Notes and Comments. 323 
point of view. But workers in the county know how necessary 
and how valuable these local records are, and we know that 
professors and other quite important people find these local 
lists useful. 
LONDON v. PROVINCES. 
Besides, as in the case of deciding on the objects to be placed 
in a local or in a national museum, so the difficulty will arise 
with publications, as to whether they are of London or provin- 
cial importance. And, just as a donor may have some say as 
to the destination of his gifts, so an author may want some 
voice in the matter of the place of publication of his work. We 
believe Sir Thomas Holland suggested that the local societies 
might still issue an annual report, with ephemeral matter which, 
presumably, the superior scholar may afford to ignore. But 
it is more than probable that some of these ‘ unimportant ’ 
notes and records may be very important in the future. We 
know how, over and over again, commonplace records of one 
generation have been of the utmost value to another. Pepy’s 
Diary would have been censored by the London referee had he 
submitted it for publication in his day. As it is, it throws a 
vivid light on the life of his times, and is now a classic. 
THE AMATEUR NATURALIST. 
But there is another point to be considered ; and an im- 
portant one. In most of our provincial societies the amateur 
naturalist receives encouragement and inspiration. Quite a 
large number of our professional scientific men began their 
career in a provincial scientific society. Their early papers 
were read at its meetings; their first encouragement was 
received there. What would the effect upon these young 
naturalists be if their first papers had to be submitted to a 
Royal Society’s Committee in London? In most cases the 
papers would certainly be ‘censored.’ Politely, perhaps, but 
firmly, they would be told that their work was not up to 
“standard’ and could not be printed. This is not encourage- 
ment. And it is to the encouragement given to their maiden 
efforts that so many of our professional scientific men owe the 
positions they hold to-day. No; our methods may not be 
perfect ; they may not be German, but before any such change 
as that suggested takes place, the matter should be very care- 
fully considered. 
THE ANTIQUITY OF MAN. 
On this subject Prof. Boyd Dawkins made an important 
contribution. Professor Boule, in his masterly essay pub- 
lished in Anthropologie, xxvi., Jan.-April, 1915, freely criticised 
the evidence on which the antiquity of man in Britain has been 
stated to go back beyond the early Pliocene age, and concludes 
that it is not of a nature to throw light on so important a prob- 
1915 Oct. 1. 
