454 



NATURE 



[June i, 191 j 



will probably long remnin unexcelled as a compre- 

 hcnsive, comparative study of the broad features of 

 stellar spectra. Its magnitude prevents it, of course, 

 from dealinj^f with the individual spectra in detail, 

 but it stands not only a memorial to Dr. Draper, 

 out also to the patient and specialised studies of Mrs. 

 Fleming. 



The minute examination of such a wonderful col- 

 lection of photographs afforded great opportunities for 

 discovery, and right well did Mrs. Fleming and her 

 staff avail themselves of them. Of the eighteen nova: 

 discovered since 1885, fourteen first stood revealed on 

 the Harvard photographs, by reason of their char- 

 acteristic spectra; of these, ten were found by Mrs. 

 Fleming. 



The first nova thus found was Nova Normae, on a 

 plate taken at Arequipa on July 10, 1893, and examined 

 by Mrs. Fleming on October 26 of the same year. 

 Some of these discoveries were rather more belated ; 

 for example. Nova Persei (No. i) "appeared" in 

 1887, but was not "discovered" until the plate was 

 examined at Harvard in 1895. 



Then, again, Mrs. Fleming's researches led her to 

 the discovery of a great number of new variable stars, 

 stars having peculiar spectra — such as those of the 

 Wolf-Rayet type— and nebulae. In a list of 108 

 nebulae discovered at Harvard, and published in 

 No. VI., vol. Ix., of the "Annals," Mrs. Fleming was 

 credited with fifty-two, discovered during the period 

 1888 to 1907. It was also her examination of the 

 Harvard plates, in 1891, that revealed the duplicity 

 of 3 Lyrag, which, up to that time, had remained an 

 enigma, from the changes in its spectrum, to astro- 

 nomers. Such discoveries as these, bv Mrs. Fleming, 

 have been a consistent feature of the' Harvard "Cir- 

 culars" for many years, and from Prof. Pickering's 

 report for the year ending September 30, 1910, w^e 

 learn that, during that year, Mrs. Fleming's keen 

 examination revealed twenty-one new variable stars, 

 one star of the fourth type, two of the fifth, four of 

 the sixth, four gaseous nebulae, and one star the 

 spectrum of which appears to be unique. Not a bad 

 haul of discoveries for one year! 



Those who had the good fortune to come into per- 

 sonal contact with the deceased astronomer found her 

 most unassuming in her manner, although fitted and 

 ever-ready to give, from her wonderful store of know- 

 ledrre, every assistance possible to anvone who desired 

 information concerning the remarkable variations of 

 stellar spectra. At Harvard, in America, in fact, 

 throughout the whole astronomical world, her death 

 will be felt as a great loss. 



William E. Rolston. 



THE SCIENCE MUSEUM. 

 J N Nature for May 4 we announced the publication 

 of the report of the Departmental Committee 

 on the Science Museum and the Geological Museum, 

 and we gave some extracts from it. Since then 

 "Further Correspondence and Memoranda" have 

 been published (Cd. 5673), and besides this there have 

 been many letters in The Times on the subject. 

 Ihese have come mainly from biologists, urging that 

 any building erected as a science museum at South 

 Kensington would ultimately interfere with the possi- 

 bilities of the expansion of the Natural History 

 Museum. As a counterblast to the memorial from 

 representatives of the physical and mechanical sciences 

 published in the report, there has been issued another 

 trom representatives of the biological science. As 

 usual, the men of science are working against each 

 other, a sorr\' spectacle which must greatlv gratifv 

 those who are asked for monev to help its progress.' 

 NO. 2170, VOL. 86] 



It woukl af^ear also from an "Historical Memor- 

 andum," primed in the white paper referred to, and 

 from a letter from Sir Norman Lockyer, which was 

 printed in Tuesday's Times, that the authors of the 

 correspondence to which reference has been made 

 have not been too careful about their facts ; the main 

 facts are shortly stated in Sir Norman Lockyer's letter, 

 which we reproduce, but even he does not tell us the 

 whole story. When land was to be allocated to the 

 Natural History Museum, 1863, two proposals were 

 before the Government, according to Lord Palmerston, 

 its spokesman {Hansard, June 15, 1863), schemes de- 

 manding three acres and eight acres respectivr-Iy. 

 Ixird Palmerston compromised with five acres, .1; 

 the same area on which it is now proposed to 1 

 the Science Museum. 



Sir, 



To the Editor of The Times. 



Some four years ago I considered it my duty to call the 

 attention of the Royal Commission of the Exhibition of 

 1851 to the fact that practically the whole of the land 

 belonging to them had been allocated, and that, to far, no 

 proper provision had been made for a Museum doing for 

 the Physical, Chemical, and Mechanical Sciences what the 

 British Museum Library does for books, the Galleries for 

 Antiquities, the National Gallery does for pictures, and 

 the Natural History Museum does for the Biol<^ical 

 Sciences. 



As the action of the Royal Commission on my 

 Memorandum has produced a situation which has given 

 rise to some correspondence in The Times, I ask your 

 permission to deal with the main question, which is being 

 lost in the various side issues and details now being 

 discussed. 



In the original idea of the Prince Conscwt, by whom the 

 purposes to be served by the Estate were laid down, a 

 Science Museum was contemplated. The Commission sold 

 their first plot of land west of Exhibition Road to the 

 Government in 1863. Lord Palmerston, in introducing the 

 Vote for this purchase, said in the House of Commons 

 (Hansard, June 15, 1863) : — 



" Now, the question is, what do we want? What are 

 the requirements that press on the Government? In the 

 first place we want a Patent Museum." . . . "Then we 

 want an addition to the British Museum." . . . Thereafter 

 he referred to the need for a Portrait Gallery, now pro- 

 vided elsewhere. 



The White Paper Cd. 5673 giving, at the instance of 

 Lord Cromer, " Further Correspondence " on this sub- 

 ject, includes an historical memorandum which refers to 

 leading points in the development of the ground. Some of 

 these, however, may well be noted here. 



In 1880 the building of the Natural History Museum 

 was completed, and the land on which it was buik was 

 fenced off on the north side. The area then fenced in con- 

 tained very nearly iij acres, more than twice the land 

 assigned to the Natural History Museum by Lord 

 Palmerston. The building itself covered very nearly 

 3J acres, leaving 8 acres unoccupied. From that day to 

 this, i.e. a period of thirty-one years, there has been very 

 little reduction of this unused ground, sacred for all this 

 time to nursemaids. 



In 1874 the Duke of Devonshire's Royal Commission on 

 Science urged the importance to the nation of the develop- 

 ment of the Science Museum and of the organisation of a 

 Solar Physics Observatory — both institutions in direct 

 furtherance of Science and the Arts, the aim of the Com- 

 missioners in selling the land to the Government in 1863. 

 The Government acted on both these recommendations. 

 In 1876 a Loan Collection of Scientific Apparatus was 

 organised, and the Office of Works gave permission for 

 an Observatory to be erected on the ground. 



In 1876 the success of the Loan Collection was so 

 marked that the Royal Commission offered 100,000/. to 

 commence the building of an adequate Science Museum. 

 In 1888 the Government came into possession (with the 

 regrettable exception of the N.W. corner) of the whole 

 area of land between the Cromwell Road and Imperial 

 Institute Road, nearly 21 acres (20-9). 



