Correspondence—Mr. Buckman—Mr. Jukes-Browne. 141 
that all papers should begin on a separate page; and that they 
should bear, as a heading, the full title of the publication in which 
they appear. My object is to facilitate work. I venture to say that 
it is a saving of time and temper for anyone, whether specialist or 
not, to have all their literature on any particular subject, or sub- 
division of a subject placed together: to attain this it is necessary 
to “break” publications, and to assort their papers. At present this 
too often entails the destruction of the preceding or succeeding 
paper—a matter for regret when only a limited number of copies 
is issued. 
My suggestion would obviate this. I could wish it were applied 
to all publications in which original communications occur; but this, 
I fear, is Utopian. To the publications, however, of societies dealing 
with various sciences it is very necessary; to the publications of 
those dealing with one science it is quite as imperative, because 
subdivisions of a science are so numerous now. Very frequently 
the object desired could be attained by moving the first paper in the 
volume by one page; but in any case not one extra (blank) page 
per paper would be required. Expense, therefore, can hardly be 
urged against the proposal; while the boon conferred would be 
very great. S. S. Buckman. 
THE MAMMOTH AND THE GLACIAL DRIFT. 
Sir,—I have no desire to prolong this unprofitable controversy 
and must decline further argument with Sir H. Howorth, who still 
imagines he has completely proved his case, and who imputes to me 
words which I never employed. He takes up your space with 
discussing ‘‘ authority ” as if I had used the term, whereas my phrase 
was “the generally accepted views of geologists,” or in other words 
what Sir Henry himself calls “the orthodox geological opinion.” 
With Dr. Hicks the case is different; but I think he should have 
known me better than to imagine I had the slightest idea of posing 
as an ‘‘ official” or “ professional” geologist. I used the term 
“practical,” and by a practical geologist 1 mean anyone who has 
had experience in the work of mapping geological boundaries and 
collecting evidence for the construction of profile sections. By 
“approved work in the field”? I mean work which stands the test 
of investigation by other geologists. I think Dr. Hicks will agree 
with me that a man who merely visits some well known sections 
in a faulted Palzozoic district is not entitled to criticize accepted 
views of its structure. Similarly in studying areas of Drift deposits 
it is often impossible to say whether a given patch of gravel is 
above or beneath Boulder-clay from a mere inspection of open 
sections, though their relations may become clear when the area is 
carefully mapped. 
Is Dr. Hicks prepared to say, as Sir H. Howorth does, that there 
is no good ground for supposing the Hoxne deposits to be underlain 
by the neighbouring Boulder-clay ? and in the face of Mr. Reid’s 
statement in this Magazine (1888, p. 442), does he consider the 
