasing distrust of embryology as a guide in 
phylogeny, were shown repeatedly. Thirdly, there seemed a feeling 
of boredom with the interminable question of zoological nomencla- 
ture, and a certain determination to refuse to follow rigid rules 
when they lead to absurdities, and to trust more in the future to 
common sense. 
