594 CONFERENCE OF DELEGATES 
which the Transactions of the Cardiff Society (now covering a period of 
over half a century) were discovered for the first time two or three years 
ago by one of the great scientific societies in London. There is abundant 
evidence, indeed, that the gulf between the central and provincial societies 
is still an unnecessarily wide one. How can it best be narrowed ? 
Here we are up against certain of those traits in the British character 
to which I referred at the beginning of my address. It would be easy for 
a central society to draw up a clear-cut programme of research and to 
allocate to local bodies appropriate shares in its execution—shares, that is 
to say, appropriate to the environment and attainment of these various 
local organisations. Could this ideal scheme be carried out with reasonable 
precision over a period of years, there is no doubt that, in theory, the ratio 
of achievement would increase with leaps and bounds. Such, however, 
is the unreasonable nature of our British temperament that any attempt 
to conscript science in this sort of way is liable to immediate disaster. We 
are all anxious to learn but hate to be taught, and any semblance of dictation 
is calculated to arouse all the most unthinking. obstinacy in our nature. 
Nevertheless, the difficulty is one of method rather than of principle, and 
I would again refer to the carefully-considered statement of the present 
position of archzological research recently promulgated by the President 
of the Society of Antiquaries. On this a further word may be said. 
This statement, drawing attention to the major desiderata in British 
archeological research at the present time, owes its importance to two 
factors. In the first place, under the leadership of Sir Charles Peers, it 
received a very thorough preliminary consideration from a committee 
representing all the principal interests and localities throughout the country. 
In the second place—and I would draw special attention to this factor— 
it was discussed by and disseminated through a thoroughly representative 
Congress of provincial societies. ‘These societies had thus a direct voice 
in the final formulation of the statement, and ultimately received it in a 
shape which all or the great majority of their representatives regarded as 
acceptable and workable. How far the positive recommendations of the 
scheme will be carried into effect by these societies, it is at present too 
early to say, but, without going into details in the present context, I may 
observe that certain preliminary steps have already been taken in the right 
direction. 
Here, then, we have a scheme of co-ordination, drafted first by a central 
society and then shaped and approved by the provincial societies in conclave. 
The whole procedure was, we may say, parliamentary and British, and is, 
I think, a fair sample of the kind of method which, at any rate in certain 
branches of science, is likely to yield the most satisfactory results. The 
essential medium was, as I have indicated, the congress of appropriate 
societies; and although the principle of procedure by conference is perhaps 
sometimes overdone, it seems to be that method which most nearly accords 
with the needs of the age in which we live. I have in mind not merely 
the Congress of Archeological Societies but other co-ordinating bodies 
such as the South-Eastern Union of Scientific Societies, which, incidentally, 
owes so much to the enterprise of our Secretary, Dr. Tierney. Here, in 
the South-Eastern Union, we have an organisation through which, in 
particular, the smaller local societies find a useful and stimulating medium 
of exchange. I would emphasise the word ‘ useful’ and would give one 
example to illustrate my point. 
The illustration is indeed one of several which will occur readily to the 
minds of many of you. You will recall that, as the Great War proceeded, 
our Local Government Board realised the potential source of dangerous 
