134 



Appendix I : 



W. CAR- 



KUTHERS, 



Esq. 



1S71. 



the existence of a large number of authentic species and 

 specimens that have been actually described, I believe 

 that our British Museum herbarium is unequalled in 

 the world ; and that is not only the opinion -which I 

 myself have formed, for I am not very exterisively 

 acquainted with herbaria abroad, but it is the universal 

 testimony of men who have become sufficiently 

 acquainted with the British Museum herbarium to form 

 an opinion worth considering. 



7735. I believe that the British Museum is visited by 

 all the foreign botanists that come to this country, and 

 I may say that I ran over, a few days ago, the visitors 

 that we have had during this year, just to form a rough 

 idea of who they were, and I find amongst the foreign 

 botanists, who have been in the habit of visiting the 

 rauseum, the names of Coseon, Baillon, Triana, and 

 Welwitsch, who have been here during the year 1871. 



7736. I should say that Cosson has paid probably thirty 

 visits to the museum, day after day, going systematically 

 through a part of them. 



7737. Would you recommend that the (Government of 

 the country should go on as it appears to be doing at 

 present, keeping up two first rate herbaria, the one at 

 Kew, and the one at the British Museum i — I should like 

 to submit to the Commission statements made by men 

 who are better able to judge of that than myself. In 

 the first place, Mr. Robert Brown was distinctly of that 

 opinion, and expressed it very strongly on several occa- 

 sions. Mr. Bentham, the President of the Linnean 

 Society, also expressed very strongly the same opinion 

 in the paper out of which I made an extract from Dr. 

 Hooker's statement in the -earlier part of my examination. 



7738. Did not Mr. Bentham subsequently modify that 

 opinion in a paper which he published in " Nature " ? — 



I am not aware of any paper published by Mr. Bentham 

 in '• Nature." It was not stated to be by Mr. Bentham. 



7739-40. It has' been statedbeforethe Commission that 

 it was by him, and in that paper I think he expressed 

 a rather different opinion? — I will come to_that presently 

 if you will allow me. Mr. Bentham, in the evidence in 

 1859, to which I have referred, states distinctly that the 

 removal of the botanical collections to Kew would not 

 be advantageous to science, and he also says, "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 addifions to the Banksian Herbarium since Sir 

 Josei^h's death are duplicates of those already at Kew." 

 He further says chat it would be desirable to have a 

 herbarium in London. Professor Henfrey at the same 

 time insisted that it was important to keep a botanical 

 collection in London. Dr. Falconer, who had the charge 

 of both the Gardens and Herbarium at Calcutta, dis- 

 tinctly stated, as Dr. Hooker had already done, the 

 necessity for a herbarium in connexion with the botanical 

 gardens ; but he also said, " I believe that a separate 

 public herbarium and library in the centre of London 

 and easily accessible are so useful and necessary that it 

 would be in the highest degree inexpedient to do away 

 with them." Sir Charles Lyell was strongly opposed to 

 the removal, and Mr. Darwin thought that a National 

 collection ought to be in London, but he could see that 

 some weighty arguments might be advanced for Kew. 

 As the result of that investigation, the Committee came 

 -■0 the following conclusion, which you will find at page 



II [see p. 122] : " Sir William Hooker, Dr. J. Hooker, and 

 Dr. Lindley have given reasons in favour of the removal 

 of the collections 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 botanist Mr. Eobert Brown, 

 and believe that such a removal would be of great dis- 

 service 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 

 exception, 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 i_s decidedly in 

 favour of retaining such a botanical collection in the 

 metropolis." For what reason I cannot tell, but a few 

 months after that a memorial was prepared, which inti- 

 mated a complete change in the opinion of several of 

 those men. As this memoi-ial was headed by one of the 

 Commissioners present at this table, probably he may 



■ know something about it ; but Mr. Bentham, in this 

 memorial, completely upset the opinion which he had 

 given two or three months before, an opinion which was 

 bt aosord.aTice with the opinions enteartained by Mr. 



Robert Brown, by my predecessor, Mr. Bennett, and liy 

 many other distinguished botanists. 



[Interpolated by Professor Huxley. No proposition 

 has been made before this Commission to remove the 

 herbarium from the British Museum, but the question 

 which has been brought before us is the possibility, or 

 the desirableness, of bringing the two herbaria to some 

 sort of relation to one another, so that the Government 

 should not be actually doing two things twice over, seven 

 or eight miles apart.] 



Then, with regard to this particular statement which 

 is published in "' Nature," the same views were already 

 expressed in an official document which was presented 

 two years ago to the Trustees of the British Museum 

 from the Board of Works, and this statement is nearly a 

 reproduction, in slightly altered language, of that docu- 

 ment, which was fully dealt with and answered, and this 

 answer was sent to the Board of Works, and it was then 

 understood as being perfectly satisfactory, both to the 

 Trustees and to the Board of Works. I cTo not think it 

 would be very difficult for me to show how utterly hope- 

 less the study of botany, and especially palaeontology, 

 would be, if the London Herbarium were put in the 

 position that is mentioned by Mr. Bentham. 



7741. Will you be kind enough to tell us what is the 

 date of the document in which the answer is contained, 

 so that we may be able to procure it ? — ^I do not know 

 that the document has been published — it was an official 

 document. 



7742. {Chairman.) Was it not laid before Parliament? 

 — ^No. I find that the date of the official document is 

 December 1868. 



7743. (Question put by Frofessor Huxley.) Is it your 

 opinion that the two herbaria should be equally perfect 

 and equally complete, without any relation the one to 

 the other? — It is my opinion that it is absolutely neces- 

 sary for the gardens at Kew to have a herbarium for 

 naming the plants, as Dr. Hooker clearly puts it. It is 

 also my distinct conviction that a herbarium for the study 

 of systematic botany has no connexion whatever with a 

 botanical garden. It ought to be in a position where it 

 can be most freely consulted by all students of botanical 

 science, and there is sufficient evidence that London is 

 the best situation for such a herbarium. 



7744. '\\liat is, in your judgment, sufficient evidence 

 that it is better than Kew ? — The number of visitors that 

 are in the habit of coming to the department, and the 

 kind of visitors that come. I made some notes from the 

 same list from which I gave the names of the foreign 

 botanists to show the kind of visitors that come for the 

 scientific purposes to the British Museum. There are 

 two clergymen who are on official duty in London who 

 are somewhat eminent in botany ; one is, perhaps, one 

 of the most distinguished of British lichenologists, who 

 would not be able to visit the collection if he were re- 

 quired to go to Kew to do so. We have also had visits 

 during this time from two medical men who are in active 

 practice in London, who are able to run in only for a 

 short time on occasions, and who visit tis for some special 

 purpose to settle some precise point, in the one of these 

 instances with regard to some species of moss, and in 

 the other with regard to some fossil plants. Then I have 

 the names of six men who are either in business or 

 engaged in professional work in London, whose time is 

 of great importance, and who could not possibly have 

 gone to a great distance to consult a collection. There 

 are two men who have come from the country to London 

 on business, and who find it convenient to come to the 

 museum to consult the collections, but who could not 

 have gone during their short visit to London to any dis- 

 tance. There are other men living in London who are 

 able to come and settle points on a short notice, which 

 they could not do if they had to spend a day in seeking 

 for the information. On that account I should consider 

 that it was more convenient to have it in London. And 

 then I find Mr. Waterhouse, wtho is a Keeper in the 

 Museum, in evidence given in June 1360, makes the 

 following remarkable statements with regard to the con- 

 venience of London as the site for a herbarium. He 

 made this statement, which has not been contradicted, 

 and I believe I know the parties referred to, and can 

 confirm the statement if that were needed: — "One of 

 our active botanists who was living at Hammersmith, 

 and was consequently within a short distance of Kew. 

 stated that it was much more convenient fo'r him to come 

 to London to examine the collections than to go to Kew. 

 His explanation was this : that he constantly had occa- 

 sion to come to London for other purposes, and he then 

 took advantage of his visit to clear up his doubts upon 

 botanical questions, whereas he was seldom led out in 



w. car- 



KUTHERS, 

 Esq. 



1S71. 



