ANTPIROPOLOGICAL SOCIETY. 49 



arrangement would be demanded as the only natural one (supple- 

 mented of course by occasional and separate comparative collec- 

 tions.) With the miscellaneous collections that are likely to come 

 in, however, unless Congress does make special appropriations, the 

 present arrangement is likely to be found the best one. A thorough 

 and exhaustive ethnographic collection would show each product of 

 a country's civilization in the different stages of its evolution and 

 development, but with a miscellaneous and scattered collection we 

 must draw on various countries to illustrate this development. 



A recent article on museum classification says "The comparative 

 method necessarily cuts across the natural order of things in their 

 relations to time; and this is an obvious defect, which, when ap- 

 plied to anthropological collections, is destructive of all natural 

 conceptions as to the way in which modifications and changes really 

 arise or flow out of pre-existing, localized, or racial conditions." 

 It seems to me, as far as I may express any opinion on the subject, 

 that the question tends to settle itself thus. 



With exhaustive collections from representative tribes and with 

 sufficient funds to fill out or supplement the collections the ethno- 

 graphic plan is the most desirable one. 



With scattered and miscellaneous collections the comparative 

 method makes the best use of the material. 



The Museum plan is an improvement on each of the above, as it 

 combines the advantages of both. The classification provisionally 

 adopted is a teleologic one, subject to special modifications to suit 

 special cases. To illustrate this: 



In the Museum there is a collection of pipes from all parts of the 

 world. The Haidah carved black slate pipe stands out as unique, 

 and it might seem that the fault in this comparative method of ar- 

 rangement is that it does not form a fair comparison of the intelli- 

 gence or artistic tastes and abilities of the various tribes represented. 

 It might be argued that possibly the pipe was the only thing they 

 could carve or do carve. An ethnographic collection from this 

 people would show that they carve equally surprisingly in wood, 

 bone, etc., and have a great deal of artistic taste. The Museum, 

 recognizing this, makes a separate monographic collection and ex- 

 hibition of Haidah carvings, so we have one or two Haidah pipes 

 in the pipe collection, and, besides this, one or two in a mono- 

 graphic collection of Haidah carvings. 



It is aimed in all cases where such arrangement may seem to be 

 4 



