524 REPORT—1905. 
also for the purposes of science. Before the late war came to a close the Anthro- 
pological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland and the Folklore Society addressed 
to Mr. Chamberlain, then Colonial Secretary, a memorial praying that on 
the conclusion of peace a similar Commission should be issued to inquire 
into the customs and institutions of the native tribes in the Transvaal and 
the Orange River Colony, and, with a view to the accomplishment of more 
directly scientific ends, praying that at least one anthropologist of eminence 
unconnected with South Africa should be included in the Commission. The 
prayer of the Memorialists was bluntly refused. When, however, in the course 
of reorganisation of the administration, a conference was held at Bloemfontein in 
1902 of the Ministers of the various colonies, protectorates, and territories, to 
discuss native affairs, they found themselves, in the words of Sir Godfrey Lagden, 
‘much confused because the laws and the conditions of all the colonies were 
different.’ This was exactly what the Memorialists had told Mr. Chamberlain. 
So the conference determined on the appointment of a Commission of Inquiry, which 
was issued in due course by Lord Milner in September 1903, and reported on 
January 80 last. The evidence taken by this Commission, as well as that 
taken by the previous Commissions, is of a very valuable character. But, 
like those Commissions, its object was exclusively administrative. Consequently 
the evidence is only incidentally of ethnological interest, and it by no means 
covers the whole ground. The social life and marriage laws are to a great 
extent laid before the reader, but there is no attempt to distinguish accurately 
between one tribe and another ; the native institutions are discussed only so far as 
they have a practical bearing on administrative questions. ‘There is no attempt to 
penetrate to the underlying ideas and beliefs, and the vast domain of religion lies 
for the most part outside the ken of the Commissioners. Admirable, therefore, as 
is the work done by these Commissions, it is but a small part of what must be 
undertaken ifan accurate account of the natives of South Africa is to be obtained 
and preserved for scientific use, and as an historical record. What is wanted is 
that the Government should undertake this enterprise in the same way as that in 
which the Governments of the United States, Germany, the Netherlands, and of 
other countries investigate their native races, or, failing this obvious duty of a 
Government, adequate assistance should be given to societies or individuals who 
may be prepared to take the matter in hand. 
Unfortunately it is not unnecessary to insist on the need there is for us to 
consider seriously what at any particular time is most worth investigating, and not 
to let ourselves drift into any casual piece of work. Let us apply that simple test 
to South Africa, and ask ourselves, What most needs doing in anthropological 
research in South Africa ? 
So long as actual wanton destruction is not taking place, local archeological 
investigation can wait. Ido not mean to suggest that those who have the oppor- 
tunity should not devote themselves to this important subject; many can do good 
work in archeology who have neither opportunity nor inclination for other 
branches of anthropology, and the British South Africa Company has shown and 
probably will continue to show a real interest in this work. But our first and 
immediate duty is to save for science the data that are vanishing ; this should be 
the watchword of the present day. 
Observations in South African anthropography are lamentably deficient. 
Although scattered up and down in books of travel and in missionary records, 
there are descriptions of individuals, and in some cases a few salient features of a 
tribe are noted, yet we have few precise descriptions of communities that are of 
value for comparative purposes. Anthropometrical data are everywhere want- 
ing; very few natives have been measured, and the measurements that have been 
made are insufficient both as regards those actually taken and the number of 
individuals measured. The interesting subject of comparative physiology is 
unworked. We have no observations in experimental psychology, and very few 
reliable data in observational psychology. Here, then, is a large field of in- 
quiry. 
I am not competent to speak concerning linguistics, but from what I have 
