NOTES.
PRESERVATION OF OHIO
MOUNDS.--Three years ago Pro-
fessor F. W. Putnam, in a letter to one
of the editors of the
QUARTERLY, said: "The State of Ohio
has an important
trust in her keeping, and one which has
been neglected too
long. Even now, many of the important
works of the peo-
ples who formerly lived in her beautiful
valleys, have been
leveled by the plough or thoughtlessly
destroyed in building
towns and cities." At the annual
meeting for 1886 of the
State Archaeological and Historical
Society, the necessity of
immedite steps to preserve the mounds
and earthworks in
Ohio was strongly urged and a permanent
committee was
chosen to present the matter to the
Legislature. As yet
little impression has been made on the
law-makers and purse-
holders, but the subject has by no means
been dropped. In
a recent communication to the Ohio
State Journal President
Sessions, of our Society, again urges
the necessity of action,
and among other things says:
"Ohio is richer in archaeological
and prehistoric remains
than any other State, and thus far has
done absolutely noth-
ing to protect the many ancient mounds,
earthworks, burial
places and village sites. It is not very
flattering to one's
State pride that some Boston women were
applied to by
Professor Putman of the Peabody Museum,
Cambridge,
Mass., to buy the famous Serpent Mound
in Adams county.
If he had not taken an interest in its
preservation it is evident
it would soon be a thing of the past. Is
it not to be deplored
that the public-spirited citizens of
Ohio do not take a deeper
interest in the preservation of these
wonderful remains of a
prehistoric race? It is to be hoped that
the Governor will
call the attention of the Legislature in
his message to the im-
portance of their preservation, and that
a small appropriation
may be made toward securing from
destruction some of the
more important and ancient monuments of
our State. There
288