months and you could have your collection in 
safe quarters where it could never be interfered 
with by any one & arranged in such a man- 
ner that there never could be any danger of 
its becoming merged or mixed with the other 
collections.”°° It is clear that Sargent wanted 
to resolve some of the fundamental curatorial 
problems that the collection was already expe- 
riencing, but it is also tempting to suppose that 
Sargent wanted his own museum of woods (and 
that Jesup would build it for him). That notion 
was never pursued, but the Jesup Collection did 
prevail in occupying the lower hall all to itself. 
A new display was opened to the public 
on November 15, 1890, revealing 425 species 
and almost 250 watercolors, arranged in fam- 
ily groups in the cases along each side of the 
hall.°! While this was seen as an improvement, 
and many visitors believed the collection actu- 
ally was complete, Sargent advised Jesup not a 
year later, “I don’t think that we ought to con- 
sider the arrangement as final or that the col- 
lection is worthily housed or properly arranged 
until some radical change is made by which 
sufficient room for its display can be had.”°? 
In 1893, planning began for the construction 
of the museum’s southeast wing, part of the 
Seventy-Seventh Street facade, the ground floor 
of which would be dedicated to the wood collec- 
tion when it was completed in 1895.°° 
As the new wing took shape and its opening 
drew closer, there ensued a paramount disagree- 
ment (most emphatic and least charitable on 
the part of Sargent) over plans for the new hall. 
In a two-page, typewritten response to Jesup’s 
early scheme for cases and general arrangement, 
Sargent replied vehemently, and disproportion- 
ately: “A good deal of additional work in con- 
nection with the Collection has been laid out 
for me but I confess I do not feel much like 
undertaking it if the results are to be as bad as 
you seem to be determined to make them.” He 
asserted that his reputation among scientists 
could suffer if Jesup’s plans were followed, con- 
cluding, “This, from my point of view, is the 
unfortunate thing in the whole matter and why 
I believe that I have not been treated properly by 
you.”’°4 Jesup wrote out a six-page reply (that he 
did not send) in which he recounted their previ- 
ous discussions about the design. He concluded, 
Jesup Collection 33 
“It would be more agreeable to me in meeting 
with objections from yourself to have them pre- 
sented to me in a spirit of help and friendliness 
... During the many years of our friendship I 
have exerted myself to please you, and shall 
continue to do so in any way I can, but I expect 
consideration at your hands also.”°° 
In place of this letter, Jesup sent museum 
secretary John H. Winser to consult with Sar- 
gent in person about the central points of dis- 
pute, namely the design of the new cases and 
the placement of the immense cross-sections 
of coast redwood (Sequoia sempervirens) and 
giant sequoia (Sequoiadendron giganteum). In 
short, Jesup had wanted to include two or more 
round cases to break up the “monotony” of the 
exhibit, but doing so would have interrupted 
the botanical order to a degree that Sargent 
could not tolerate. At the same time, Jesup had 
arranged to place the cross-sections of the big 
trees just outside the main hall, on either side 
of the entrance, in part because of the architec- 
tural requirements for supporting them; Sargent 
was adamant that they should be placed in the 
center of the hall with the other logs, despite 
that this arrangement would require structural 
reinforcement of the floor. Jesup’s proposal took 
into account the flow of visitors, the overall 
aesthetic, costs, and the physical constraints of 
the building; Sargent worried most about what 
other scientists would think of the exhibit and 
felt that those concerns had not been adequately 
considered.°° Citing engineering and safety fac- 
tors, an Executive Committee of the museum 
resolved the practical question, temporarily, in 
favor of the original layout.°’ 
Early in 1896, when the specimens were 
moved into the new hall and the watercolors 
were hung, the debate subsided, and Sargent’s 
attention turned back to his usual curatorial 
concerns. Jesup assured the museum’s trustees 
that the lower hall of the new East Wing had 
been designated for the “permanent lodgment” 
of the wood collection and concluded, “It is 
thought that no better plan can be conceived 
whereby the effectiveness of the exhibit can be 
increased.’°® Not surprisingly, however, even 
this latest arrangement would be revised again 
as specimens were added to the exhibit, at Sar- 
gent’s urging, through the early 1900s.°? 
