458 
tology has been much retarded by the neglect of the stu- 
dents of the extinct forms of animal and vegetable life 
to make themselves sufficiently acquainted with the struc- 
ture of the corresponding forms now inexistence. So long 
as fossils were looked upon as the products of numerous 
successive and independent creations, there might have 
been some excuse for this mode of dealing withthem. But 
now that we regard animated nature, past, present, and 
future, as one and indivisible ; now that we acknowledge 
the stream of life, s nce its first appearance on this planet, 
to have been unbroken and continuous, let us exhibit its 
products, whether existing or extinct, in one continuous 
and unbroken series. [he structure of an extinct organism 
can only be correctly undersiood after study of the nearest 
allies at present in existence. The best paleontologist 
must be he that has deduced his knowledge of extinct 
beings from comparison of their remains with the cor- 
responding parts of those now alive. Those who ap- 
NATURE 
[ Oct. 6, 1870 
preciate these truths will not fail to allow that the proposed 
amalgamation of the paleontological collection in the 
general series in the new Museum of Natural History, 
will be a decided step in advance, and one imperatively 
called for in the present state of natural science. 
I have now, I think, touched upon some of the principal 
points on which changes are required in our present sys- 
tem of treatment of the collections of natural history 
belonging to the nation. It would be easy to go into 
further particulars in which reforms are needed. Especially 
I might call attention to the inadequacy in point of num- 
bers of the present staff of officers in some of the Natural 
History departments of the British Museum, the insuf- 
ficiency of the yearly sum allowed for acquisitions, the 
vexatious regulations concerning the examination of 
specimens, and the miserably insufficient accommoda- 
tion for private study. But all these things we may well 
hope to see altered in a new institution, and I will not 
AYSIIVS 9I18Md 
ae! 
3 SEY 
ILI i 
5 & I 
GLASS CASES 
GALLERY 
TD) — ED XD — Uh DT) 
PUBLIC 
YD — CD 
aoe HALL} 
take up time by enlarging upon them. In conclusion, 
however, | will recapitulate the principal topics touched 
on in the following propositions, which I trust the mem bers 
of the British Association will agree with me in putting 
forward as the “ platform” of reforming naturalists. 
1. The administration of the New Museum of Natural 
History should be vested in a director, who should be 
immediately responsible to one of the Queen’s Ministers. 
2. The collections should be primarily divided into two 
series : (z) those intended for public exhibition ; (4) those 
reserve | for private study. 
3. Tae collections @ (for public exhibition) should be 
arranged in their natural order, in one continuous series 
of galleries, so as to give the best possible general idea 
of the principal forms of life, and of their arrangement 
according to the natural system. 
4. The collections 6 (tor private study) should be 
LIBRARY 
STAIRCASE 
PUBLIC GALLERY 
OPEN COURT , 
7) — GD — aM 
WORKING & STUDENTS ROOMS 
PUBLIC GALLERY 
arranged in rooms immediately adjacent to the public 
galleries, in sucha manner that the corresponding portions 
of a and & should practically form but one series, and 
that the private student should have access at all times 
to objects in the public galleries. 
5. Acomplete Library of Natural History should be 
furnished for the special use of the institution, and be 
placed in some central portion of the building, equally 
accessible to all departments. 
6. The collection of osteology, the spirit-preparations, 
the skins in store, the series of British animals,* the 
collection of ‘nests and nidamertal structures,’ and all 
other subordinate collections, should be amalgamated in 
the general series. 
7. The collections of the Palzontological Department 
should likewise be amalgamated with the general series. 
P. L. SCLATER 
