776 



SCIENCE, 



[N. S. Vol. IX. No. 231. 



Proceedings of the United States National Museum. 

 Volume XX. Published under the direction 

 of the Smithsonian Institution 8vo, sii + 

 932 pp., xcvii pis. Washington, 1898. 

 [?1899.] 



The activities and influence of the Smithso- 

 nian Institution have so extended that, instead 

 of a modest Report of some hundred pages, its 

 annual publishing output comprises several 

 bulky octavo volumes. It is only 15 years since 

 the Report of the United States National 

 Museum was issued in distinct covers from that 

 of the Smithsonian Institution. And now, to 

 judge from the copy submitted for review, even 

 this has reached limits that transcend the 

 binder's art, and suggest that a further division 

 into volumes would be beneficial. The line of 

 division is obvious, for the Reports both of the 

 Smithsonian and of the Museum owe their 

 present thickness chiefly to the articles of gen- 

 eral interest which are printed after the annual 

 official statements. The public is, doubtless, 

 grateful for these admirable articles, but its 

 gratitude would be increased were they pre- 

 sented in more convenient form. The numer- 

 ous readers that will be found for Mr. Thomas 

 Wilson's richly illustrated account of ' Prehis- 

 toric Art' will not wish to be weighted with 

 lengthy lists of accessions to the library, of new 

 species described by the Museum staff, or of 

 specimens sent to the Museum for identification. 

 On the other hand, the professional museum- 

 curator, who doubtless keeps the richly sugges- 

 tive, one might say the classical, reports of the 

 Smithsonian officials at hand for reference, will 

 soon find his available space choked up with 

 reprints of papers that he either has no longing 

 for or already has in their original form. 



The present Appendices to the Administrative 

 Reports have, it is true, grown in a natural man- 

 ner, on the one hand out of the summaries of 

 progress in science that used to be attempted by 

 the Smithsonian, and on the other hand out of 

 short accounts or catalogues of specimens in the 

 National Museum. Moreover, there may be some- 

 thing in the terms of the appropriation by Con- 

 gress that renders the present mode of publica- 

 tion an ofiicial necessity. In such case a strong 

 expression of the value atlached at home and 

 abroad to the several sections of these Reports, 



and of the inconvenience resulting from their 

 union, may do something to facilitate a change. 

 There is another argument in favor of the 

 proposed separation. The information con- 

 tained in these reports is as out of date as that 

 in an ordinary science text-book. The world 

 looks for more actuality in news that come 

 from the United States. There is little in this 

 ' Report of the U. S. National Museum for the 

 year ending June 30, 1896 ' that the intelligent 

 readers of Science did not know nearly three 

 years since. We all knew that "Under an 

 order issued by the President on May 6, 1896, 

 the National Museum [with the other depart- 

 ments of the Smithsonian Institution] was made 

 subject to the law regulating appointments and 

 promotions in the Civil Service of the United 

 States." We have read all about the govern- 

 ment exhibit at the Atlanta Exposition in Brown 

 Goode's contemporaneous report. We have 

 moui-ned for Professor C. V. Riley and Mr. R. 

 E. Earll, and, alas ! for the writer of their obit- 

 . uary notices, here reprinted from Science. We 

 have heard enough — perhaps too much — about 

 Alaska and the seal fisheries of Bering Sea. 

 There is little left but the statistics previously 

 referred to. And since the letter of transmittal 

 is dated August 8, 1896, why should we have 

 to await these 284 pages for two years and a 

 half? The reason appears to lie in the elabo- 

 rate papers contained in Part II., which, it is 

 obvious, could not have been published in 1896. 

 Internal evidence shows that Mr. Thomas Wil- 

 son's attactive work on Prehistoric Art, of 340 

 pages, 75 plates and 325 text-figures, was not 

 completed in manuscript before 1897. Mr. 

 Stewart Culin's fascinating account of the 

 origin of chess and playing cards has an intro- 

 ductory note dated August, 1897, and contains 

 quotations from matter printed in that year. 

 The equally interesting account of the exhibit 

 of Biblical Antiquities at the Atlanta Exposi- 

 tion, by Drs. C. Adler and I. M. Casanowicz, 

 contains more than one such reference. It is 

 not likely that Dr. Walter Hough's exhaustive 

 monograph on the lamp of the Eskimo was 

 ready for the printer before the articles that 

 precede it. Why should not all these have 

 been issued separately, or at least reserved for 

 the 1897 Report? 



