to a statement by Mr. Pettigrew published in The Times to-day. He says, "I cannot but deeply regret to see a nobleman for whom I entertain the highest respect standing forth as the leader of the secessionists, and in his speech, as reported in your paper of this day, he is represented to describe himself as 'one of the earliest members that joined the association, and afterwards filled the situation of president of the architectural section.' Now, Sir, this must surely be an error of your reporter, for the Marquis of Northampton never attended a meeting of the association, neither proposed either a member or a correspondent, never subscribed to the funds, nay, even declined to be president of the central committee upon its formation, on the ground of his position as president of the Royal Society. The only architectural section ever held was at Canterbury, and Professor Willis was the president." In regard to my being one of the earliest members of the association, I believe I was, though I did not contribute before the division, being then absent from town, and being desirous to know what sums were given by others; but after the separation I at once made a donation, because I thought it advisable that the President of the Royal Society should discountenance an irregularity so dangerous as a precedent. The Reporter was wrong in stating that I claimed the honour of having "filled" the situation of President of the Architectural Section. What I did say was, that I had "accepted" that Presidency for the present Meeting, in fact it was so announced in the printed advertisement, but I did not fill the office, having subsequently accepted that of President of the Meeting. It is also true that I never attended any previous meeting, because there never has been but one,—that at Canterbury last year—at which I fully intended to have been present, had I not been prevented by the necessity of my going abroad and by the state of my health. To return, however, to our regulations. The Committee have come, after great consideration, unanimously to the determination to change our name and adopt a fresh one. It is not one of the names I recommended to Lord Albert; but still it will shew I was sincere in my offer, and will not in any way detract from our position. We are to be called the Archæological Institute of Great Britain. The word "Institute" is, I think, a better name than "Society," and it is borne by one of the leading bodies of Europe—I mean the Institute of Paris. The word implies that we mean to teach, and that we are not merely a company met together for the sake of society. There will be no difficulty in regard to our journal—the name will remain the same. The next number of our journal will be The Archæological Journal, No. 7. You are now called upon to confirm the decision of the Committee; you, of course, have a perfect right to negative the decision of that Committee. This, I trust, you will not do; but place that trust in them which I think they have deserved at your hands. So far we have had a prosperous voyage, and are nearly in port, where I hope we shall arrive safe. With these observations I trust I have made my farewell speech to the controversy, and that we shall have no more of it. If it becomes absolutely necessarv to defend ourselves, of course we must not shrink from this
