SCIENCE. 



[N. S. Vol. XVI. No. 414. 



cially as exemplified in the 'Reports' of the 

 Bureaii of American Ethnology and the 

 U. S. National Museum, the 'Memoirs' of 

 the American IMuseum of Natural History, 

 the publications of the Peabody Museum, 

 etc., they fully appreciated. Dr. Am- 

 brosetti, in the numerous extra-forensic 

 discussions with prominent representatives 

 of the United States, was enthusiastic in 

 his commendation of the 'American 

 method,' the adoption of which in the 

 Argentine means a rich harvest by the 

 time the congress meets in the capital city 

 of the great South American republic. 



Other distinguished foreigners, whose 

 short stay will be remembered with pleas- 

 ure by their colleagues of the United States, 

 were Dr. Hjalmar Stolpe, of Stockholm, 

 the representative of the Royal Ethno- 

 graphical Museum, well known as about 

 the first serious student of the ethnological 

 aspect of decorative art; J. L. van Pan- 

 huys, the author of several investigations 

 among the Carib Indians of Guiana, who 

 in the absence of Dr. J. D. E. Schmeltz, 

 the delegate originallj' appointed by the 

 government, was the official representative 

 of the Netheiiands at the congress; C. V. 

 Hartman, the delegate of the Svenska 

 Sallskapet for Antropologi och Geografi, 

 who laid before the members the sumptu- 

 ously printed account of his areheological 

 researches in Salvador and Costa Rica; 

 David Boyle, of Toronto, the creator of the 

 Provincial (Ontario) Areheological Mu- 

 seum, of which he was the official represen- 

 tative; Leon Lejeal, of the College de 

 France, who occupies the chair recently 

 founded by the Due de Loubat; A. P. 

 Maudslay, the authority on Mayan hiero- 

 glyphics, who came as the delegate of the 

 Anthropological Institute of Great Britain 

 and Ireland (London) ; Waldemar Bogoras, 

 whose investigations in northeastern Asia 

 for the Jesup North Pacific Expedition are 

 in process of publication, a typical Russian 



with a good command of English, etc. H. 

 Pittier de Fabrega, one of the delegates 

 from Costa Rica, has made special studies 

 of the Indian languages of his country, 

 while his colleague, Juan F. Ferraz, pub- 

 lished in 1892 a dictionary of 'Nahuatlis- 

 mos' (Aztec words in use in Costa Riean 

 Spanish). Mexico was well represented; 

 besides Alfredo Chavero, Nicolas Leon 

 and Leopoldo Batres, the official delegates 

 of the Federal Government (the first as the 

 personal envoy of President Diaz), there 

 were present from the State of Mexico 

 Alonzo Fernandez, and from the State of 

 Oaxaca, Francisco Belmar. Seiior Chavero 

 is a president of the Mexican Chamber- of 

 Deputies and the representative in that 

 body of the President of the Republic ; 

 Nicolas Leon is the Director of the An- 

 thropological Section of the ]\Iuseo Nacional 

 de Mexico and a student of the language 

 of the Tarascans and other Amerinds; 

 Francisco Belmar, a lawyer of Oaxaca, has 

 published many valuable monographs on 

 the native tongues of that state. It is much 

 to be regretted that Antonio Peiiafiel, the 

 distinguished Mexican geographer and 

 ethnologist, could not be present at the 

 meeting. Peru, Ecuador, Bolivia, Chili, 

 Brazil, Venezuela and Colombia had no 

 delegates at the congress, although there 

 are Americanists of note in those countries, 

 like Rodolfo Lenz of Santiago de Chile. 

 Dr. Nina-Rodriguez of Bahia ( Brazil"!, Dr. 

 M. A. Muiiiz of Lima, and others, whose 

 presence would have given the New World 

 section of the delegates more of a Pan- 

 American character. Some of the dele- 

 gates from the United States were pre- 

 vented bj' various causes from attending 

 the Congress. Duties in Washington and 

 the preparations for the reception of the 

 members of the congress on their visit to 

 that city kept away both Dr. Walter Hough 

 and Dr. J. Walter Fewkes. Dr. Carl Lura- 



