34 MUSEUM OF COMPARATIVE ZOOLOGY.  [Feb. 
and the aims which heretofore have been largely prominent. 
These specimens, as should be borne in mind, have been in proc- 
ess of collecting for more than twenty years. They have come 
from a vast variety of sources, under an almost endless multi- 
plicity of forms, often in small numbers, and received at a great 
number of different times ; so they have been packed away, not 
as the Director might have wished, but as the storage rooms 
would best allow, — the primary design being the accumulation 
of valuable materials, in as large amount as possible, for subse- 
quent investigation and arrangement. Accordingly, the occa- 
sional mixing of specimens from different localities is a result, 
even when there is the utmost care, necessarily incident to the 
unpacking of large quanties of fossils from various localities, and 
the repeated handling of them on other occasions. At the same 
time, it is evident that such a condition of things renders a vast 
amount of labor imperative. A partial mingling of specimens, 
for instance, necessitates a deal of comparison, of examination 
of kindred groups, of study of minute points, characieristics of 
particular localities, if a restoration ever be effected, and even 
then leaves every such specimen destitute of that fixed certainty 
which is so important in all strictly scientific investigations, and 
in order to really trustworthy conclusions. 
It is, therefore, clear that these several collections, while 
remaining in the condition referred to, kindred specimens being 
so widely separated and the same species being designated by 
such a variety of labels, could be made, only to a very small 
extent, available for the purposes of instruction and of advanced 
studies, or of intelligent comparison and of exchange. In order 
to become both theoretically and practically useful, they must 
be brought together in a systematic way, consolidated in conso- 
nance with a fixed plan, and so worked up that each species 
should have its appropriate place, as determined by its affinities, 
and receive its designation accordingly. And this, asis evident, 
must involve an immense amount of work, both on the speci- 
mens themselves, and in the consultation and comparison of 
authorities in respect to classification, synonymy, and the 
nomenclature to be adopted in each specific case. Without all 
these labors, and more than these, it was plainly impossible to 
have a single grand collection so arranged throughout according 
to both the affinities and the analogies of nature, as to be the 
