of different types of maps, all of which are excellent, but I feel bound to state that I regard Richard Kiepert’s map of Central Europe as representing the great _desideratum_ of map-making. The essential physiographic features of that most intricate region, including the primary and secondary axes of the continent, are exhibited with such clearness that it is possible to use this map before a large class in a college or university lecture course. For all ordinary purposes of the high school, the Sydow-Habenicht map of Europe is sufficient, and as it is the map of the whole continent, the geographical relationships of Europe and Africa and Europe and Asia are shown, as, of course, they cannot be with the Kiepert map, but no college class should be denied the privilege of seeing the Kiepert map or its equivalent, and if there is an equivalent I am not acquainted with it. Some of the maps of the French houses of Delagrave and Hachette & Company are deserving of wider use in this country, but our dependence on English and German publications, for commercial reasons; is not likely to be diminished for several years to come. These French firms apparently make little effort to advertise their wares in the United States, so that the difficulty of keeping track of their latest works and ordering them when they are known, constitutes a serious obstacle to their general use. The second grand division of wall maps is made up of those which attempt primarily to show forth political divisions. They fall naturally into two further divisions; first, political maps of modern countries as they are at the present time, and second, historical maps which represent political divisions of the earth as they were at different times in the past. The most accurate maps of the first class are, generally speaking, published by the various governments of the civilized world, particularly of those military nations whose general staffs have, from the necessities of scientific warfare, been driven to preparing as accurate representations of the surface of the earth as is humanly possible. Of course, such maps record the minutest topographical details, and to that extent are physical in character, but for that matter, purely political maps in the sense of totally ignoring all physical features, are becoming, happily, almost unknown. All a political map is, then, is a map which pays relatively more attention to the human side of geography than to the physical, and so, as it were, looks at the face of the continent from the point of view of man rather than nature. There are good maps of the first subdivision almost without number, and they are well known by people other than specialists. Those published in England and America by such houses as Rand-McNally, W. & A. K. Johnston, George Philip & Son, and Edward Stanford may serve as good examples. They are quite adequate for the English speaking world and are known to schoolmen throughout this country.