?l6 Recent Literature. [oa 



Shufeldt's 'Scientific Taxidermy for Museums.' 1 — This memoir is pre- 

 sented by Dr. Shufeldt as the result of studies of mounted specimens 

 largely in the collections of the United States National Museum, made by 

 him at the request of the authorities of that Institution. As an expert 

 whose opinion could be considered authoritative, he was desired to make 

 a critical examination of the specimens of taxidermy displayed "in the 

 National Museum and Smithsonian Institution" and to suggest plans for 

 further improving exhibits of this nature. 



Dr. Shufeldt's essay opens with a general review of the taxidermist's 

 profession and its requirements. He compares the old with the 'New 

 Taxidermy' and, in our opinion, rightly claims for the latter a place 

 among the arts. Then follows a detailed consideration of many examples 

 of the taxidermist's skill, including representatives of Invertebrates, 

 Fishes, Reptiles, Birds, and Mammals. This part of the paper, covering 

 48 pages, is very fully illustrated by 82 full-page half-tone plates from 

 photographs of the specimens described and commented upon. 



Dr. Shufeldt's remarks are timely. The day has arrived when the 

 work of the artist-taxidermist should receive the attention it deserves. 

 The day has passed when the name taxidermist can be applied to the 

 whole group of animal stuffers and mounters, from the village barber, who 

 'sets up' a pet cat or canary, to the expert modeller of a bison. 



It is only within comparatively recent years that taxidermy could 

 rightly claim rank as an art. Its development is in part due to the 

 cumulative agency of transmitted experience, but more especially to the 

 establishment of departments of taxidermy in our large museums. Here, 

 secure of a salary which is in no way affected by the amount of work 

 performed, the artist-taxidermist can give full scope to his originality. 

 Patience and an unlimited amount of time are absolutely necessary 

 adjuncts of the higher class of taxidermy. For this reason, even when 

 other things are equal, the commercial taxidermist cannot compete with 

 the museum worker. If the former should devote one half the time to 

 his subjects that the latter conscientiously gives to his, he would become 

 bankrupt. His customers, the public, are not educated to a proper 

 appreciation of truly artistic taxidermy and they are therefore giyen no 

 more than their money's worth. In other words, they pay a low price 

 for an inferior class of work. 



Dr. Shufeldt is therefore to be thanked for his clear exposition of the 

 differences which exist between the trade and the art of taxidermy. Let 

 us hope his words will so open the eyes of the public to the merits of this 

 new art that a taxidermist may feel warranted in establishing a studio 

 whose patrons shall not be purchasers of rugs and feather screens, but in 

 a strict sense patrons of the arts. — F. M. C 



'Scientific Taxidermy for Museums (Based on a Study of the United States 

 Government Collections). By R. W. Shufeldt, M. D. Report U. S. Nat. Mus. (for 

 1892), pp. 369-436. Pll. xv-xevi. Washington, 1894. 



