kings and parliaments cannot make new words. I think folk-lorists will look upon it as an axiom that kings could not inaugurate such a ceremony as that at Alnwick, which must have had some more powerful creator than the worst of English kings; and they will bear in mind that, on the coast of Ireland, is another water ceremony, where the victim is not a prospective freeman of a municipal corporation. Our point is, then, that survivals want accounting for, and, whatever may ultimately prove their proper place in the history of our race, no society is better able to account for them than this, no science better able to cope with the questions at issue than folk-lore; and I cannot help expressing an earnest hope that we shall now be able to attract to our standard men whose interest in folk-lore does not lie outside institutions—that we shall be able, by our methods and by our aims, to show that we occupy a place among the learned societies occupied by no other body, and which sadly needs being adequately filled.
In India there is a society specially established for the study of institutions, and it has been called by the honored name of Sir Henry Maine; in England the Folk-lore Society nominally occupies the ground. But if it does not soon actually occupy it by paying attention to these subjects, some other organisation will step in to do its work.
What, then, it appears to me we have now to do is to steadily look our position in the face—ascertain our requirements, and organise to meet every emergency. Our study embraces all that is traditional in its origin—folk- tales, hero-tales, legends, superstitions, usages, customs, and institutions. Every branch must be assisted ; every student seeking our aid must be welcomed and assisted; every member must consider what folk-lore has become under the auspices of this society, and must be a specialist only to enable him to contribute to the general stock of knowledge.
According to my bias, as I frankly term it, I believe the
