354 Notes and Comments. 



evidence on each side of a case, and leave the verdict to the 

 jury.'* The way he gave the evidence was worthy of an 

 'expert witness.' Naturally, the volume, being published in the 

 ordinary way, was reviewed and criticised. This was done 

 thoroughly. Professor Kendall (who was, in a way, largely 

 responsible for the appearance of ' Ice-work ' !), and many 

 others, were easily able to demonstrate that Professor Bonney's 

 theories would not ' hold water.' 



THE PRESENT ADDRESS 



Years have gone by. The ' submergers ' seem to have 

 gone and left not a rack behind ; scores of observers have 

 added hundreds of facts to the previous list of proofs of land- 

 ice having occupied the greater part of Britain ; and in the year 

 1910 we again find ourselves back in the old-fashioned times, 

 amongst old-fashioned ideas, and with old-fashioned theories. 

 Worse than all, it is apparent to anyone who is well-acquainted 

 with ' Ice Work, Present and Past,' which was published in 

 1896, that the present presidential address is merely a summary 

 of that work (and a poor summary at that !), with a few further 

 arguments which have been brought forward in order to deal 

 with recent discoveries. The same unfair method of presenting 

 ' facts ' is apparent ; the same ideas are propounded, and the 

 same unsatisfactory account of the author's own views exists. 

 Professor Bonney's concluding words at Sheffield were : ' the 

 difficulties in either hypothesis appear so great that, while I 

 consider those in the " land-ice " hypothesis to be the more 

 serious, I cannot as yet declare the other one to be satisfactorily 

 established.' We quite agree with the Professor that ' this 

 may seem a " lame and impotent conclusion " to so long a 

 disquisition,' and we heartily endorse his remarks that the best 

 service we can do is to attempt ' to separate facts from fancies, 

 by demanding that difficulties should be frankly faced, instead 

 of being severely ignored.' The address is evidently another 

 example of the well-known ' you should do as I say, not as 

 I do.' Would that the Rev. Professor Bonney had ' frankly 

 faced ' the difficulties of his own theories, instead of ' severely 

 ignoring ' them. 



* He also appropriated quite a number of blocks, maps, etc., from 

 Professor Wright, and put them to his own use, without any permission or 



acknowledgment whatever ; though that is a detail. 



Naturalist, 



