work of twelve years' labor, and show, with becoming pride, his own half-hundred volumes upon the subject, shall we say that there is no place for this work? When Lönnrot, Aspelin, Krohn, and the faithful Finnish societaires rescue hundreds of thousands of the most pregnant popular riddles, songs, charms, etc, from the oblivion into which all traditions, lost in the irresistible march of modern civilization, shall not our highest praise be given to them for their work? And here, in our midst, one race is being ruthlessly swept out of existence, and its lore fast perishing, another has just passed from a condition favorable to the development of legend and popular literature, and another stratum of our population is evanescent, and with Americanization of the emigrant, passes away his rich fund of inherited customs, superstitions, and literature. Folk-Lore societies encourage the collection, publication, and study of this important and beneficent information and serve an important purpose in our civilization.
What, then, shall be said to those zealous scholars who claim that Folk-Lore is but a part of some other science—as only a proper dependency of some other kingdom of thought? Not indeed to any new nomenclature or arrangement of science, but to some branch of it which was in existence when Folk-Lore, less than fifty years old as a science, was imagined. What say some of the masters upon this subject? Monsieur Gaidoz, of the highest authority as a scholar and savant, defines it as "that ensemble of traditions and popular literature, which, to abridge, is called to-day, ordinarily, by the English name of Folk-Lore. True it is, that closely allied to Folk-Lore are other sciences, which in turn assist it, and derive aid from it." "It is true," says Professor Sayce, "that it is often difficult to draw the line between Folk-Lore and Mythology, to define exactly where one begins, and the other ends, and there are many instances in which the two terms overlap each other." "Folk-Lore," says Machado y Alvarez, "has close relations with Sociology." It falls within certain limits, within the limits of Sociology. Again, "It follows, from what has been said, that though Folk-Lore, in my opinion, has something in common with Psychological biology, something in common with Sociology, and, of course, something in common with Anthropology also, it
