42 



DEPARTMENTAL COMMITTEE ON BOTANICAL WORK : 



Mr. IK. J', tages would be very great, having regard to the fact 



Hie.rn, that we tind the best botanical work on the Continent 



M.A., F.L.s. is done where the principle of concentration exists. 



As to the expense being very great, it is very diiiicult 



15 Nov. 1900. -without figures to answer the question. 



969. I simply use a very vague phrase, a very large 

 expense. "What if it were to rnn into £100,000?— I must 

 say that £100,000 does seem very difficult to be 

 balanced by tihe scientitic advantages. St.rictly speak- 

 ing, the two things are incommensurable, and it is 

 almost impossible to weigh one againsit the other. 



970. {Lord Avchurij.) With reference to the question 

 of danger from fire, do you attach much importance 

 to the proximity of the London Fire Brigade, with its 

 very valuable appliances, in the case of Cromwell 

 Road ?— Yes. 



971. It has been represented to us that the sheets 

 used at Kew and those used in the Natural History 

 Museum are of a different size? — Yes ; tJie British 

 Museum sheets are about one-seventh larger in area 

 than those at Kew^ 



972. Do you attach any importance to the fact that 

 ^•'hereas tilie Kew sbeets might be introduced int>o the 

 cabinets of the British Museum, it would be impossi^ble 

 to introduce the British Museum sheets into the Kew 

 cabinets, so that it would involve either alteration of 

 the specimens or an entire reorganisation of the cabi- 

 nets ? — I think that is a matter of considerable im- 

 portance, because it is impracticable to attempt to 

 cut down the sheets of the British Museum. 



973. We have had it represented to us that there is 

 on the one hand an advantage, and almost a necessity, 

 for the collection at Kew, having regard to the living 

 plants, and that, on the other hand, there was an ad- 

 vantage, and almost a necessity, for a collection at 

 the British Museum, having regard to the presence 

 of the fossil collections there. Mr. Carruthers expressed 

 the opinion that it was necessary to have really a larger 

 collection in connection with the fossil plants than it 

 was for the use of a botanical garden. Have you any 

 opinion on that point as to the relative importance of 

 a collection, with reference to fossil botany on the one 

 hand, or to an existing garden on the other? — No 

 doubt, in the study of fossil botany a very intimate 

 acquaintance with recent plants is required. It is the 

 intimate acquaintance of a monographer rather than 

 the supei'iiciial examination of specimens, I think. But 

 tliere is no doubt the larger the coillection of recent plants 

 you have for the purpose, the better is the position 

 "of a monographer or other person. 



974. The point is that you have got to work on the 

 one hand a botanical garden, and on the other hand 

 a collection of fossil plants, and Mr. Carruthers ex- 

 pressed the opinion that to do those two things satis- 

 factorily you would really require a larger collection ? 

 — A co'llection of dried plants? 



975. Yes? — ^I should place great confidence in the 

 opinion of Mr. Carruthers ; I have no strong opinion 

 on the matter. 



976. You have no strong view yourself as to the 

 relative necessity of a collection in the two cases ?— No. 



977. [Mr. Seymour.) Do you think the removal of the 

 Kew herbarium to London would be a very derided 

 improvement on the present accommodation afforded 1 

 —Yes, if it were done properly. There is this about 

 •everything going to Kew, that unless there is some 

 great change made in the organisation of the place, 

 the person -\vho had to control the whole herbarium 

 would be under the direction of the Director of Kew 



Gardenls, who would, I suppose, be necessarily selecte<l 

 for other considerations than those which made him 

 best competent to control a dried collection ; whereas 

 in the British Museum the keeper of the Botanical 

 Departanent would not be controlled in the same sense. 



978. Would that be your main reason for recom- 

 mending transference from Kew to Kensington, rather 

 than the transference of the whole from Kensington to 

 5;e.^y ? — That would be one of the reasons. 



979. Not the main reason? — ^I gave various reasons 

 hefore, and this is a supplementary one. 



979*. (Professor Balfour.) That point would be one 

 really of adnidnistration ? — Yes. 



980. It could be got over iby adiministration, could 

 it not ?— Yes. 



981. Is there anv work done by the Botanical De- 

 partment of the Bi-itish Museum which you would at all 



put in comparison with the amount of work that is 

 done by Kew — I mean general botanical work for the 

 whole country and the Empire, the Colonial Office, 

 and so on ? — In quantity, or in scientific value ? 



982. Both in quality and in quantity? — As regards 

 the past, the quantity I believe done at the British 

 Museum is small ; but there has been a great advance 

 of late years, and in looking forward, of course the 

 rate of change has to be looked at, and the gain which 

 is 'uoiw taking place at the Biitish Museum is so great 

 in the value of the work that they put out that I think 

 we must consider verj' shortlj' the two will be equal. 



983. Do you recognise that the co'lonial work which. 

 Kew does is a very important work ? — Yes ; I suppose 

 that need not be interfered with. 



984. Sujjposing you were to transfer this herbarium 

 from Kew, or the bulk of it at any rate, would not 

 there be a very great risk of that work being interfered 

 with ? — I do not think so at all, because it is intended 

 that there should be, I believe, a secondaiy herbarium 

 at Kew. Of course, the British Museum authorities 

 should be consulted on any special points. 



985. That is to say, you think if you had this 

 secondary herbarium at Kew\ the Kew people could 

 consult the British Museum for anj-thing that it did 

 not sujvply ? — Yes ; but I think in most cases tliere 

 would 1)6 no need to consult the British Museum. 



986. But do you think, in the event of an important 

 question being submitted to Kew by the Colonial 

 Office, that the answering of it would be facilitated if 

 the Kew people had first of all to go tlirough their 

 herbarium, with great uncertainty of being able to 

 find a plant, and they then had to go to the British 

 Museum ? — I think that the practical loss on that 

 account would be small. Conceivablj' it might be great. 



987. (2Ir. Darwin.) In following wp what Professor 

 Balfour said, I should like to know what your opinion 

 is as to whether the severance of the connection of 

 Kew with the Colonies would lead to a want of re- 

 search into the naming of new plants ? — I should not 

 think so ; not into new' plants. 



988. One of your reasons for jDreferring the British 

 Museum as the jjlace for amalgamation was the pre- 

 sence of the zoological and geological collections. In 

 the course of your botanical work, have you ever had 

 occasion either to consult the zoologists or the 

 geologists ? — I have not worked at the lower classes of 

 cryptogams where that necessity would be likely to 

 arise. As regards geology, I believe that what little I 

 have done in connection with fossil hotany 'has not 

 been such that any fossils in the British Museum at 

 that time existed. 



989. Have you seen it going on in the work of other 

 people — any union of work among zoologists and 

 botanists ? — I have often seen people from the Geo- 

 logical Department come into the Botanical Depart- 

 ment of the British Museum. I only know it in that 

 vague way. 



990. My impression was. that in these days of 

 ^specialisation there is very little connection? — Until you 

 come to the border line. 



991. That is not veiy much in herharium work, is it? 

 — Not so far as my work has extended. 



992. The border line is rather more microscopic, is not 

 it? — I believe it is. 



993. (Chairman.) In some of the answers you gave to 

 Lord Avebury, in reference to the mode of incorporation, 

 and certain difficidties which might arise from incorpora- 

 tion, I might ask you whether there is not more than one 

 mode of incoiipoi-ation possible ? — I daresay there is. 



994. For instance, besides the difficulties of total in- 

 corporation, sheet by slieet, on account of the difference 

 in the size of the sheets, there is incorporation that went 

 so far as placing the cabinets of a certain order or a certain 

 group together'in the British Museum, side by side with 

 the cabinets from Kew. Would ruot incorporation to 

 that extent very much assist study? — ^It would, but I 

 should look upon such a thing as a temporary expedient 

 only. 



995. (Lord Archury.) You stated in answer to Pro- 

 fessor Balfour that until recently the amount of work that 

 had been done by the Natural History Museum BotaJiical 

 Department had not been so large as that done at Kew, 

 but is it not fair to consider with reference to the officials 

 that their time was very much taken up in the transfer- 



