n6 
Notes and Comments. 
be given to the care with which the 1250 illustrations have 
been drawn in order to give the maximum amount of informa- 
tion to the student without confusing him. Some of these are 
coloured in order to show arteries, etc. The present edition 
has been entirely revised ; additional illustrations have been 
given, certain portions have been re-written, notably in the- 
sections relating to the Nemathelminthes, Molluscoida andi 
Annulata. 
MUSEUMS OLD AND NEW. 
Mr. O. G. S. Crawford replies to some criticisms of his 
book on ‘ Man and his Past/ recently made in The Museums 
Journal, in order to substantiate some remarks he made in 
his book. From this we quote the following, and feel relieved,, 
either that Mr. Crawford has not been up in the north, or that 
he considers our Northern Museums are satisfactory. He 
states : — ‘ Possibly there are in some remote towns a few 
museums so unaffected by the reforming spirit, etc. There 
are ; but they are not all remote. I have twice visited 
Hereford Museum. The first time (in 1919), I admired an. 
interesting old map of the county hung in the entrance. The 
next time (in 1921) it was hidden behind a huge stuffed 
crocodile (/ Presented by Lady . . . "), disporting himself in 
a glossy coat of varnish, and surrounded by rocks and vege- 
tation that must have been very unfamiliar to him.. On my 
second visit I failed to find some bronze implements I had 
drawn on my first. They may be there still, but the point 
is that I could not find them. Portsmouth cannot be called 
a “ remote " town ; but its museum is, I think, almost the 
worst I know. Southampton, I regret to say, runs it close „ 
though the material in it (mostly unlabelled) is second to 
none — barring its “ tabular flints/' of course. The labels 
which do exist are either useless or misleading. Bath Museum 
has labels, but the cases are filled with a disorderly jumble of 
specimens, many of them of great archaeological value ; it 
feels like a tomb. Caerleon and Cirencester Museums are 
not unlike each other. Both have fine material covered in 
dust. The iron objects in both need immediate attention. 
The same is true of those in the museum at the Chedw T orth 
Villa. Dover Museum, from what I remember of it about 
ten years ago, was unlabelled and dusty. So,, probably, is 
Folkestone, although the day I called (when returning from 
leave during the war, and delayed half a day there) the 
caretaker was dusting it, and would on no account allow me 
to enter. But the real gem is at Frome, Somerset. Only 
members of some trumpery local “ philosophical society" are 
admitted, a privilege rarely exercised, one would imagine. 
It contains two specimens of archaeological interest ; one is 
a forgery, and the other has no site.' 
Naturalist 
