s observers of barbaric tribes.

It does not quite seem to me that Mr. Max Muller makes his audience
acquainted with these precautions of anthropologists, with their sedulous
sifting of evidence, and watchfulness against the theoretical bias of
observers. Thus he assails the faible, not the fort of our argument, and
may even seem not to be aware that we have removed the faible by careful
discrimination.

What opinion must his readers, who know not Mr. McLennan's works,
entertain about that acute and intrepid pioneer, a man of warm temper, I
admit, a man who threw out his daringly original theory at a heat, using
at first such untrustworthy materials as lay at hand, but a man whom
disease could not daunt, and whom only death prevented from building a
stately edifice on the soil which he was the first to explore?

Our author often returns to the weakness of the evidence of travellers
and missionaries.

Concerning Missionaries

Here is an example of a vivacite in our censor. 'With regard to ghosts
and spirits among the Melanesians, our authorities, whether missionaries,
traders, or writers on ethnology, are troubled by no difficulties' (i.
207). Yet on this very page Mr. Max Muller has been citing the
'difficulties' which _do_ 'trouble' a 'missionary,' Dr. Codrington. And,
for my own part, when I want information about Melanesian beliefs, it is
to Dr. Codrington's work that I go. {103} The doctor, himself a
missionary, ex hypothesi 'untroubled by difficulties,' has just been
quoted by Mr. Max Muller, and by myself, as a witness to the difficulties
which trouble himself and us. What can Mr. Max Muller possibly mean? Am
I wrong? Was Dr. Codrington _not_ a missionary? At all events, he is
the authority on Melanesia, a 'high' authority (i. 206).

THE PHILOLOGICAL METHOD IN ANTHROPOLOGY

Mr. Max Muller as Ethnologist

Our author is apt to remonstrate with his anthropological critics, and to
assure them that he also has made studies in ethnology. 'I am not such a
despairer of ethnology as some ethnologists would have me.' He refers us
to the assistance which he lent in bringing out Dr. Hahn's Tsuni-Goam
(1881), Mr. Gill's Myths and Songs from the South Pacific (1876), and
probably other examples could be added. But my objection is, not that we
should be ungrateful to Mr. Max Muller for these and other valuable
services to anthropology, but that, when he has got his anthropological
material, h