After the terrors excited by the alleged danger of using arsenical wall-papers, it is rather a relief to read the opinion of Mr R. Galloway, who has written an article upon the subject in the _Journal of Science_. ‘Has it,’ he asks, ‘ever been proved that persons who inhabit rooms the wall-paper of which is stained with emerald green, suffer from arsenical poisoning?’ He then points out that the injurious effects, if any, must be due to the mechanical detachment of the pigment from the paper, and that such homœopathic doses of the substance as could be carried by the air, would be totally different from the effects which arise from larger doses of arsenic. Moreover, he has made inquiry as to any cases of poisoning occurring during the packing of this finely divided pigment—during which operation the packers are surrounded by clouds of its dust—and could hear of none. Mr Mattieu Williams, a well-known writer on Science, is also of opinion that ‘arsenical wall-papers’ are practically harmless. We are glad to record these opinions, for the tendency of the present time is to point out lurking dangers in every direction, until one is apt to wonder how our forefathers, in their happy ignorance of sanitation, ever contrived to reach adult age. At Reading, this autumn, a honey-fair is to be held, when prizes will be distributed to beekeepers who work on humane and advanced principles, and also to those who can show the greatest amount of unadulterated honey raised in a Berkshire hive. Such a show as this is worthy of every encouragement, for honey fetches a high price, and so does wax, even in these days of cheap sugar and composite candles. It thus becomes possible for the intelligent cottager to add considerably to his scanty means; and if he can be taught that honey can be won without periodical destruction of bees and comb, so much the better. There is some complaint that the newfangled hives, efficient though they be, are too expensive to supersede the old straw skep. The British Beekeepers’ Association might well turn their attention to this aspect of the matter. Last year, Professor Huxley stated it as his opinion that no act of man could possibly influence the increase or decrease in the number of sea-fish. This was in answer to the gloomy anticipations of many that the herring and other fisheries would be gradually annihilated unless our fishermen were compelled by law to observe certain conditions. So far as herrings are concerned, the recent enormous catches have shown that there are fish as good and plentiful in the sea as ever yet came out. Last month, we saw these fish in splendid condition being sold at the Farringdon Fish Market, London, at one penny per dozen. By the way, can any one explain why, in these days of refrigerators and cheap ice, eighty-six tons of fish should be allowed in one month to become—at Billingsgate—unfit for human food?