It certainly is rather startling to hear from the country from which have come the severest criticisms on the use and the users of amalgam fillings, the admission that “amalgam per se, is an excellent filling material.” With amalgams, as with the other plastic materials, a _perfect_ filling of its kind has yet to be discovered, for a measure of uncertainty seems to exist in all of them; but as a proof that an amalgam _may_ make a good useful filling, I can say that I have seen more than one apparently in a perfect condition after thirty years’ wear, and I cannot but think that much of the discredit attaching to its use, arises from its being the filling we naturally have recourse to in all cases of doubt and difficulty. That “the use of plastic filling material tends to lower the standard of Dentistry, thereby diminishing its sphere of usefulness,” is scarcely a fair way of stating the matter. The indiscriminate use of them would certainly do so, but the judicious selection of them in cases unsuited for the use of gold, need not necessarily interfere with the acquirement of the manipulative ability necessary for making good gold fillings, nor is it desirable that it should do so, as the power of manipulation required for the successful use of gold, must tend to perfect the powers of the operator in the use of all plastic materials, and must thus extend the sphere of usefulness of that Dentistry which has for its standard of excellency, ability to save teeth. Time has only permitted me very briefly to notice some portions of this new creed, to show that it contains much that might be productive of profitable discussion, but I think from what has been said, we may reasonably conclude that each material has its own particular advantages, and that until we are in possession of a filling suitable for universal application, a judicious selection is necessary on the part of the operator in each particular case. The fourth, and not the least important object of the society is “the cultivation of a generous professional spirit amongst practitioners throughout the district,” and to this I hope may be added throughout the whole body of the profession; for the knowledge that we are branches of one central society, should lead to a feeling of fellowship not only with the members of the parent society, but also with the members of the other branches, and surely it is not too much to hope, that with the extension of the Society and its branches, and the feeling of professional brotherhood thereby engendered, we may see the gradual increase of that Christian charity which “thinketh no evil,” and which would scorn all attempts at self-exaltation, by the disparagement of the efforts and qualifications of a fellow practitioner, which I fear has been greatly encouraged by the isolation that has so long existed in our speciality.