xxviii
Appendix No. 1.
societies and field clubs of the metropolitan districts have already declared
their views on former occasions, and it is chiefly with the object of
attempting to define the respective attitudes of the parties concerned that
I have entered the arena on this occasion.
There are at the present time more than twenty Natural History Clubs
in the environs of London, and of these many have long been in the habit
of making collecting excursions to our Forest. Our own Society and our
Walthamstow colleagues have their head-quarters in the Forest district.
Some of the East-end clubs are entirely composed of working men, and
have done excellent work in fostering a healthy taste for the study of out-
door natural history among this class of the community, a matter of
considerable importance to us when we so often hear that the Forest has
been acquired as a recreation-ground chiefly for the working men of Bast
London. In addition to these numerous local clubs there are the great
London societies, which, like the Linnean, Zoological, Entomological,
Royal Microscopical, and Quekett Club, are all interested in promoting
the study of biology in its various branches. Now, in face of the rapid
destruction of all the truly wild tracts of country in the vicinity of
London, it must assuredly be of the greatest importance to the natural-
history public as a body to watch with the most jealous eye the dealings
of those in authority with this the largest, wildest, and most accessible
of all the open spaces in the metropolitan district. To naturalists gene-
rally such a tract of primitive country as that which has come under the
management of the Corporation is something more than a mere picnicking-
ground ; to all students of Nature it is a biological preserve. Nay, I will
even go so far as to declare that forest management is essentially a
scientific subject in itself—a natural-history question in the broadest
sense. Now, with the exception of our esteemed members the Verderers,
by whom we were invited to a conference some months ago, it appears to
me that the Conservators as a body, and a confessedly unscientific body,
are not aware that scientific counsel is necessary to enable them to faith-
fully carry out the Act of Parliament, i.e., to keep the area committed to
their charge in its " natural aspect " as a forest. I will therefore take the
present opportunity of pointing out that scientific criticism would have
been disarmed and the fears of natural-history students allayed if the
Epping Forest Committee had only recognised the claims of Science by
consulting, let us say, the Directorate of Kew Gardens, or by appealing
to the councils of some of the London Scientific Societies.
If we consider the actual work done during the period that the Forest
has been under the jurisdiction of the Corporation, we may fairly say
that the energies of this body have hitherto been developed in the direction
of landscape gardening; i. e., of artificialising certain portions of the
Forest. The great hotel at Chingford has been made the centre of con-
vergence of a number of roads, some of which have been newly cut, even
at the risk of being superfluous. The aquatically-disposed holiday-maker
may hire boats in which he can paddle about on "ornamental water," or
can embark on a floating machine turned by hand-paddles, and possibly
constructed with a view to delude the occupants into the belief that they
are on board a steamer. The exhausted East Londoner, whose vitality
appears to require that recuperation which seems to be derivable from
swinging, steam-roundabouts, and throwing sticks at cocoa-nuts, has
been amply provided for, and his wants have in every way been attended
to. In 1881 the Forest was threatened by a railway, in 1882 by a tram-
way, and again this year another railway bill is about to be introduced
into Parliament. To all these schemes the Committee, no doubt with
the best motives, gave and still give their support, and one has to .seriously
ask what is the meaning of the word "Conservator," and how far this