On Dr. Noetling's conclusions respecting the aboriginal designations for stone implements.

Dr. Noetling's conclusions are that: (a) There were two classes of stone utensils—one consisting of round, water-worn stones, called pe-ura, and used for religious ceremonies; the other of chipped, sharpened stones, called by various names, and used for cutting; (b) The Aborigines had perhaps two words, but probably only one, for siliceous implements; (c) The Aborigines did not manufacture special implements for special purposes.
The arguments he adduces from the aboriginal vocabulary are so cogent that his conclusions are almost inevitable. It seems to me that only some of the details are arguable, and I shall confine myself to these.
I would finally mention that I have heard that there exist some phonographic records of the actual aboriginal speech; if these could be found, they would be of the greatest value. As far as I am able to advance the study of that speech I shall do my utmost, and feel confident that the Royal Society will encourage my efforts.