98 
NATURE 
| Fune 9, 1870 
play, nor for the provision of the necessary accommoda- 
tion for its study—still less for the separation of a popular 
typical series for public inspection, apart from the great 
mass of specimens whose importance is appreciated only 
by professed naturalists. And, in the attempt to combine 
the two, the public are only dazzled and confused by the 
multiplicity of unexplained objects, densely crowded to- 
gether on the shelves and cases ; the man of science is, 
for three days in the week, deprived of the opportunity of 
real study ; and the specimens themselves suffer severely 
from the dust and dirt of the locality, increased manifold 
by the tread of the crowds who pass through the galleries 
on public days,—the necessity of access to the specimens 
on other days preventing their being arranged in hermeti- 
cally closed cases. 
A Museum of Economic Zoology has been commenced 
at South Kensington. 
There is an unrivalled Zoological Garden or living col- 
lection, well situated in the Regent’s Park, but not the 
property of the State, nor receiving any other than in- 
direct assistance, in the terms on which its site is granted. 
The measures which your memorialists would respect- 
fully urge upon the consideration of Her Majesty’s 
Government, with a view to rendering the collections 
really available for the purposes for which they are in- 
tended, are the following :— 
That the Zoological Collections at present existing in 
the British Museum be separated into two distinct collec- 
tions,—the one to form a Typical or Popular Museum, 
the other to constitute the basis of a complete Scientific 
Museum. 
These Museums might be lodged in one and the same 
building, and be under one direction, provided they were 
arranged in such a manner as to be separately accessible ; 
so that the one would always be open to the public, the 
other to the man of science, or any person seeking for 
special information. This arrangement would involve no 
more trouble, and would be as little expensive as any 
other which could answer its double purpose, as the 
Typical or Popular Museum might at once be made 
almost complete, and would require but very slight, if 
any, additions. 
In fact, the plan proposed is only a further develop- 
ment of the system according to which the Entomological, 
Conchological, and Osteological collections in the British 
Museum are already worked. 
That an appropriate Zoological Library be attached to 
its Scientific Museum, totally independent of the zoologi- 
cal portion of the Library of the British Museum, which, 
in the opinion of your memorialists, is inseparable from 
the general library. 
That the Scientific Zoological Museum and Library be 
placed under one head, directly responsible to one of Her 
Majesty’s Ministers, or under an organisation similar to 
that which is practically found so efficient in regard to 
Botany. 
That the Museum of Economic Zoology at South Ken- 
sington be further developed. 
Your memorialists recommend that the whole of the 
Kew Herbarium become the property of, and be main- 
tained by, the State, as is now the case with a portion of 
it—that the Banksian Herbarium and the fossil plants 
be transferred to it from the British Museum—and that a 
permanent building be provided for the accommodation 
at Kew of the Scientific Museum of Botany so formed.* 
This consolidation of the Herbaria of Kew with those 
of the British Museum would afford the means of including 
in the Botanical Scientific Museum a _ geographical 
* Since this Memorial was written great changes haye taken place in the 
extent and position of the Botanical collections both at Kew and the British 
Museum, and the above recommendations would require some modification. 
This applies especially to the fossil plants, which it seems_ highly 
desirable to retain within an easy distance of the principal geological collec- 
tions, and which might be fully illustrated by including the geographical 
botanical collection in the typical museum in London.—{G. B., June 1870.] 
| botanical collection for the illustration of the colonial 
vegetation of the British Empire, which, considering the 
extreme importance of vegetable products to the com- 
merce of this country, your memorialists are convinced 
would be felt to be a great advantage. 
Your memorialists recommend further, that in place of 
the Banksian Herbarium and other miscellaneous botani- 
cal collections now in the British Museum and closed to 
the public, a Typical or Popular Museum of Botany be 
formed in the same building as that proposed for the 
Typical or Popular Museum of Zoology, and, like it, be 
open daily to the public. ; 
Such a collection would require no great space; it 
would be inexpensive, besides being in the highest degree 
instructive; and, like the Typical or Popular Zoological 
Collection, it would be of the greatest value to the public, 
ee to the teachers and students of the Metropolitan Col- 
eges. 
That the Botanical Scientific Museum and its Library, 
the Museum of Economic Botany, and the Botanic Garden, 
remain, as at present, under one head, directly responsible 
to one of Her Majesty’s Ministers. 
The undersigned memorialists, consisting wholly of 
Zoologists and Botanists, have offered no suggestions re- 
specting the very valuable Mineralogical Collection in the 
British Museum, although aware that, in case it should be 
resolved that the Natural History Collections generally 
should be removed to another locality, the disposal of the 
minerals also will probably come under consideration, 
GEORGE BENTHAM, V.P.L.S. 
W. H. Harvey, M.D., F.R.S. & Z.S., &c., Pro- 
fessor of Botany, University of Dublin. 
ARTHUR HENFREY, F.R.S., & L.S., &c., Professor 
of Botany, King’s College, London. 
J. S. HENSLOW, F.L.S. & G.S., Professor of Botany 
in the University of Cambridge. 
JOHN LINDLEY, F.R.S. & L.S., Professor of Botany 
in University College, London. 
GEORGE BUSK, F.R.S. & Z.S., Professor of Com- 
parative Anatomy and Physiology to the Royal 
College of Surgeons of England. 
WILLIAM B. CARPENTER, M.D., F.R.S. & Z.S., 
Registrar of the University of London. 
CHAS. DARWIN, F.R.S., L.S. & G.S. 
THoMAS HUXLEY, F.R.S., Professor of Natural 
History, Government School of Mines, Jermyn 
Street. 
Noy. 18, 1858 
LONGEVITY IN MAN AND _ ANIMALS 
On Comparative Longevity in Man and the Lower 
Animals. By E. Ray Lankester, B.A., Junior Student 
of Christ Church, Oxford. (London: Macmillan and 
Co. 1870.) 
N this interesting little essay Mr. Lankester appears 
to have accumulated most of the facts with which we 
are at present acquainted, in respect to the duration of life. 
He defines longevity to be the length of time during 
which life is exhibited in an individual ; but does not, of 
course, apply the term individual to entire masses pro- 
ceeding, as in the case of a/siwastrum and many polypes, 
from a process of asexual generation ; and he proceeds to 
point out that there is a longevity belonging to the 
species, and a longevity characteristic of the individual, 
and further, that the average longevity of a species never 
equals its potential longevity, since a thousand accidents 
happen to destroy individuals at an early period of their 
