120 



Appendix I 



Professor historical value which attaches to parts of the British 

 Owen. Museum collection of botany, as, for example, to the 

 1858 Banksian Herbarium. 



As to whether it is desirable to remove the British 

 •Museum colleotion to Kew : " That question opens out a 

 wider view ol the subject. I would first beg to express 

 my conviction of the -advantage of the nation possessing 

 only one museum of any deparitment of natniral 

 Msttoiy. Tw!o public or national museums in different 

 localities mutually impede the perfection of either. They 

 i-aise the market ^paice of the speoimients of the sam.e 

 class. If it be a very rare specimen, and the heads of 

 the two respective establishments are desirous to have 

 it, they bid against eacih other. Then it involves the 

 necessity, occasionally, of the scienitiific investigator of 

 a particular subject having to visit two museums under 

 a certain disadvantage in each, when he would otherwise 

 have to visit but one, under more advantageous oiroumf- 

 stances for his inquiries. Believing that, for some years 

 past, the present botanical collection at Kew has, to a 

 certain extent, fulfilled the functions of a national one, 

 I should be disposed to regard that locality as the more 

 advanitageous one for carrying out iiie d'esign of a com- 

 plete national botanical collection." 



I am "aware thatthe greater portion of the herbarium 

 and library at Kew is the private property of Sir William 

 Hooker ; and I Ijeg to add that wherever it be determined 

 to place the national collection of botany, it would, in 

 my opinion, be essential to include in it such private 

 collections." 



The answer given has no bearing whatever on the 

 severance from the British Museum of the other collections 

 of natural history. "The circumstances influencing my 

 opinion on the botanical department do not exist in rela- 

 tion to any other department of the natural history collec- 

 tions in the British Museum. 



I think that a national collection of botany should in- 

 clude the fossil plants, and that they are as essential to a 

 complete view of the forms of that kingdom of nature as 

 they are indispensable for a collection of palaeontology in 

 relation to geology. I am, therefore, of opinion that a 

 series of foissil plants should exist both at the British 

 Museum- for the geology, and at Kew for the botany." 



In the event of the botanical collection being removed 

 from the British Museum, I believe that "a small 

 selection could be made sufficient to illustrate fossil 

 botany ; a small series would be quite sufficient, and I 

 think it essential to the usefulness of a collection of 

 fossil plants." 



* * * 



Professor Owen then withdrew. 



At a subsequent meeting, on 21st June, 1858, 

 George Bentham, Esq., Professor Henfrey, and 

 Dr. H. Falconer being in attendance, were called 

 in and examined.' 



George Bentham, Esq. 

 G. "I am of opinion that the removal of the whole 



B^N™AM, botanical collection to Kew would not be advantageous 

 to science ; but that, under certain circumstances, the 

 removal of the Banksian Herbarium forming part of the 

 bo*anicail collection, might be advanltageous. 



" Supposing Government to carry out, as contemplated, 

 flie plan of providing a suitable building at Kew for the 

 national herbarium, and adding to the present national 

 herbarium Sir W. Hooker's Herbarium, and providing 

 a proper staff for the use of that herbarium and 

 library ; under such circumstances, I think the Banksian 

 Herbarium would be more useful at Kew than at the 

 British Museum. By Banksian Herbarium, I mean the 

 botanical collection left by Sir Joseph Banks." 



Questioned : " You have presented, we understand, a 

 valuable herbarium and library as public property to the 

 Eoyal Botanical Establishment at Kew ; now, what are 

 your views in making this donation?" — Answered: "I 

 thought that at that time there was no herbarium and 

 library -in London sufficiently open for the use of 

 botanists, and I presented them on condition that they 

 should form the nucleus of a national herbarium and 

 botanical library, to be kept up at the expense of Govern- 

 ment, and open to the free use of botanists, under such 

 regulations as the Director of the Kew Gardens should 

 establish." 



The portion of the whole herbarium at Kew (the larger 

 part of it being the private property of Sir W. Hooker), my 

 collection constitutes, "as near as Dr. Hooker and my- 

 self could calculate, about one-fifth." 



Ksq. 



Supposing that there were buildings at Kew capable of a. 

 receiving a large public herbarium provided with a staff" Bentham 

 competent to manage it, and that it should be hereafter i? 

 considered desirable to transfer thither the botanical 18.58. 

 collections of the British Museum ; " I think the Sloanean 

 is of more value at the British Museum than it would be at 

 Kew, and I think that a great portion of the additions to 

 the Banksian Herbarium since Sir Joseph's death, are 

 duplicates of those already at Kew. With regard to many 

 unarraaiged plants at the British Museum, I am unac- 

 quainted with them. 



"I think" that, for the advantage and convenience of 

 botanists resident in London, it would be desirable to re- 

 tain a, consultmg herbarium at the British Museum in 

 addition to that at Kew. " It may be of use to botanists— 

 not, perhaps, working botanists — to have a herbarium to 

 consult in London, without going to Kew." 



I have paid a great deal of attention, as a systematic 

 botanist, to the natural order of the Leguminosce ; and am 

 cited in Lindley's "Vegetable Kingdom'' as an authority 

 for the fact, than in the year 1845 there were about 6,500 

 species of that family then known. 



"I became acquainted with nearly the whole Legii- 

 minostx. through the medium of herbaria. There are not 

 many hundreds that I have seen living." 

 _ As to the proportion of these 6,500 species seen in the 

 living state, "I have examined very few in botanical 

 gardens ; very few indeeid." 



I have published several thousand new species of 

 plants ; I have never pubHshed one without examining 

 it in a herbarium, and I have examined very few in 

 botanical gardens. 



It is absolutely necessary for the good use of a herbarium 

 that it should be in close connection ^vith a good botanical 

 libiary. A botanical library is useful without a herbarium, 

 but not a herbarium \\ithout the library. 



I do not think it necessary for the study of a herbarium 

 that there should be a collection of living plants in con- 

 nection with it. 



It appears to me of great consequence that so long as 

 natural history is exhibited to the public in the British 

 Museum, a botanical collection should be included in that 

 exhibition." 



Professor Henfrey. 



I generally agree with Mr. Bentham, and do not differ professor 

 "in any points of importance. The only point of im- Henfret, 

 portance I would dwell on would be that of keeping 

 a botanical collection at the British Museum. 



I think that a botanical collection in the British Museum 

 should be devoted to the illustration of the science of 

 botany, and not to its application." 



Dr. S. Falconer. 



Invited to explain to the Committee what posts he had ^^, ^ 

 occupied as a director of a public botanical garden ; said, falconbh. 

 " I held the office of superintendent of the botanical garden 

 at Saharunpoor in the North-western Provinces of India, 

 near the foot of the Himalayah Mountains, from 1831 to 

 1843, as the immediate successor of the late Dr. Boyle, and 

 in succession to the late Dr. Wallich. I was superinten- 

 dent of the botanical gardens of Calcutta from 1847 to 

 1855, making jointly a period of about twenty years. In 

 Calcutta I was ex-officio professor of botany to the medical 

 college, and as such I had annually to give a course of 

 lectures upon the science. 



I have read the evidence given by the late Mr. Pobert 

 Brown {see page 117) on the occasion referred to, and I 

 entirely agree in the opinions expressed by him regard- 

 ing the objects and practical uses of a herbarium kept 

 up distinct from a botanic garden. Mr. Brown, from his 

 acknowledged pre-eminence, was entitled to give his 

 opinions with the weight of authority ; he did not enter 

 in detail into the reasons on which they were founded, 

 and the Royal Commission seems to have received his 

 statements -vvithout asking for explanations. I believe 

 that there is a good deal of general misconception on this 

 subject, and I am desirous of giving the reasons for the 

 opinions which I hold. The scientific object of a botanical 

 garden is to grow the greatest possible number of species 

 of living plants, illustrative of the largest number of 

 genera and natural orders, as near as may be to the state 

 in which they occur in nature ; the whole methodically 

 named and classified, so as to exhibit an cnsembh of the 

 range of vegetable forms, of the 'plan upon which they 

 have been designed by nature, of their mutual affinities, 

 and of their properties and uses. But from the different 

 media in which plants are produced, and the great range 



