July 5. 1894] 



NA TURE 



225 



Daily the bird visited tlie garden till the bushes were cleared, 

 and so the crop was saved. In Crowle this year these birds 

 are numerous. I have a garden in a place in North Wales 

 where this year there are few of these birds. The grub 

 stripped the hushes of leaves, and the fruit died. 



Worcester, June 23. J. Lloyd-Bozward. 



On the Diselectrification of Metals and other Bodies by 

 Light. 



Referring to a footnote on page 135 of Nature, June 7, 

 Messrs. Elster and Geitel have been good enough to call my 

 attention to a great deal of work done by them in the same 

 direction and published in recent numbers of Wiedemann's 

 AnnaUn. The most important statement about it is that they 

 had observed the photoelectric power of fluorescent minerals 

 and the electrical activity of sunlight, and had worked for some 

 time at the influence of these facts on atmospheric electrifica- 

 tion ; the idea that atmospheric electricity was thus caused (by 

 the discharging action of sunlight) having been already mooted 

 apparently by von Bezold and Arrhenius. 



Oliver J. Lodge. 



Absence of Butterflies. 



It may be worth while to put on record what has happened 

 this spring and summer, viz. the total absence of butterfly life. 

 Beyond an occasional white butterlly, there are none to be seen. 

 I have a large garden where there is usually abundance of them, 

 but a coloured butterfly has not been seen this year yet. 



Gravesend, July 2. Delta. 



THE SETTLEMENT OF THE EPPING 

 FOREST QUESTION} 



BY a happy coincidence the Essex Naturalist, con- 

 taining the full official report of the discussion on 

 the management of Epping Forest, which took place 

 under the auspices of the Essex Field Club on April 28,- 

 and the Report of the experts appointed by the Cor- 

 poration of London, have been published almost simul- 

 taneously, the former having been issued a fortnight or 

 SO before the latter. As the proceedings of the Con- 

 servators had been subjected to a running fire of the 

 most vehement criticism ever since last autumn, the 

 question of the management of the forest may be con- 

 sidered to have excited an amount of popular interest 

 such as had never before been raised since the public 

 dedication by the Queen in 1882. The reason for the 

 popular outburst of indignation on the present occa- 

 sion is to be found in the circumstance that the 

 thinning operations had been carried on in a dis- 

 trict which is well known to contain the finest 

 example of a beech wood that the forest offers, viz. 

 Monk Wood, and the amassed heaps of felled trunks, 

 drawn to the roadside for removal, naturally attracted the 

 attention of every passer-by, and gave rise to a not al- 

 together unnatural feeling of uneasiness as to the fate of 

 the forest's show woodland. A fair and unbiassed ex- 

 amination of Monk Wood, however, soon sufficed to 

 dispel any fears of unnecessary destruction or permanent 

 injury, and those whose judgment in such matters is 

 worthy of the most serious attention, did not hesitate to 

 express their belief that the operations had on the whole 

 been carried out judiciously, and for the future benefit of 

 the forest. This conclusion was arrived at in many cases 

 against the preconceived notions of some of the visitors 

 who attended the meeting on April 28, and some speakers 

 in the discussion with great candour admitted that the 

 result ol the visitation and the explanations given on the 

 spot had been to cause them to modify their views. This 



' " The Essex Naturalist, being the Jouinal of the Essex Field Club," 

 '°"'<i|_by William Cole, Hen. .Sec. Nos. 1-5, vol. viii., published JuDe 

 1894. • Kpping p'orcst, Kcport of Experts as to M.ln.tgement, &c. Report, 

 EppiTiR Forest Committee." presented June 14. 1894. 



- A brief report of the meeting appeared in Natukk, May 3, p. 12. 



appears most distinctly from the speeches of such well- 

 known friends of the forest as Sir Frederick Young, 

 Prof. Boulger, and Mr. F. C. Gould, and it is only fair to 

 add that many others who, without any special knowledge 

 of forestal operations, attended the meeting, of which the 

 proceedings are now reported, as lovers of the naturally 

 picturesque, had their judgment materially aided by the 

 opportunity given them for comparing portions of the 

 forest which had been severely thinned in former years 

 with other portions which had not yet been attacked. 

 The arguments for and against the conservatorial doings 

 are fully set forth in the Essex Naturalist, and will form 

 an important chapter in the history of the forest 

 management. 



But the Essex Field Club has of course no official con- 

 nection with the Epping Forest Committee, and although, 

 as everybody knows, the chief executive verderer is Mr. 

 Edward North Buxton, this gentleman gave his services 

 as a conductor of the meeting because of his special 

 knowledge on the one hand, and on the other as an officer 

 of the Field Club. The decision at which the meeting 

 arrived, as already reported in these columns, is in no 

 sense an official utterance of the Club as a body corporate, 

 but is simply to be regarded as an expression of individual 

 opinions consequent upon a personal visitation and a 

 discussion raised thereby. It seems desirable to make 

 this statement in order to avoid future misunderstanding. 



The Corporation of London, as the official Conservators 

 of the forest, on April 12 appointed a special Committee 

 of experts, in their own words, " to view the forest, and 

 advise us forthwith as to the effect of the thinning, and 

 our future policy with regard to the management of the 

 forest." The names suggested were Viscount Powers- 

 court, Dr. Schlich (the Professor of Forestry at Cooper's 

 Hill), Mr. James Anderson of Manchester, and -Mr. 

 William Robinson, the editor of the Garden. Sir Joseph 

 Hooker was also asked to nominate two other members, 

 and he suggested the names of Earl Ducie, Mr. .•\. B. 

 Freeman-Mitford, M.P. (formerly Secretary to H.M. 

 Commissioners of W^orks), and Mr. Angus U. Webster, 

 formerly forester to the Duke of Bedford. Lords Ducie 

 and Powerscourt w-ere unable to join the Committee, but 

 the five signatures attached to the Report may be con- 

 sidered as strongly representative of the art and science 

 of forestry as the names of any committee of experts that 

 has ever been or possibly could be brought together in 

 this country. 



Taking the Report as a whole, it will be seen that the 

 Committee practically give their sanction to the policy 

 which has been, and is being, pursued by the Conserva- 

 tors, and endorse the decision arrived at by the majority 

 of those who took part in the meeting and discussion on 

 April 28. Surely after this most weighty verdict there 

 need be no further alarm as to the future of the forest. 

 A detailed analysis of the Report would occupy too much 

 space in these columns, but some of the most important 

 recommendations may be considered. .'\nd first of all, 

 with respect to the opening out of views and the making 

 of clearings, there is no uncertainty about their state- 

 ment : — 



" As there is much beautiful landscape in and around 

 the forest, the opening up of which would add much to 

 its charms, we think that the best views should be care- 

 fully opened up by making judicious clearings. Such 



views would be in every way a gain The rides 



and drives are beautiful features of the forest, and those 

 made in recent years are well designed. They should 

 receive constant attention, lest the encroachments of 

 vegetation should mar their picturesque elTect. In this 

 connection we would call attention to the beauty of the 

 glades which already exist. These should be increased 

 in number, where it can be done without sacrificing the 

 finer trees, or interfering with the massive groups of the 

 forest." 



NO. 1288, VOL. 50] 



