exact. There have been times, however, when, in reading some research paper, one has thought that an unfamiliar term used could just as well have been replaced by a more familiar one. The importance of this subject of the terminology of science, from the point of view of this address, is seen in the fact that research papers constitute a very large bulk of the scientific literature of to-day, and this is especially the case with respect to the regular journals of science. The literature of science thus is appealing to a diminishing circle of readers, and in many cases it makes no appeal at all to the people. It damps the enthusiasm of the reader who is not an expert, but who wants to be interested. For myself I believe strongly that, to justify and maintain its existence, an avowedly scientific journal must demand a high standard in the papers which it publishes, and cannot afford to lower that standard in any respect. My only reason for referring here to the topic of terminology is that it is without doubt one of the causes of the gap between science and the people. The Present Agencies for Bringing Science to the People. To turn now to another part of my general theme. What are the present agencies for making science available for the people? It is impossible for me to refer to them in any detail, and yet I want to indicate the extent of these agencies. Undoubtedly the first to be mentioned should be the teaching of science in our Schools, and I would add also, in our Training Colleges and Universities. Naturally I do not intend to plunge headlong into the complex problems of Education, but there are one or two points connected with them which are closely related to my subject. By far the greater number of students who take a particular science at school, and as a Stage I unit at the University, are not going to find their life work in that science. But it is through these school courses and the Stage I University courses that science gains its widest opportunity for getting into touch with the people. I have already tried to describe briefly the intellectual and spiritual benefits which science can confer upon individuals. It can on the one hand bestow the gift of intellectual happiness by revealing something of the romance of the world in which we live. It cannot accomplish this if the teacher himself lacks imagination, if the syllabus is over-concerned with the mere acquisition of facts, and if the text books used are too formal. On the other hand, science can provide a most valuable form of mental discipline leading to a steady and reasonable outlook upon life, and to the development of character. It cannot accomplish this if the syllabus is designed to save the student as much personal labour and socalled drudgery as possible, and takes the form of “potted” science. Somewhere between these two extremes thus indicated lies the ideal method. There must be something wrong with the teaching if it fails to stir the imagination of those who are taught, or worse still if it leads a proportion of them actually to dislike