JUNE 13, 1884.] 
At 10 A.M., sighted Java Head lighthouse; but the 
wind hauling ahead, we kept away, and went round 
Prince Island. Latter part, fresh breezes, and thick, 
smoky weather. Friday and Saturday, passed large 
quantities of ashes in the water. Saturday, crew em- 
_ ployed in cleaning ashes off masts and rigging. Water 
had a green color. 
The point of special importance in the above ac- 
count is the record of the sudden barometric fluctua- 
tions, due to the great air-wave with which readers 
of Science are already familiar. 
Accompanying the above extracts from the log, isa 
sample of the ‘sand and ashes’ which fell so thickly 
upon the rigging. It is of a light gray color, and 
harsh to the touch. It is essentially a pulverized 
pumice, by far the greater part of it consisting of 
fragments of volcanic glass. These fragments are 
sometimes twisted, but generally in flat, angular 
- transparent scales, which are filled with minute bub- 
bles, and, of course, are isotropic. Angular fragments 
and crystals of transparent plagioclase, occasionally 
showing the hemitropic striations, and giving bright 
colors in the polariscope, together with more irregular 
and rounded fragments of dark green and brown 
_pyroxenic minerals, probably augite and hypersthene, 
are scattered very occasionally among the glass par- 
ticles. Grains of magnetite, often well rounded, also 
-oecur, and may be picked out and examined sepa- 
-rately by a magnet covered with tissue-paper. 
The dust collected by Mr. Joseph Wharton, from 
snow which fell in the suburbs of Philadelphia on 
Jan. 22, and supposed by him to be of volcanic 
origin,! has been kindly submitted by him to the 
writer for examination. It is composed of particles 
_of quartz, coal, cinders, vegetable matter, etc., among 
which are certain glassy hairs and rounded globules. 
These bear no resemblance to the angular glass frag- 
ments composing the Krakatoa dust, which is re- 
markably free from either filaments or globules; and 
the supposed volcanic glass particles in the Philadel- 
phia dust appear to be of local origin, — from blast- 
furnaces, founderies, or the like. 
For the vial of dust, and the extracts from the log, 
I am indebted to my friend, Rev. Wayland Hoyt, 
D.D., of this city. H. CARVILL LEWIS. 
Philadelphia, May 27. 
Professor Gill on assumptions of museum- 
keepers. 
In a recent issue of Science, p. 615, my friend Pro- 
fessor Gill has made a rather savage attack upon 
another very good friend of mine, for which I feel in 
some degree responsible, since a remark in my review 
of the ‘ Voyage of the Challenger’ has been taken 
by the former as a text for his phillipic. I have no 
desire to cross swords in argument with so skilful a 
dialectician as Professor Gill, and shall therefore be 
-contented to make certain general statements. 
1. The policy of Dr. Ginther, as keeper of the zoolo- 
gical collections of the British museum, has, from the 
start, been an extremely liberal one, much more so 
than that of his predecessor. I know of no museum 
where facilities are more readily granted, the methods 
in the natural-history department and in the great 
library of the British museum being precisely similar. 
Any person known to the authorities may secure the 
use of a table in one of the laboratories, and may 
have specimens brought to him day after day, from 
morning till night, as fast as he can fill up and sign 
the requisitions. That this is so, I can testify 
from personal knowledge. Within the past eighteen 
months, I have known of seven ichthyologists, — 
1 Science, Feb. 1, 1884, p. 139. 
SCIENCE. 
703 
three from the United States, one from Italy, one 
from France, one from Sweden, and one from Aus- 
tralia, each of whom spent weeks in the museum, 
‘and had no specimens refused him. I have also 
known of several other American zoodlogists who 
have been treated with equal courtesy. I may men- 
tion, in passing, that no person, not an officer of the 
museum, is ever allowed to work in a room by him- 
self, no matter how well he may be known, — a pre- 
caution which I believe to be quite necessary, since 
privileges of this sort have in the past been shame- 
fully abused. I might mention one instance, many 
years ago, in which the entire collection of alcoholic 
specimens in one group of vertebrates was badly 
mutilated by a series of coarse dissections, carried on, 
without the knowledge of the authorities, by a young 
student, now one of our most distinguished American 
zodlogists. I have heard the story from his own lips, 
as well as from Dr. Gunther. 
2. The Challenger fishes are not, as yet, turned over 
to the British museum, but are still under the con- 
trol of the lords of the admiralty, by whom, through 
Sir Wyville Thompson, Dr. Ginther was requested 
to prepare the report upon the ichthyology of the 
expedition. Dr. Ginther, therefore, in my opinion, 
is perfectly right in retaining this collection under 
his own control until his report is completed, after 
which they will, no doubt, become the property of 
the British museum, and be open to inspection under 
museum rules. The distinction between Dr. Giin- 
ther in the capacity of keeper of the zoological col- 
lections of the British museum, and Dr. Giinther in 
the capacity of naturalist, engaged upon the Challen- 
ger report, should be carefully observed. 
Professor Gill refers to a case in which a certain 
European ichthyologist has recently been refused the 
privilege of examining the Challenger collections. 
Not being in possession of all the facts in the case, I 
shall not attempt to explainit. This Ido know, how- 
ever, that, at the time referred to, the Challenger fishes 
were being moved, together with the natural-history 
collections of the British museum, from Bloomsbury 
to South Kensington, and were in large part packed 
in boxes, so that they were really inaccessible; but a 
portion of the collection was still upon a table in Dr. 
Giinther’s private office: and these specimens, as well 
as others in his own house, were freely shown by 
him to Dr. Bean and myself. I cannot doubt that 
the same privilege would have been extended to any 
other ichthyologist who had made any reasonable 
request for the use of the material. It should be re- 
membered, however, that these collections were not 
worked up in any way, were neither catalogued nor 
labelled, and were held by Dr. Giinther as a per- 
sonal trust from the Challenger survey, and had not 
yet passed into his official custody. 
The question as to the extent to which any spe- 
cialist, charged with the duty of working up col- 
lections made by a government expedition, may 
reserve to himself, while engaged in the preparation 
of his report, the handling of the material, is one 
into which I do not wish to enter at present. Profes- 
sor Gill is apparently of the opinion that some ques- 
tion of moral principle is involved, and that working 
naturalists should be communists in respect to the 
use of material. The only point which I desire at 
present to make is this, that Professor Gill has evi- 
dently been misinformed as to the manner in which 
Dr. Ginther has administered his trust as custodian 
of the zodlogical collections in the British museum. 
In conclusion, I desire to enter a serious protest 
against the bitter and unreasonable criticisms upon 
Dr Giunther’s work which have of late years so fre- 
