ON NATURAL HISTORY MUSEUMS. 3
fulfilled, indeed, so far and in such way as our means have
permitted.
As many of our members may not have visited the Forest
Museum recently, it may not be without use to explain what
has already been done there, and what more it is intended to do,
provided the necessary funds are forthcoming. Even in its
present incomplete state the Museum is a source of much
attraction to the crowds of excursionists in the summer months.
It appeals to many who might not otherwise be attracted to
a Museum. A visitor to the forest will casually enter the Lodge,
and have his attention arrested by the collections, whereas he
might never think of making a definite visit to a Museum in
town. And who dares to guess what far-reaching results may
perchance flow from such an accidental introduction! It may
be true as Oliver Wendell Holmes said, that the ordinary
visitor to the British Museum "will know as much about it as the
fly that buzzes in at one window and out at another." But that,
I believe, is due mainly to the bewildering wealth of our National
Treasure-house. A small museum is likely to have in some
respects much more educational value than a large one ; and
just because our Forest Museum is not embarrassingly rich in
specimens, I venture to assess its value as altogether out of
proportion to its magnitude. That remarkable man, the late
Professor Rolleston, remarked that "a young man who is
possessed of a talent for Natural Science and Physical Inquiry
generally, may have the knowledge of this predisposition made
known to himself and to others, for the first time, by his
introduction to a well-arranged Local Museum."(2) Is it
unreasonable to hope that some bright spirit—perhaps some
'potential Darwin'—may date his inspiration from a casual visit
to that little Museum in the Forest ?
Obviously the first thing that claims attention in a forest
is its timber ; and hence a Forest Museum must contain, first
and foremost, illustrations of the Forest Trees. Of the throngs of
Londoners who visit Epping Forest, how small a proportion
could name the common trees, even when clad in all their livery of
green ! I heard of a Cockney who, failing to distinguish one
tree from another, grouped the oak, the beech, the elm, and a
(2) Address to the Biological Section of the British Association at Liverpool, 1870.
Report, p. 93.