122 



Appendix I : 



the trees from -nrhioli those woods were derived, hundreds 

 went to Somerset House to see them ; and besides their 

 usefulness in an economical point of view, they were often 

 advantageous, as I can testify, to palaeontologists. 



I take 'for granted the batanis-ts mil give the Trustees 

 good reason of their own why an extensive herbarium 

 should be placed within their reach in the metropolis. 

 I shall, therefore, confine myself to the bearing of a col- 

 lection of specimens of the vegetable kingdom on our own 

 science. You may remember that Prof essor Phillips told 

 us at one of our last meetings at the Geological Society, 

 that he should have been unable to draw up the paper 

 which he read to us on a fossil fruit from Purbeck, had 

 he not bieen able to compare it with 'a laa-ge assemblage of 

 recent fruits, of different families of plants, which he found 

 in the Kew Museum. 



Professor Heer, of Zurich, now, perhaps, the most 

 active and successful cultivator of fossH botany in the 

 world, told me last summer that the progress of that de- 

 partment of palaeontology is seriously impeded by the 

 want of a great collection of the leaves and fruits of living 

 plants, which, as yet, exists nowhere in Europe. It is 

 becoming almost as indispensable for the advance of 

 geology as the rich collections of the skeletons of mam- 

 malia and fish which we must now go to Paris or Vienna 

 to consult. I set a high value on the new Museum of 

 Economic Botany at Kew, but we want a collection of a 

 more comprehensive kind of plants, whether they be com- 

 mercially useful or not. Some of these would be purely 

 of scientific interest ; but uany others might be made as 

 iiistructive and attractive, if placed in glass cases, as are 

 the corals, shells, or many other departments of natural 

 history, to which crowds now resort. 



Believe me, &c. 



(Signed) Cha. Lyell. 



Charles Darwin, Esq., to Sir B. I. Murchison. 



Down, Bromley, Kent, 19 June. 



My dear Sir Roderick, — 



•I 'have juBt received youi note. Unfortunately I 

 cannot attend at the British Museum on Monday. I do 

 not suppose my opinion on the subject of your note can 

 be of any value, as I have not much considered the sub- 

 ject, or had the advantage of discussing it with other 

 naturalists. But my impression is, that there is much 

 weight in what you say about not breaking up the natural 

 history collection of the British Museum. I think a 

 national collection ought to be in London. I can, how- 

 ever, see that some weighty arguments might be ad- 

 vanced in favour of Kew, owing to the immense value of 

 Sir W. Hooker's collection and library ; but these are 

 private property, and I am not aware that there is any 

 certainty of their always remaining at Kew. Had this 

 been the case, I should have thought that the botanical 

 collection might have been removed there, without en- 

 dangering the other branches of the collections. But I 

 think it would be the greatest evil which could possibly 

 happen to natural science in this country, if the other col- 

 lectiins were ever to be removed from the BTitisli 

 Museum and Library, Pray believe me, 



Yours, &c. 

 (Signed) Ch. Darwin. 



The Sub-Committee then proceeded to the considera- 

 tion of their report, which was agreed to as follows : — 



The Sub-Committee on Natural History, to W.hom it 

 was referred to take evidence as to the expediency of 

 transferring the botanical collections now in the British 

 Museum to Kew, beg to report that while all the 

 botanists they have exam^ined are of opinion tliat it would 

 be advantageous to form a botanical establishment at 

 Kew, comprising an extensive herbarium and a good 

 library, as an addition to the garden of living plants, 

 there are differences of opinion respecting the desirable- 

 ness of also keeping up in the metropolis such a herba- 

 rium in connection with the extensive library of the 

 British Museum. 



Sir WUliam Hooker, Dr. J. Hooker, and Dr. Lindley 

 have given reasons in favour of the removal of the col- 

 lections from the British Museum to Kew, with the view 

 of rendering that establishment more complete, but Dr. 

 H. Falconer, long at the head of the Botanical Garden of 

 Calcutta, and Professor Henfrey, support the opinion of 

 the late eminent botanislt, Mr. Robert Brown, and be- 

 lieve that such a removal would be of great disservice to 

 science by depriving the consulting botanist of ready 

 access to a central metropolitan herbarium and library. 



In this view Mr. Bentham coincides, with this excep- 

 tion, that he wishes the herbarium bequeathed by Sir 

 Joseph Banks to be removed to Kew. 



In reference to the scientific importance of the botanical 

 collection in its illustration of the geological specimens 

 in the Museum, the opinion of Sir Charles Lyell is de- 

 cidedly in favour of retaining such a botanical collection 

 in the metropolis. 



It is stated in evidence that a herbarium may be emi- 

 nently useful to the student even when entirely separated 

 from a garden, and such evidences affords an answer to 

 any argument in favour of a removal, which might be ap- 

 parently derived from a consideration of the expediency 

 of uniting all the constituents of a botanical collection in 

 one place. 



The herbaria at Kew, and the library there, are, by far 

 the greatest part of them, private property, and only 

 accessible to the public under certain conditions ; there 

 are no buildings belonging to the gardens in which the 

 united collections could be deposited, and no staff suffi- 

 cient for its care, and the arrangement of necessary 

 accessions. It is also stated that the number of speci- 

 mens common to the collections at the British Museum 

 and Kew is very large. 



In addition to the above considerations it is clear that 

 such a transfer as above alluded to cannot be made at 

 present, nor, as it appears to your Sub-Committee, can 

 the question be seriously entertained until the Govern- 

 ment has decided upon erecting the necessary buildings 

 at Kew, and providing a sufficient establishment in that 

 locality. 



We are, therefore, unanimously of opinion that it is 

 not desii-able to recommend the translation of the 

 botanical collection from the British Museum to Kew. 



We further suggest that the vacancy caused by the 

 death of Mr. Brown should be filled up, according to the 

 MBnuite -df the Ttuste-es of thie aStli JanuaiT, 1837, 

 §54. 



[This was accordingly done by the appointment of Mr. 

 J. J. Bennett as Keeper of Botany.] 



VARIOUS CRITICISMS ON THE FOREGOING. 



"Quarterly Review," July, 1858. Art. VII. (On tihe 

 British Museum, Oflicial Papers, 1835-58.) 

 _ This article gives a short history of the entire collec- 

 tions from the time of Sloane's bequest onwards. On 

 page 218 the writer demands that the collections of 

 natural history should be separated from the rest, and 

 housed in a building to be specially erected for their re- 

 ception, preleriably at Burlington House, or else at 

 Kensington Gore. 



'■The Natural History Collections in the British Museum." 

 "Gardeners' Chronicle," 14th August, 1858, pp. 

 620, 621. 



An article by Mr. George Bentham, signed with his 

 initials. He refers to the "Quarterly Review" article, 

 and continues, " . . notwithstanding the MemoriaL 



. . an impartial perusal of the above article leads to 

 the conviction that such a step [as the removal of the col- 

 lections in question] is now indispensable," and urges 

 the transference of the botanical collections to Kew, with 

 the exception of the " Sloane Herbarium." 



Leading article on the same subject, ib. 29th August, 

 1858, pp. 651, 652, by the Editor, Dr. Lindley. 



Further extracts from the previous paper. House of 

 Commons, 1859, n. 126. 



Professor Lindley to the Principal Librarian. 



21, Regent Street, S.W., 

 Dear Sir, 19 November 1858. 



Will you have the goodness to place before the 

 Trustees, when they next meet, the accompanying 

 copies of a memorial that has been to-day sent to the 

 Treasury, on the subject of the natural history col- 

 lections in the British Museum ? Yours trulv 

 A. Panizzi, Esq. (signed) JoJin Lindley. 



PUBLIC NATIONAL HISTORY COLLECTIONS. 



Copy of a Memorial addressed to the Right Honourable 

 the Chancellor of the Exchequer. 

 Sir, 

 The necessity of the removal of the natural history 

 departments from the British Museum having been 

 recently brought prominently before the public, and it 

 being understood that the question of their reorganisa- 

 tion in another locality is under consideration, the 

 undersigned zoologists and botanists, professionally 

 or otherwise engaged in the pursuit of natural science, 

 feel it their duty to lay before Her Majesty's Govern- 



