632 ANNUAL REPORT SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION, 1917. 



forced to extend the bounds of science. Applying his continuous 

 experience to a large store of specimens • from far and near, the 

 museum systematist may often have a broader view than one whose 

 studies (more attractive, more profound if you will) have been 

 limited to a single country or to a few isolated species. But he will 

 rightly desire to base his conclusions on something beyond his mu- 

 seum experience, and nowadays the better type of museum worker 

 generally does so. Again, to quote Doctor Bailey : 



We do not realize that there is now appearing the modern systematist, who 

 is not an herbarium hack, but a good field man, an evolutionist and plant 

 geographer, one highly skilled in identification, and reinforced by much col- 

 lateral training of a highly specialized character. 



Let this, however, be quite clear. It is not the business of the 

 museum man, as such, to conduct experimental research, to make 

 field surveys, or to apply his knowledge to industrial processes. " It 

 is his business to supply the labourers in all those other fields with 

 the particular kind of knowledge that the museum can best or can 

 alone furnish. He can, as our Mauritian story showed, identify 

 specimens for them, throw light on their origin, give information 

 as to their natural environment, and thus suggest further research 

 or practical applications of the knowledge already to hand. Some 

 may say : " If this is all, why should not a library serve our pur- 

 pose ? " For one reason, as appears from the same story, because 

 the facts to be gleaned from museum collections are to be found in 

 no library. In any case the identification and comparison of speci- 

 mens are far more easy, rapid, and certain by means of collections. 

 The opinions of the museum expert are based on knowledge drawn 

 from the actual specimens in the museum. Mere book-learning is 

 of no avail. Moreover, no expert carries all his knowledge in his 

 head. He is an expert because he is, as it were, a part of his collec- 

 tions and understands how to use them for his researches. Those 

 who send enquiries to our museums often seem to think that an 

 answer can be despatched by return of post. More often is it the 

 case that a single question demands hours, days, or weeks of study. 

 The search for evidence, the piecing together of scattered threads, 

 and the formulation of exact results make up a lengthy process for 

 which continuity and the concentration of attention are required. 



But we want the public of scientific and of practical men to realize 

 that we are wishful to help them, not indeed by doing their work 

 for them, but by opening to them the resources of our museums. 

 It is a great pity that workers in general do not make more use of 

 the museums. How often, after reading some elaborate memoir, do 

 we not exclaim : " If only the silly fellow had taken the trouble to 

 come to us, what a lot we could have shown him ! " The pity of it 

 is that science is the loser, and the world at large the sufferer. A 



