358 Editors’ Table, [May, 
pally for other institutions, it would seem appropriate that its 
members should also make collections for other institutions. Tha 
the president does not object to this form of suicide, may be 
derived from the following,’ which is said to be from his pen: 
“If A and B choose to bestow their treasures in Boston or 
elsewhere, and C prefers that the National Museum at Washing- 
ton shall have his, the common cause of scientific progress is not 
injured, nor is the Academy any better or worse on account of 
such disposition. The value of scientific discovery is not contin- 
gent upon the locality where it may be made, or on the style or 
title of the discoverer. Every man is free to dispose of his own 
property as he may judge to be satisfactory to himself.” 
We doubt whether any other city of the civilized world pre- 
sents such noble examples of self-abnegation as is implied in the 
above extracts. How far their fellow-citizens will be willing to 
share these crowns of self-immolation remains to be seen. r 
though a few may be found to console themselves with the pious 
reflection that “ our loss is their gain,” we doubt whether a general 
hosanna will arise on a distribution of important collections to 
other localities, excepting from the recipients. 
The first speaker is pointed in his assertion as to the fate of a 
museum supported by voluntary labor, etc.: “ They soon degen- 
erate into imperfectly classified storehouses, etc.” Has not the 
eration?” Under incompetent hands nothing else can be ex- 
ected. Prof. Agassiz says the most important results may be 
derived from the study of objects “around us and in us.” For 
the entomologist this statement has an especial truth, but Prof. 
Agassiz took good care to make a great collection in zoology, 
- paleontology and geology from all parts of the world. The posi- 
` tion that an academy of sciences should not have a museum if 
it can, is absurd. As well try to run a mill without grist, or 
printing without type. That Philadelphia is not abie or willing 
to have a museum, devoted first to the interests of original 
research, and second, for exhibition to the public, is, to say the 
least, highly improbable. This, of course, does not include “ or- 
nate architecture,” which is not part of a museum, and which 
Prof. Henry very justly condemned. The Academy has indeed 
expended money in architecture, while its vitals have been unsup- 
plied with food. : 
n further confirmation of our statements regarding the unsuit- 
able nature of appointments to positions, we refer to the report of 
the Proceedings of the Academy at the end of this number of 
the Naturauist. We add to this the further fact that one of the 
most able of our rising naturalists has been relieved of the schol- 
arship which was endowed by the late A. E. Jessup, and which 
paid a small salary, without the offer of an equivalent place. 
1 Philadelphia Evening Bulletin, Dec. 30, 1879. 
