iu the game at any peiiud ut tht-ir lives. Is 

 it, therefore, to be wondered at that we do 

 not find such support as we cousider our 

 aims and objects deserve? The mention of 

 this matter causes some reflection on the 

 irony that denies interest iu matters of vital 

 importance, and conceutratcs so much on a 

 game. We may, therefore, feel that we 

 must at present be content to be in a mi- 

 nority, and aim at making our efficiency 

 inversely proportionate to our numbers. 



I trust that the foregoing remarks may, 

 to some extent, convey to you what I in- 

 tended, viz. ; that 1, there seems to be no 

 indication that it would be advisable at 

 present to depart from the original lines (f 

 the Society's work, and 2. that there is most 

 decidedly a niche which we can very use- 

 fully fill. We certainly may discharge our 

 duties much more efficiently Ihau we have 

 done hitherto, and it will be some part of 

 my business to suggest liow this can be 

 brought about. 



There is no doubt that we have suffered 

 greatly in the past by the loss of some of 

 ■our best trained minds, whose places it has 

 been impossible to hll \ip to the present. 

 Their great value to the Society lay iu 

 their ability to observe and report accu- 

 rately, and also to do original work. Xow, 

 if we are to add to the general stock of 

 knowledge, it is very desirable that (1) we 

 should be acquainted with what is already 

 known; (2) that we should train our minds 

 to observe. Now, we cannot all be skilled 

 observers. The ability to seize ra])idly upon 

 miuute details and appraise them at their 

 true value is a talent only vouchsafed to a 

 few, but I think we all can become accurate 

 observers, and ni order to attain this it is 

 essential, as I have before hinted, to note 

 our results. 



Dr. Wills again called attention to the 

 value of the notebook, and said : X very use- 

 ful side of such work is that it 

 may preclude the necessity of gathering 

 specimens of rare floweis whith would 

 be better left to seed and i)ropagaic 

 themselves. If we could in this way 

 avert their destruction a distinct service 

 would be rendered, as it is very evi- 

 dent that a boom in nature study may, if 

 not controlled within certain limits. ]jrove 

 decidedlv disadvantageous. Take, for ex- 

 ample, the case of our British orchids. It 

 has recently become a favourite pastime to 

 an ever-increasing number of individvals to 

 carry out a systematic .search all the seasou 

 for these rather rare plants, and uo doubt 

 every specimen seen is gathered. As it is 

 no pait of anyone's business to secure the 

 coutinuation of the supply, it cannot be very 

 long cie this interesting class of plants will 

 be as extinct as the dodo. I think, thcre- 

 fore, that all those who are really interested 

 in botany from a scientific staud|joint will 

 admit that a record of lln-ii being seen with- 

 out beins" gathered will bo Cfjually beue- 

 nciai anrl less destructive. It is a matter 



of much rcyret that our rare birds and 

 plants arc disappearing so rapidly, the one 

 by wanton shooting and the other by reck- 

 less gathering, but bej'ond passing a protest 

 it seems impossible to do anything to pre- 

 sent our anticipated loss. 



Another point that our members may cou- 

 sider is the question of specialisation, i.e., 

 taking uji a special subject or group of sub- 

 jects, and devoting attention more particu- 

 larly to the selected group. It is peifectly 

 manifest that iu ^uch an enormous field as 

 the sciences offer it is absolutely impossible 

 to do justice to more than one department 

 at most. 



One other point which I should like to 

 raise with regard to our programme is that it 

 would be very helpful if any of our mem- 

 bers would offer any suggestions as to any 

 special subject which they would like to hear 

 dealt with iu the course of a session. Then 

 it seems to iiic that we may avail ourselves 

 rather more of another department which is, 

 I believe, guerally included in the scope of 

 scientific societies. I mean the literary 

 side. In conclu^^iou, I feel that we cannot 

 see any indicatirai for altering the aims of 

 our Society, although it is necessary to keep 

 an open mind so as to be ready to avail 

 ourselves of any reasonable suggestion. It 

 is impossible for us to compete with cine- 

 matographs, ch?a]) magazines, etc., every- 

 one of which is Ijusy in ransacking every 

 source from which any detail of interest may 

 be obtained in order to extend its sale and 

 prolong its life, aud any natural history 

 photographs, accounts of phenomena, life 

 histories of jilants or insects, find a ready 

 sale, but, and here is a point which I eom- 

 meud to your consideration — it is a difficult 

 matter to keep n natural history magaziue 

 going. Why ? Simply because the public 

 want variety, not too much natural history, 

 however wonderful and interesting it may 

 be. Oh no ! A magazine entirely devoted 

 to nature is much too monotonous for the 

 jaded appetites of the 20th century. Verbum 

 sap. Ladies and gentlemen, if you want any 

 further answer to the question " Shall wo 

 cater for the public?" — well, candidly^ — I 

 say don't ! (Applause.) 



A vote of thanks was proposed to the 

 President for his address by Mr. Sidney 

 Harvey. 



Mr. C. Gardner seconded, and remarked 

 that there were members who had left the 

 Society wJio still went iu for scientific work. 

 He thought, eveu if these did not again 

 become members, they might come there and 

 tell tliem the results of their researches. 

 He did not see why cinematographs had any 

 connection with a Society like their's inas- 

 much as they catered for amusements very 

 much in the same way as a theatre did, and 

 had very little of an educational or scientific 

 character- He did not consider there was 

 any |)0pular interest in football itself, the 

 iuterest being merely in Ihe result of the 

 game. 



