MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. 



If.) 



seum ? — London is the most central place, and on the 

 whole, the most convenient, for the foreigners who 

 come over. They do not, however, complain of Kew. 

 I see nearly all the foreiijners who come to work at my 

 sort of work, and they all complain bitterly of t)ie two 

 herbaria, but I do not think many of them complain 

 much of coming to Kew. 



332. As a matter of fact, to a person cominsj; tc. 

 London the diiference between going to Kew and going 

 to Cromwell Koad is not really very much now, with the 

 underground railways and the increased facility of 

 travel ? — That depends very much what station they 

 tome to. If they come to Liverpool Street they can 

 get to Kew very nearly as quicklj- as to the British 

 Museum. 



333. The fact of its being essential to keep up a 

 herbarium at Kew, does it not rather point in the 

 direction of Kew being the jolace where the combined 

 lierbarium should be ? — Tes, so far it does ; there is 

 the analogy, and analogy proves something, of 

 Berlin. At Berlin they are at work moving the her- 

 barium from the town down to a place quite as far 

 from Berlin as Kew is. 



334. In working at Kew or the British Museum, do 

 you find frequentlj' that they have not got the books 

 you want ? Have you to use the Linnean Society 

 library, for example ? — No, never. I sometimes go to 

 the Royal Society for books neither have got, but be- 

 tween the British Museum and Kew I can generally 



get everything I want. I have to send down for books j/^. (; ^ 

 at the British iluseum to what they call their General C/arkc v.a.H. 



Library. The botanical library is very good, but ihfly — 



have a general scientific library which, as a rule, con- 7 Nov. 1900. 

 tains all that> I want. 



335. (J/r. Darwin.) There is one statement which you 

 have made which I do not understand. You said that 

 j-ou desire to have the incorporation of the two collec- 

 tions up to date, and that you did not mind about new 

 liungs. Does not that mean allowing tue same state 

 of things to grow up ? — I was speaking jiurely from 

 my own selfish point of view. I have generally nar- 

 rowed mj evidence to that. We cannot possibly catch 

 everj- collection. If a collection was sent from China to- 

 morrow and sold in the market, I should not care so 

 much what became of it for mj' purpose. It has not 

 been named or quoted in books. I travel about 

 Europe. I have been to Geneva many times, to Berlin, 

 and to all sorts of places to see their herbaria, but I 

 cannot possibly capture everything new. I am expected 

 to work up old material in this country. 



336. If you looked beyond your own point of view, 

 you would not approve of that? — I would rather not 

 express any opinion. 



337. How far would the kind of incorporation spoken 

 of in the questions put to Sir George King have saved 

 you time, merely having the cabinets side by side ? — 

 It would save me a great deal of time. It would be the 

 second best thing to complete amalgamation. 



Mr. James Gboves, f.l.s., called; and examined. 



337*. (Sir John iKirk.) Tou have been engaged 

 largely in the work of the British flora, I think ? — I 

 have. 



338. Have you made use of both the Kew Herbarium 

 and that of the British Museum in that work ? — I have 

 constantly used the British Museum, but only occa- 

 sionally Kew. 



339. Can you distinguished the different uses you 

 have made of these two — what leads you to go to one 

 or the other ? — I go to the British Museum to consult 

 books and specimens, mostly in connection with British 

 plants, and to Kew for those I cannot see at the British 

 Museum. 



340. Is it that the one is more convenient to you than 

 the other in locality ? — ^Yes. 



341. But not so much for the material that you get ? 

 — No, purely from the locality. 



342. You have been present and have heard what 

 has been said. What do you think of the proposal that 

 the two herbaria should be united ? — From my point 

 of view it would be very much more convenient if they 

 were united, provided they were in London. But if 

 they were united at Kew for myself and people situated 

 as I am, it would be highly inconvenient. 



343. So that you would recommend, if any change 

 were made, that the amalgamation should take place 

 by moving the Kew collections to the British Museum ? 

 — Certainly. 



344. Have you had to make use of the pre-Linnean 

 collection at all in your work ? — Not to a great extent ; 

 but in connection with the Characese we have had occa- 

 sion in past years to do so. 



345. Have you studied the question from beyond the 

 limited field of British botany'? — I have worked at the 

 Characeas of tlie world, and incidentally in connection 

 with British plants I have worked at European, but 

 not to a great extent at extra-European plants. It 

 seems to me an important point that people coming up 

 to London, as many country botanists do, for a day or 

 two, should be able to consult specimens at the British 

 Museum, and, ifrom a logical point of view, too, I think 

 that the great collections should be in the capital of 

 the country, and not 10 miles away. 



346. {Lord Avehury.) In fact, the same considera- 

 tions that apply to you would apply to London and 

 provincial botanists generally ; they would prefer the 

 great collection being in London rather than elsewhere ? 

 — I think so. I am a business man, and have very little 

 time to spare, so that I am obliged to nurry off to the 

 British Museum immediately after leaving business on 

 the Saturday afternoon in order to secure any daylight. 

 It is during the winter I do almost all my herbarium 

 work. Botanists coming up to London on business or 

 for any other purpose would not usually care to go to 

 Kew to look up perhaps a few odd plants. 



3499. 



SJr. J 



347. You think they would be very reluctant, to see 

 the botanical section moved out of London. I think n",,.. via 

 tuey would, certainly. 



348. {Professor Balfoxtr.) You think it would be a 

 practicil inconvenience to have to go down to Kew ? — 

 Ye^. 



349. When the natural history collections were moved 

 down to Cromwell Boad from Bloomsbury, did that 

 make any difference ? — Not to me, it was about the same 

 distance. 



350. Probably to some 'botanists it makes it slightly 

 more incooivenieni; ? — It wouid entirely depend on where 

 they were staying in London. 



351. People arriving on the north side of London would 

 not find it much further to go down to Kew — people, 

 arriving at St. Pancras or King's Cross ? — Yes. 



352. The difference in time is now very slight in goings 

 down to Kew las compared with the British Museum, is . 

 it not? — ^I think it is considerable. It is for anyone 

 with my small leisure ; but not, perhaps for him who 

 has the whole day in front of him. 



353. It would take half an hour or so, would it not? — 

 Quite half an hour. 



354. Supposing there were a transference and amalga- 

 mation made at Kew of the flowering plant herbarium, 

 would it be any advantage to maintain the cryptogamic - 

 herbarium at the British Museum — Cryptogams below 

 Pteridophytes, that is to say, the mosses and the 

 Thallophy tes ? — I think it would be better to have the • 

 collections together. 



355. If there is an amalgamation? — Yes. 



356. You do not thini it would be an advantage to keep.< 

 the Crj'ptogams at the British Museum ? — ^I think not.. 

 It would be a little more convenient for me, because I 

 happen to work at a group of cryptogams. 



357. But do you think it would be a mutilation of the 

 collection at all ? — No. I do not think there is really 

 any essential connection between the collections of 

 Phanerogams and Cryptogams, except in the matter of 

 literature. In dealing with the Characese three- 

 quanters of the books one uses are in the phanerogamic 

 herbarium at the British Museum. 



358. {Mr. Darwin.) Have you any idea as to how far 

 your case is a common one ? Are there many people like 

 you engaged in the serious study of systematic botany 

 who are also engaged in some profession which takes up 

 a large part of their time? — Not very many, I should sp.a . 



359. You do not thiiik it is a common case ? — No, but 

 the total number of visitors to the herbaria is not yery 

 large judging from the visitors' books. I know oii'b 

 other man very similarly situated to me, because ho 

 generally goes to the Museum in the same train as I di. 



560. But you do not at the moment think of many 

 cases ? — No. 



C2 



