124 REPORT — 1870. 



Parliament in a body of fifty trustees, consisting principally of great officers of state 

 and of nominees of certain families whose ancestors have contributed to the hetero- 

 geneous contents of that builduig. Aniougst these fiftj^ trustees there are but two 

 or three that are in any wise interested in natural history. Their secretary and 

 chief executive officer is the present principal librarian, with whose great literary 

 qualifications for his position every one is well acquainted, but who would not, I 

 am sure, claim for himself in any sense the name of a naturalist. It will thus be 

 seen that the actual government of om' natiu-al-histoiy collections is at present 

 vested in persons who have no special qualifications for the task. But, it may be 

 said, there is the superintendent of the natural-history collections, and the keepers 

 of the various departments into which they are divided — have they nothing to do 

 with the administration ? To this I reply, very little indeed, unless their advice 

 is asked, or unless they choose to offer it. And, in the latter case, the}' can only 

 address the trustees through the secretary, who is the only official present at the 

 meetings of the trustees, and in whose hands, therefore, the administration of the 

 natural-history collections is practically vested. This objectionable form of govern- 

 ment, we think, ought to be replaced by appointing a director of the proposed new 

 institution, " immediate^ responsible to one of the Queen's ministers." This simple 

 form of admiuisti'ation has been most successful in other scientific institutions, 

 such as the Kew Gardens and Herbarium and the Royal Obsenatory, and we be- 

 lieve it would be the best in the present case. It might, however, be advisable to 

 give the director of the National Museum of Natural Ilistory a board of advice, 

 composed of the heads of the principal departments into which the Museum is 

 divided. Or another mode of softening the despotism would be to appoint a boai-d 

 of visitors, consisting of distingmshed naturalists. These might be delegates from 

 the principal scientific societies of the coimtry, each of whom would be specially 

 bound to see that the particular branch of science to the advancement of wliich his 

 Society is devoted received its fair share of attention. 



As regards the subordinate appointments in the National ^Museum of Natural 

 History, these ought to be made, if not on the nomination of the director, at least 

 not without his fidl sanction and approval. The director, being held responsible 

 for the well-doing of the whole establishment, shoidd certainly be allowed to select 

 his own officers more or less directly. It is well known that some of the appoint- 

 ments made by the trustees in the departments of natural history in the Biitish 

 Museum have been, to say the least of them, in nowise felicitous, and that in one 

 case at least great public scandal has been caused by the notorious incompetence 

 of the person nominated. It is in vain to address remonsti'ances to a body of ir- 

 responsible trustees ; but if the director is required to sanction every nomination, 

 we shall know to whom to apply in case of any appointment not being up to the 

 mai-k, 



II. Of the form of Buildiiif/ of the National Museum of Natural History. 

 In discussing the form of building best adapted for a great National Museum of 

 Natural History, let us begin by considering the principal classes of persons for 

 whose accommodation it is or ought to be constructed. These are : — 



1. The public at large, who go there to get a more or less general notion of the 

 structure of natural objects and of their arrangement in the systema tiatures, 



2. The student who uses the Museum for scientific purposes. 



•3. The officers of the institution, whose business it is to amass and arrange the 

 collections. 



In the opinion of most members of parliament, apparently especially of those who 

 represent metropolitan constituencies, the first of these three classes is that whose 

 accommodation ought to be first considered in the present case. In my opinion, 

 and probably in that of most of those here present, the NatioUtal Museum of Natural 

 History ought to be constructed primarily for the accommodation of the third of 

 the three classes ; for, unless the officers of the institution have ample space and 

 opportunity to examine and arrange the collection, it is obvious that neither the 

 public nor the special student can be benefited thereby. At the same time I do 

 not think that the public ought to be utterly excluded from their Museum four 

 days in every week, as is now the case j and I therefore put it forward as an axiom 



