WHEN the first Congress on this subject met in Paris in 1889 under the presidency of Prof. Ribot, and with Prof. Charles Richet for its secretary, it proved a vigorous and most successful attempt to gather together from all parts of the world the students of a difficult branch of learning in which some methods of modern physics are being used in psychology, and these methods, or at least their results, are invading the province of what our ancestors would have preferred to call metaphysics. In the opinion of many of the most thoughtful students of the subject it has been considered an important point to keep up the connection between the physiological and the psychological sides of the questions under discussion, and the present Congress under the careful and admirable presidency of Prof. Henry Sidgwick, has proved very successful on this point, and has led to much pleasant acquaintanceship between those whose general work lies in different branches of learning. At Paris the full number at the Congress was about 150, and very little notice was taken of it in England; but at this recent Congress in London there have been nearly twice as many members, and it has received 70 or 80 visitors from all parts of Europe and from the United States and Canada. The vice-presidents have been Prof. A. Bain, Prof. Baldwin, Prof. Bernheim, Prof. Ebbinghaus, Prof. Ferrier, Prof. Preyer, Prof. Delboeuf, Prof. Liégeois, Prof. Preyer, Prof. Richet, and Prof. Schäfer. Among the other well-known names of the visitors there were those of Helmholz, Binet, Ribot, Henschen (Upsala), Münsterburg (Freiburg), and among the English names Herbert Spencer, Francis Galton, Prof. Oliver Lodge, Prof. Victor Horsley, Dr. Lauder Brunton, and Dr. Hughlings Jackson. The honorary secretaries were Prof. James Sully and Mr. F. W. H. Myers. The rooms of University College were kindly lent to the Congress by Mr. Erichsen for its use during the four days of the meeting (Aug. 1-4). Prof. Sidgwick's address attracted a large audience. He expressed himself as feeling it his first duty to apologize for the choice of England as the place of meeting, inasmuch as England could not be said to be the country which had done most for experimental psychology which, in the common meaning of the terms, had been most advanced in German and French laboratories, and was making recent and rapid progress in America. However, in a slightly different sense of the word the English school of psychologists from Locke and Hume down to Bain and Herbert Spencer had been for the most part experimentalists or at least empiricists. They had before them at this Congress a very wide range of subjects, too extensive he thought on the whole to be covered by the term “Psychologie Physiologique,” which had been used at Paris as the name of their first Congress, and he thought “Experimental Psychology” more appropriate. In laboratory work the leadership was taken by Germany; in hypnotism France was our master and Germany our colleague. He was glad to see some of the leaders of the Nancy School with them that day, as he thought they were taking the broader lines in the subject, and that Europe was certainly not inclined on the whole to narrow the subject. He would not attempt to discuss the larger questions at that time, but would confine himself to the harmless task of explaining the arrangements that were proposed. In the morning meetings the Congress would be divided into two sections, of which Section A would be devoted to neurology and psycho-physics, and Section B to hypnotism and cognate questions; in the afternoon there would be general meetings.