mations” a “ Metamorphic System” underlying the Lauren- 
tian, and an“ Azoic Cycle,’ preceding the Paleozoic, 
Now there may be a Metamorphic System of older date 
than the Laurentian rocks, and strata deposited during 
“ Azoic” times may also exist; but at present we have 
no knowledge either of the one or the other. Murchison, 
we thought, had settled once and for ever that the 
crystalline schists of the Scottish Highlands were of 
post-cambrian age. © ine xe 
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR 
[Zhe Editor does not hold himself responsible for opinions expressed 
' by his c ondents, No notice is taken of anonymous 
communications.| — 
The Wational Herbarium 
PERMIT me, in your columns, to give shortly the grounds upon 
_ which I made the statement that no herbarium of any kind ex- 
~ isted at Kew Gardens during the time of the Aitons, but that the 
Banksian Herbarium was often, and for a long time systemati- 
cally, used for naming the Kew plants (NATURE, Oct. 3, 1872, 
. 450), which statement is thus dealt with by Dr. Hooker 
Teaena: Oct. 24, 1872, p. 516):—“ Nor was the naming of 
the Kew plants carried out in London, as is supposed. There 
was a large herbarium in constant use at the Royal Gardens at 
the very period alluded to, the breaking up of which, when it 
Was proposed to give up the Gardens, necessitated the formation 
of another.” Pe: 
Instead of my statement heing a supposition, it was hased ‘on 
the following data :—1. The lists of the plants sent up from Kew 
Gardens to be named by Solander when Curator of the Banksian 
Herbarium, which were duly entered in the “garden book,” still 
preserved in the Botanical Department here. 2. The continuance 
of this practice to a recent date, as evidenced by the following 
article in the engagement between Mr. Brown (Solander’s suc- 
cessor in the Banksian Herbarium) and the trustees of the 
British Museum when he became keeper of this department in 
June 1872, “‘that Mr. Brown have full liberty to assist the 
Superintendent of the Royal Botanical Gardens at Kew, in like 
manner as during the lifetime of Sir Joseph Banks.” 3. The 
specific statements in several official reports of the late Sir W. 
J. Hooker, such as this from-one dated 31st December, 1854 :— 
“* Till 1853 our garden was utterly destitute of the two former 
appendages,” viz., an herbarium and library. arte 
~ I was surprised to read Dr. Hooker's declaration that his evi- 
dence is “ unequivocally opposed” to the transfer of the collection 
of dead plants from the British Museum to Kew. In this case I 
have completely misunderstood his position in the repeated 
attempts that have been made to destroy the scientific position of 
the National Herbarium at the British Museum. In 1858, when 
the trustees of the Museum were induced to inquire into the 
necessity for the existence of the herbarium in London, they ex- 
amined Dr. Hooker among other witnesses, and in their finding 
they say, “‘Sir W. Hooker, Dr. J. Hooker, and Dr. Lindley 
have given reasons in favour of the removal of the collections 
from the British Museum to Kew, with the view of rendering 
that establishment more complete.” Other testimony, however, 
had more weight, and so they were ‘‘ unanimously of opinion 
that it is not desirable to recommend the translation of the 
botanical collection from the-British Museum to Kew.” (Return, 
House of Commons, 1859, No. 126, p. 12.) Ten years after, in 
the memorial presented through the Board of Works to the trus- 
_ tees, Dr. Hooker proposed that a ‘‘ Reference Herbarium,” 
‘consisting of the ‘‘ British Museum Herbarium, /nws the speci- 
mens required for Kew” should be kept at the Museum for the 
use of ‘botanists, geologists, amateurs and others resident in 
London, or passing through it, who may want information which 
at would not be worth their while going to Kew to procure.” 
“And more recently, in his evidence before the Science Commis- 
ssioners, Dr. Hooker repeats this proposal with somewhat more 
of detail. The great scientific working herbarium to which all 
botanists should come should be at Kew (Q. 6,683). To secure 
“this, “the two herbaria should be arranged under one head” 
4Q. 6,685). ‘I could bring the collection under one system” 
{Q. 6,730). It would be the duty of the first herbarium in the 
country (?.e. Kew) to supply the British Museum (Q. 6,745). 
The specimens, ‘‘on their arrival at the British Museum, could 
be put into their places by the officers there, the Operation being 
as simple as that of putting books on a shelf ;” and in future “a 
subordinate could intercalate the additions ” (Q. 6,732). 
No doubt these proposals (excluding that made in 1858, on the 
death of Mr. Brown, and before the appointment of Mr. Bennett}, 
contemplate the maintenance of a collection of dead plants ia 
London. But a collection from which ‘‘all specimens of interest 
only to the scientific botanist have been removed to Kew” 
(NATURE, vol. iii. p. gor), and consisting only of the worthless 
duplicates of the two amalgamated herbaria, would be utterly 
useless for scientific purposes, and its maintenance would unques- 
tionably be a waste of public money. 
I will only add, that there is certainly nothing to prevent Dr, 
Hooker “‘ recruiting” the British Museum Herbarium from that 
at Kew to any extent, at once, and without the intervention of a 
Royal Commission. It is quite certain that the trustees and my 
predecessors, like myself, would have welcomed sets of the 
numerous collections, made at the expense of the British Govern- 
ment, which have been distributed from Kew to “ America, 
Paris, Austria, Prussia, Hanover, Holland,” &c., but none of 
which have ever been sent to the National Herbarium at the 
British Museum ! W. CARRUTHERS 
British Museum, Dec, 2 
THERE is no inconsistency between Sir W. Hooker’s state- 
ment, quoted by Mr. Carruthers, that ‘‘till 1853 our garden was 
utterly destitute” of an herbarium and library, and mine that in 
the Aitons’ time there was a large herbarium here, kept up for 
naming the garden collections. Sir W. Hooker of course re- 
ferred to the period during which the gardens had been public 
property. - The herbarium in question was broken up when Kew 
ceased to be a private estabiishment. The words quoted by 
Mr. Carruthers ought hardly in fairness to be detached from the 
context. Sir W. Hooker’s meaning was, of course, that the 
gardens, as a public department, possessed, till 1853, no official 
herbarium or library. He goes on to speak of his own private 
ones, by means of which the work of the garden had been 
carried on ever since he became director, and which, having at 
his death been purchased by the Government, form, with 
those presented by Mr. Bentham and others, the foundation of 
the present collections. 
It is necessary to mention this, as otherwise Mr. Carruthers? 
quotation might lead anyone unacquainted with the facts to sup- 
pose that the work of Kew Gardens up to 1853 had been con- 
ducted without any herbarium or library whatever. 
Mr. Carruthers is mistaken in implying that I ever suggested 
the supplying the British Museum with ‘worthless duplicates ” 
from Kew; and equally so in stating that ‘‘none” of the collec- 
tions distributed here have ever been sent to the British Museum. 
Such an assertion is no encouragement to send more. Nor does 
the fact that no return of any kind has ever been made by the 
British Museum for some thousands of specimens that have been 
sent to it from Kew, offer much inducement to continue such 
gifts. Itis the clear duty of this, as of other similar establishments, 
to distribute its duplicates to such institutions as exert themselves 
to make a suitable return. This is the case with the Herbaria 
of America, Russia, Prussia, Holland, &c., and, in fact, with all 
kindred establishments with which Kew corresponds. It is the 
acquisition by this means of authenticated specimens from almost 
every seat of botanical research, which more especially gives to 
the National Herbarium of Kew Gardens the incomparable 
Position it now holds. Jos. D. Hooker 
Royal Gardens, Kew, Dec. 3 
The Meteoric Shower 
WHILE the observations of the recent meteoric shower con- 
tinue to attract general attention, the following notes of some 
descriptions of the display that have reached me, which will con- 
tribute useful results for comparison with published accounts of 
the phenomenon that have already appeared, will, perhaps, be 
interesting to your readers :— 
On the nights immediately preceding that of the star-shower 
the sky was at some places unclouded, and observations of 
meteors were recorded. The large meteor described in a recent 
