maintain a cabinet of objects,’’ was rewritten as ‘‘[the Academy] will 
establish and maintain a museum.’’!! 
The Academy’s ties to those organizations interested in starting 
a new museum were strong, and it took little effort to make them 
stronger. Similarly, the Academy sought better relations with other 
science groups in the city, including the St. Louis Horticultural Socie- 
ty, the St. Louis Herpetological Society, and the St. Louis Bird Club. 
The Academy also affiliated itself with larger organizations such as the 
Missouri Academy of Science, which was established in 1934; the 
American Association for the Advancement of Science; and the Associa- 
tion of Academies of Science. !? 
The Academy strengthened ties to other organizations by extend- 
ing membership to them. Other ways the Academy increased member- 
ship included direct-mail and personal solicitation.'? These member- 
ship schemes proved very successful. One year’s growth illustrates the 
point: membership grew from 183 active members at the beginning of 
1932 to almost 300 by January of the next year. 
A larger membership meant more revenue from dues and dona- 
tions, which of course was good news. The bad news was the ineffi- 
cient way the Academy administered its finances. To remedy this, a 
finance committee was formed. The new committee promptly analyzed 
the organization’s finances and subsequently introduced novel manage- 
ment procedures and investment strategies that led to a safer and more 
lucrative trust. !4 
The Academy also took stock of another important asset—its col- 
lections. In 1929 the whereabouts of some of the collections that had 
been removed from the Olive Street building ten years before was uncer- 
tain. This concerned the members, who began an inventory. An ex- 
haustive list of the collections had been completed by 1932. Darling 
K. Greger, who compiled the inventory, made this observation about 
the collections: 
It is fortunate for the Academy that the collections . . . are in safe hands 
and [that] their preservation is assured against the time when the Academy 
may acquire a permanent home and when they may go to form the nucleus 
for extensive collections of their various types. !5 
While the members kept busy reorganizing and revitalizing the 
organization in the early 1930s, the Academy’s more routine activities 
went on as usual. The publication of the Transactions remained a vital 
part of what the Academy accomplished. Three volumes were printed 
between 1929 and 1934. Some examples of the scholarship contained 
in these volumes include Phil and Nellie Rau, ‘‘The Sex Attraction and 
Rhythmic Periodicity in Giant Saturnid Moths’’ (1929); Gayle B. 
Pickwell, ‘‘The Prairie Horned Lark’’ (1931); and C.E. and H.E. Burt, 
44 
