368 NATURAL SCIENCE [December 
THE FRANK BUCKLAND COLLECTION 
AMoNG other matters that cannot but prove interesting reading to 
the authorities at South Kensington Museum, the Report of the 
Select Committee recently issued contains the following paragraph :— 
“We recommend that the Museum of Fish Culture should be 
abolished. Previous recommendations to this effect have been made. 
Phe Secretary and the Director both agree that it should be removed, 
and it has already been offered to two public bodies, being rejected by 
both. The fact is that this collection is dangerous owing to the large 
amount of alcohol in which the fish are stored; it is obsolete, not 
having been revised or increased for several years ; and it does not 
carry out its obligations under the testamentary conditions of Pro- 
fessor Buckland’s will. It occupies a good deal of space. Opinion 
being unanimous, we hope that this collection may disappear without 
delay.” 
The state of things is no doubt disgraceful, but the remedy 
proposed seemed too severe to many naturalists, and among others 
to the Piscatorial Society, which appointed a committee, consisting 
of Dr C. S. Patterson, Mr G. J. Chatterton, and Mr C. E. Walker, to 
investigate the matter. The following report was unanimously 
adopted by the Society :— 
“The committee inspected the collection, which they found in a 
deplorable condition, and quite inadequate to carry out the testator’s 
intentions, evidently owing to absolute neglect since it was taken 
over. There being no catalogue it is impossible to determine how 
much of the original collection still exists. The purchased additions 
apparently consist of something less than two dozen specimens, the 
majority of which have no direct bearing upon British fish industries. 
A large amount of the space allotted to the exhibit is taken up by 
objects which, however interesting in themselves, have no connection 
with either fish or fisheries. Your committee fully endorse the 
opinion of the Select Committee of the House of Commons as to the 
danger arising from the specimens preserved in spirits, as the build- 
ing is entirely unsuited for the storage of such exhibits, but fail to 
see the point of the objection as regards the Buckland bequest, inas- 
much as the majority of the fish in alcohol belong to the Day collec- 
tion, which is not in any way an industrial exhibit, and should be 
placed in the Natural History Museum. As regards the testator’s 
intention to provide a consulting and reference room for his fellow- 
countrymen, whether interested in sea or river fisheries, your com- 
mittee are of opinion that such an educational centre is urgently 
needed, and that the collection in question, although inadequate 
through neglect, is capable of being brought up to date and of taking 
the place contemplated for it by the donor. Subject to Mrs Buck- 
land’s life interest a sum of £5000 was bequeathed to the Director 
and Assistant-Director of the South Kensington Museum in trust for 
the British nation to provide lectures on fish culture in connection 
with this unique series of specimens. Your committee, however, have 
