aid oe TU: nat . ‘ yy : (\ ‘ae i A ee, i i. A ow " fa s a) j Rh ANNUAL REPORT OF THE BOARD OF REGENTS OF THE SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION, SHOWING THE OPERATIONS, EXPENDITURES, AND CONDITION OF THE INSTITUTION FOR THE YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 1897. Bec) RE ies NATIONAL MUSEUM. Part: £6 WASHINGTON: GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE. 7902. AN ACT PROVIDING FOR THE PUBLIC PRINTING AND BINDING, AND THE DISTRIBUTION OF PUBLIC DOCUMENTS. Approved January 12, 1895. “Of the Report of the Smithsonian Institution, ten thousand copies; one thousand copies for the Senate, two thousand for the House, five thousand for distribution by the Smithsonian Institution, and two thousand for distribution by the National Museum.”’ It A MEMORIAL OF GEORGE BROWN GOODE, TOGETHER WITH A SPE ECITON OF HIS PAPERS ON MUSEUMS AND ON THE HISTORY OF SCIENCE IN AMERICA. WASHINGTON: GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE. LOO1, INGE ROW CLT ON. The influence of Doctor George Brown Goode on the growth and character of the United States National Museum was profound, and it extended to museum development in all parts of the world. It is desirable that an account of his life and services should appear, together with reprints of his valuable papers on American science and public museums, as well as several on related subjects that have never been published, in this portion of the Smithsonian report devoted to the work of the National Museum. Most of these papers appeared originally in publications not easily accessible to students, and all reprints have long since been distributed. GEORGE BROWN GOODE. Every student of nature the world over has profited by the work of Doctor Goode. Everyone interested in the advancement of science and in the development of museums as the graphic representatives of history and science has been and will be encouraged and assisted because he lived and worked. Every person can emulate his example of right living and honest service with gain individually and as a member of the community and of the body politic, and every Virginian can point with pride to the fact that Doctor Goode’s ancestors were from that historic State. Personally I knew him as the man of science, the museum adminis- trator, the patriot, the valued adviser, and the loyal friend. Two years have passed since his death, and I feel the personal and public loss more and more. No one has come to take his place in many of the fields of his activity. Science, and particularly Government scientific institutions, will long miss the wholesome influence that he exerted on the minds of scientific and public men. But all that could be said by me has been spoken by those whose tributes follow. We loved the man, and we cherish his memory in secret thought and honor it in the written words of this memorial volume. CHARLES D. WALCOTT. v oS et . > ry CONTENTS. MEMORIAL MEETING. Page SEDC EIGET SEU a ache ree cit Peel A 2a gba PU 3 SLI EE NTT 8 cs BR cat Uo Mr nh ce ee 4 Introductory remarks. By Gardiner Greene Hubbard...................... 5 Opening Address. By Gammel: Pierpont Langley... fo... 0.2 Ses eke. a Goode as a historian and citizen. By William Lyne Wilson ................ 13 Goode asa naturalist. By Henry Fairfield Osborn. ....-2.....5.....0..-00. 17 Goode’s activities in relation to American science, By William Healey Dall. 25 Resolutions and messaves Of syimoathy: ..jcovicc cc ov 10 bbs does dedecce cnet oc. 33 Memoir of George Brown Goode. By Samuel Pierpont Langley ............ 39 PAPERS BY GEORGE BROWN GOODE. Musciin-bastory and Musenins of History ..... icc. osce esac ceaccescdess sets 63 ihe Genesis of the United States National Museum ............2.c..0ce. ese 83 The Principles of Museum Administration ........... Sele ait ere irs at ie 193 Pee RMSeMINS Ol CCF MEGER 2 c0 blocs sna Dae oh soe sinly hac oheweceh cnbinnee. 241 The Origin of the National Scientific and Educational Institutions of the "SUSE YS Chee STS RTS Ae Re ce a no ai Se yn 263 mie Merimnames of Natural History in America. 9.00.3. 00.. fess beni ea ceation 357 ewer imines On Aten Can SCIeNCE)... cals sms oe uae skool sues lee eieee 407 The First National Scientific Congress (Washington, April, 1844) and its Con- nection with the Organization of the American Association ............... 467 The Published Writings of George Brown Goode. By Randolph Iltyd Geare. 479 VII 19. 20. List OF PLATES: Facing page. FRONTISPIECE. George Brown Goode (1857-1896), assistant secretary of the Smithsonian Institution. From a photograph by T. W. Smillie........ . John James Abert (1787-1863), chief of U. S. Topographical Engineers. Brom a ctechenoraviay: My [. BUELTE. 25.6 afew c)sre nine oe sieiois sore dele 8 . Louis Agassiz (1807-1873), naturalist. Froma steel engraving of a painting. . John James Audubon (1780-1851), naturalist. From a photograph ofa OR Gk pele nya Me TOE A ROO a ets a. wih jaja oth le evi ion toe w ooeue ete oicann aio ctoee . Don Felix d’Azara (1746-1811), naturalist. From an engraving by Lizars. . Alexander Dallas Bache (1806-1867), superintendent U. S. Coast Survey. CESecatine co gOUTOEO PT CNY Uh Oly he OA UIAELIND. «haa 5) 3) ela a/ewicin letra ncg.aem tis! s (cer ale; tynieie a Charles Patrick Daly (1816-1899), geographer. From a photograph..... James Dwight Dana (1813-1895), geologist. From an engraving by PEs PRSEINUE LYRR eagreecte) oni ern Sess ora/2In ci nlals)« sisiate, « Fm b% nici nipus,eT0'E sala He o-0/0 102 106 110 I1t4 118 122 126 130 134 138 142 t The illustrations that accompany this volume are arranged alphabetically. Ix 21. 51. 52. . Eben Norton Horsford (1818-1893), chemist. From an engraving . David Hosack (1769-1835), botanist. From an engraving by A. B. Durand Lust of Plates. Facing page. Charles Henry Davis (1807-1877), naval explorer. From an engraving by, Ave Hes Ratehicne sre 5'eia: =, Susie ard Setetbtan) 38.6 ted eget eda te ner ice Pe ete ene ae cae . Edwin Hamilton Davis (1811-1888), ethnologist. From a copy of a g0)SN0) Corey 0) | Re AREAS Micro H OH GGC DUA mode saUaboaddasenbecdanes 3. John William Draper (1811-1882), physicist. From an engraving by George H. Perine « . «.:2)5ti\ Saray eleventere see exercts.ar eet ate . Peter Stephen Duponceau (1760-1844), philologist. From a lithograph. . . Timothy Dwight (1752-1817), president of Yale College. From an enpraving® by Mreeniain a: cp wieteccs Sie eee ee en ole teen eee ete ee . James Buchanan Eads (1820-1887), civil engineer. From an engraving by AL Ee Ritchie «oe 2ln i G/sdGele Sistas Seen a cutee vie ee . Amos Eaton (1776-1842), botanist. From an engraving by A. H. Ritchie. 28. Andrew Ellicott (1758-1820), astronomer and civil engineer. From a photograph of a painting . George William Featherstonhaugh (1780-1866), explorer and geologist. Front a photosraph ss <.5.5.. 25 = deaeiote a oles keene wate an oa ee . William Ferrell (1817-1891), meteorologist. From a photograph ....... . John Reinhold (1729-1798) and John George (1754-1794) Forster, natu- ralists. From an engraving by D. Berger . Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790), scientist. From an etching by Albert o; ss) 0,2 aa 010 6(e v6, ee leis, 5,9" s § Se) abalial aie . John Charles Frémont (1813-1890), army explorer, From an engraving by T. Knight of a photograph © 0) @) 6,6 ae! ieie)me (eves wusile © Ole «60 a © ee) 86% sae oldie in . George Gibbs (1815-1873), ethnologist. From a photograph............ . James Melville Gilliss (1811-1865), astronomer. From a photograph.... . Augustus Addison Gould (1805-1866), conchologist. From an engraving by Wright Smith . Asa Gray (1810-1888), botanist. From a wood engraving by G. Kruell.. . Jacob Green (1790-1841), chemist. From an engraving by J. Sartain of a painting by H. Bridgport . Arnold Guyot (1807-1884), geographer. From a photograph ........... . Stephen Hales (1677-1761), botanist. From a steel engraving . Charles Frederic Hartt (1840-1878), naturalist and explorer. From a wood cut engraving of a photograph . Ferdinand Rudolph Hassler (1770-1843), first superintendent of the U.S. Coast Survey. From a photograph of a painting . Isaac Israel Hayes (1832-1881), Arctic explorer. From an engraving by Jackman . Joseph Henry (1799-1878), first secretary of the Smithsonian Institution. . . Edward Hitchcock (1793-1864), geologist. From a photograph of a painting of a painting by Thomas Sully 8's) 0 0 0 5 ole 0c eo. n 0) aleve! se ote imi siw oe © Onl alee) wie) aiele)e dels . Andrew Atkinson Humphreys (1810-1883), army engineer. From an engraving by A. H. Ritchie @ 6 am 6 ela le vie ele mise eo) 6 eel sks étule Sintale a) aiatuPelein se) o\nl . David Humphreys (1752-1818), poet and diplomatist. From an engraving m6 (6 80 eee) 6 i) 0) e) elie) ec) x wTe)\e. 6) np 60 \.6 0 © by G. Parker of a painting by Gilbert Stuart . Elisha Kent Kane (1820-1857), Arctic explorer. From an engraving by T. B. Welch of a daguerreotype portrait by Brady..................... Benjamin Henry Latrobe (1767-1820), civilengineer. From a lithograph. Isaac Lea (1792-1886), conchologist. From an etching by S. J. Ferris.... 146 150 154 158 162 166 170 174 178 182 186 190 196 200 204 208 212 216 220 224 228 232 236 240 244 248 252 256 260 266 270 274 53. 54. 55- 56. 57- 59. 59. 60. 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. 67. 68. 69. 70. ik 72. 73- 74. 75: 76. 77: 78. 79- 80. 81. : 82. List of Plates. ancl Facing page. Meriwether Lewis (1774-1809), explorer. From an engraving by Strick- EET GU ca Shi CSS COS OPI Ieuan ae se re eo James Harvey Linsley (1787-1843), naturalist. From a steel engraving. . Stephen Harriman Long (1784-1864), army explorer. From an engraving by J.C Butire of a-dapuerrcotype portrait... 02... es. sce cce cscs anaes William Maclure (1763-1840), geologist. From an engraving of a painting eae UO Ht aS A bys AN reer the apn wt ae ie cv aes hoe aCe kee tks eet. Matthew Fontaine Maury (1806-1873), geographer. From an engraving PigneecOn ens AGL iio: ater tn <0 ae ee itis te Re ete cianach eR ake does Frangois André Michaux (1770-1855), botanist. From an engraving by Hee Mallet a painting by Rembrandt Peale .. 52.0. 6...0.60 aces ese Ormsby MacKnight Mitchel (1809-1862), astronomer. From an engraving nt CRN ET SSSA i oon hen Be pac ae ea Samuel Latham Mitchill (1764-1831), ‘‘Nestor of American Science,”’ Brom an-enerayvine of a.painting by H) Inman: ..5. 2.0.2... oe: sec usee Samuel George Morton (1799-1851), physician. From an engraving..... Albert James Myer (1827-1880), chief signal officer, U.S. A. From an Sera vine Ky WML WEBI fais ci sc esnlcd, (es nial «%<..\bx ee sete suc died John Strong Newberry (1822-1892), geologist. From a photograph...... Eliphalet Nott (1773-1866), president of Union College. From an engrav- ing by ALB. Durand of a painting by “Ames... << 0.4.2. esccnec cles us. Thomas Nuttall (1786-1859), naturalist. From an engraving by Thom- Denison Olmsted (1791-1859), physicist. From an engraving by A. H. Ji GI US casei Ie SBR saclay eee ae John Grubb Parke (1827-1900), army explorer. From an engraving by FAN TLS OSS SIMD Ore ae, A A iy PR a Charles Willson Peale (1741-1827), artist. From a painting by himself. . Rembrandt Peale (1778-1860), artist. From a painting by Thomas Sully. Benjamin Peirce (1809-1880), mathematician. From a photograph ...... Timothy Pickering (1745-1829), statesman. From an engraving by ‘I. B. Welctola patmbine by Gilbert Stuart. ois. 52.2. ese hk aca cheese Zebulon Montgomery Pike (1779-1813), army explorer. From an engrav- ELAS VU SCVaT Tie gf el Se le en a Joel Roberts Poinsett (1779-1851), statesman. From an engraving by [ode DOSES a ariraiae SO a tet Gag eae, ae eee ea era Joseph Priestley (1773-1804), chemist. From an engraving by W. Holl of Bgpaleleit et yp Gull DEL ENOt ARE: Seis Serle ci iareic co. 2 oo cia Madnick Shae Samuel Purchas (1577-1628), author of ‘‘ Purchas, his pilgrimage.’’ From SNA S Te Ge Msc Teao, 2ed & 19) Sa Oo. 1-2 eae a Constantine Samuel Rafinesque (1784-1842), naturalist. From a wood cuLreproduction of a steel engraving. ©. 6. occ .' coe cee nie ced dedecses eo. William C. Redfield (1789-1857), meteorologist. From an engraving by Beg ele asthe nah one Sal Yay MBS Mc tated ceafionctsiclh is Shsbusertotccat otek aed, Charles Valentine Riley (1843-1895), entomologist. From a photograph. David Rittenhouse (1732-1796), astronomer. From an engraving by J. B. PoMegere obapaimtine byoG WePeale.< . deals sin sccec gl. 92. 93- 94. 95. 96. 97- 98. 99. 100. IOI. 102. 103. 104. 105. 106. 107. ro8. T09. 89. go. Facing page. . Thomas Say (1787-1834), naturalist. From an engraving by Hoppner Meyer of a painting by Wood .........---seeee eee eee ete eee teen ees Henry Rowe Schoolcraft (1793-1864), naturalist and explorer. From an engraving by Illman and Sons... ...... + e+ eeeee seen eee eect cere teens Pietro Angelo Secchi (1818-1878), astronomer. From a wood cut...... Benjamin Silliman (1779-1864), chemist. From a mezzotint by P. N. Whelpley .: 0.2.5.0 cc csc cece combs amen cama sis = nim gman eee ve=er etisiats Sir Hans Sloane (1660-1752), founder of British Museum. From a steel GH TAVIDG < cs-m sicicje oe 4 nveie o.arnin Hime slsieicrs he mista oteerei nee Retell ee James Edward Smith (1759-1828), botanical writer. From a photograph Of AN ENGTAVING 2.0... cece teeters eee coe ee es seeeneecnanesesesesses John Smith (1579-1632), English explorer. From an engraving ....... Jakob Steendam (1616-1662), poet and naturalist. From a lithograph of a steel engraving .....-..000secceecees sts rege same eee ise earee a aieeeinls Isaac Ingalls Stevens (1818-1862), army explorer. From an engraving by J.C. Buttre oo... nce oe cia we werere = eieeels prea saree ainsi ete Isaiah Thomas (1749-1831), founder of the Antiquarian Society in Worcester, Mass. From an engraving by J. R. Smith................ Benjamin Thompson, Count Rumford (1753-1814), chemist and physi- cist. From an engraving by T. Miiller.............-.-- sees ee eeeeeee John Torrey (1796-1873), botanist. From a lithograph...............- John Tradescant (1608-1662), traveler and naturalist. From a reproduc- tion of aniold ‘engraving... a..2 ccs see as oe eee ee eens lee rear Gerard Troost (1776-1850), mineralogist and geologist. From a steel QMO TA VINE 55 oc Ses she nsene Boum # Speed eae Ie oes eee eater eae William Petit Trowbridge (1828-1892), civil and mechanical engineer. From a photograph... ......:sceescee dence esc cee scene cereserncacecs Stephen Van Rensselaer (1765-1839), founder of the Van Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. From an engraving by G. Parker of a minia- ture by C: Braset 6. 0. 2.0/0 ecaie vie cteini ett aie aie) oi =i) aie) wate iote etme ener Garcilaso de la Vega (1539-1616), Peruvian historian. From an early engraving by Carmona... 2.252. ceens «20 0)ee em isisleicie an iierslo sible niatals ielere Benjamin Waterhouse (1754-1846), physician. From an engraving by Re REEVES srarc ssi tie. 0. dchrelt wie iais wo eye siete: s) © opebels @irpciste)aketstota ters i afetetst=leiatelat=]- Voter Francis Wayland (1796-1865), president of Brown University. From an enpraving by. J. C. Buttre « «3.0.2 2.27 os sein ee vie bien ieee tener David Ames Wells (1828-1898), political economist. From an engraving by EL; WY Srnrttla © 5. oc.5.< 5 aha 008 oct kus. 0 @ wrote ereye. eats ale tetera Ree eee eee William Dwight Whitney (1827-1894), philologist. From an engraving by J. GC. Bettre oc sis oa ese thse caters ayoymie ie temo: ote ye emt eens eel eee Charles Wilkes (1798-1877), naval explorer. From an engraving by INP RACH £ 25,52 covela o-0i 010 ore reheusieoleteioneleseieloheretels ofokohen olen telel=Dieteletntaet ast ete Hugh Williamson (1735-1819), promoter of scientific enterprises. From an etching by Albert Rosenthal of a painting by J. Trumbull ......... Alexander Wilson (1766-1813), ornithologist. From an old engraving. . Caspar Wistar (1761-1818), professor of anatomy. From an engraving by J.B Longacre ofa painting by iB. OS® 2.7 cto sice teem eee Jeffries Wyman (1814-1874), comparative anatomist. From an engrav- ine by Iy.'S; Pundersoms sco cec 2c ch nove crete ieiete eels eteietebelene ere ete ek ete ene Edward Livingston Youmans (1821-1887), founder of Popular Science Monthly. From an engraving by C. Schlecht.............. aunt sss 398 4o2 406 410 414 418 422 426 430 434 438 442 446 450 454 458 462 466 470 474 478 482 486 490 494 498 500 Renee) Ra OF THE MEETING HELD IN COMMEMORATION OF THE LIFE AND SERVICES OF GEORGE BROWN GOODE, Assistant Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution, in charge of the United States National Museum. MEMORIAL EXERCISES. On Saturday evening, February 13, 1897, a meeting was held in the lecture room of the United States National Museum to commemorate the life and services of George Brown Goode. Over four hundred persons were assembled, representing the seven scientific societies, the patriotic and historical societies, of Washington, the American Philosophical Society, and the American Society of Naturalists. The programme was as follows: MEMORIAL MEETING. You ARE invited to attend a Memorial Meeting, under the auspices of the Joint Commission of the Scientific Societies, and in co-operation with the Patriotic and Historical Societies, of Washington, to commem- orate the life and services of GEORGE BRowN GOoopDk, LL.D., Assistant Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution, in charge of the United States National Museum. The meeting will be held inthe Lecture Room of the National Museum, Saturday evening, February 13, 1897, at 8 o’clock. Washington, February 6, 1897, PROGRAMME. Introductory remarks by the President of the Joint Commission, Hon. GARDINER G. HUBBARD Address by the Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution, Dr. S: 2. LANGLEY Goode as a Historian and Citizen, Hon. WILLIAM L. WILSON Goode as a Naturalist, Pror. HENRY F. OSBORN Goode’s Activities in Relation to American Science Pror. WILLIAM H. DaLL INTRODUCTORY REMARKS. By GARDINER GREENE HUBBARD, President of the Joint Commission of the Scientific Socteties. This day was selected as the day to pay tribute to Doctor G. Brown Goode, as it is his natalday. On my return to Boston from the maritime provinces last summer, I heard with deep regret of the death, a few days before, of Doctor George Brown Goode. ‘To me he had been a friend; to me his death was a deep personal loss and sorrow. ‘To him I have turned for counsel, for advice, for sympathy, and his response was prompt, earnest, and cordial. Do I not express the feeling of all who knew him? Never was there a truer and more intelligent counselor, a more sympathetic friend, a more ready helper, a more kindly nature. None knew him but to love him, None named him but to praise. It was at Twin Oaks, one of the last Sundays in June, that he spent the last morning with us. He walked with us through the grounds’ twining ways, pointing out the beauties of the flowers, which he was so quick to see, and showing a knowledge of the habits and needs of every tree and shrub. He passed through the grounds to the library and looked over a portfolio of recent Japanese prints. He showed a perfect familiarity with them, selecting the good, rejecting the poor, and know- ing the value of each. With books he was equally familiar, and more than once suggested some rare book that I should like to obtain. Books were his friends and companions. His reading was extensive and varied. He knew my pedigree better than I, and corrected mistakes that I had made in preparing my genealogy for the Society of Colonial Wars, in which organization he was deeply interested. His mind was versatile, his interests widespread, his tastes refined, his judgment correct. He was a true lover of nature, of art, of beauty everywhere. He heralded to us the first coming of the birds, he knew their notes, and welcomed the opening of the spring blossoms. He was alive to every bit of earth and sky. With all the pressure of numerous and varied cares and respon- sibilities, he lent a ready ear, a helping hand, to all who asked his aid. He would read and correct a manuscript for a friend, conduct another 5 6 Memorial of George Brown Goode. through the Museum and open to him its treasures, or prepare a scheme for an exposition at Chicago or Atlanta. Into the work of the Museum he threw his whole heart and life. He knew it in all its strength and weakness, its deficiencies, its wealth, its possibilities, and therefore believed in its glorious future. He knew it in all its different depart- ments—in its minute details. Hewelcomed every new object that was brought into the Museum and directed its disposition. He refused the appointment of Commissioner of Fisheries and remained in charge of the Museum at a smaller salary, because he felt his services were more needed there. He was urged last summer to go to the Seal Islands, a trip he would gladly have taken, but he was reluctant to leave his work. He remained to die at his post. Others will speak of him in his public relations; others can estimate his scientific attainments and the debt of gratitude the Museum owes to his faithful and skillful administration; others will weave and lay upon his tomb wreaths and garlands. I bring but a few violets, the expres- sion of my personal love and esteem. He was a friend whom I loved and whom I miss from my daily life. OPENING ADDRESS. © By SAMUEL PIRRPONT LANGLEY, Secretary, Smithsonian Institution. While I am aware that it is only fitting that I should say something here about one I knew so well as the late Doctor Goode, I feel the occa- sion a trying one, for he was so dear a friend that my very nearness and sense of a special bereavement must be a sufficient excuse for asking your indulgence, since I can not speak of him even yet without pain, and I must say but little. Here are some who knew him still longer than I, and many who can estimate him more justly in all his scientific work, and to those who can perform this task'so much better, I leave it. I will only try to speak, however briefly, from a personal point of view, and chiefly of those moral qualities in which our friendship grew, and of some things apart from his scientific life which this near friendship showed me. As I first remember him it seems to me, looking back in the light of more recent knowledge, that it was these moral qualities which I first appreciated, and that if there was one which more than another formed the basis of his character it was sincerity—a sincerity which was the ground of a trust and confidence such as could be instinctively given, even from the first, only to an absolutely loyal and truthful nature. In him duplicity of motive even, seemed hardly possible, for, though he was in a good sense, worldly wise, he walked by a single inner light, and this made his road clear even when he was going over obscure ways, and made him often a safer guide than such wisdom alone would have done. He was, I repeat, a man whom you first trusted instinctively, but also one in whom every added knowledge explained and justified this confidence. This sincerity, which pervaded the whole character, was united with an unselfishness so deep-seated that it was not conscious of itself, and was, perhaps, not always recognized by others. It is asubject of regret to me, now it is too late, that I seem myself to have thus taken it too much as a matter of course in the past, at times like one I remember, when, as I afterwards learned, he was suffering from wretched health, _ which he concealed so successfully while devoting himself to my help, that I had no suspicion till long after of the effort this must have cost 7 . 8 Memorial of George Brown Goode. him. He lived not for himself, but for others and for his work. There was no occasion when he could not find time for any call to aid, and the Museum was something to which he was willing to give of his own slender means. Connected with this was an absence of any wish to personally domi- nate others or to force his own personal ways upon them. It is pleas- antest to live our own life if we can, and with him every associate and subordinate had a moral liberty that is not always enjoyed, for apart from his official duties, he obtruded himself upon no one with advice, and his private opinion was to be sought, not proffered. His insight into character was notable, and it was perhaps due as much as anything to a power of sympathy that produced a gentleness in his private judgment of others, which reminded one of the saying, that if we could comprehend everything we could pardon everything. He com- prehended and he pardoned. Associate this tolerance of those weaknesses in others, even which he did not share, with the confidence he inspired and with this clear insight, and we have some idea of the moral qualities which tempered the authority he exercised in his administrative work, and which were the underlying causes of his administrative excellence. I do not know whether a power of reading character is more intuitive or acquired; at any rate without it men may be governed, but not in harmony, and must be driven rather than led. Doctor Goode was in this sense a leader, quite apart from his scientific competence. Every member of the force he controlled, not only among his scientific associates, but down to the humblest employees of the Museum, was an individual to him, with traits of character which were his own and not another’s, and which were recognized in all dealings. And in this I think he was peculiar, for I have known no man who seemed to possess this sympathetic insight in such a degree; and certainly it was one of the sources of his strength. I shall have given, however, a wrong idea of him if I leave anyone under the impression that this sympathy led to weakness of rule. He knew how to say ‘‘no,’’ and said it as often as any other, and would reprehend where occasion called, in terms the plainest and most uncom- promising a man could use, speaking so when he thought it necessary, even to those whose association was voluntary, but who somehow were not alienated, as they would have been by such censure from another. ‘‘He often refused me what I most wanted,” said one of his staff to me, ‘‘but Inever went to sleep without having in my own mind forgiven him.’’ I have spoken of some of the moral qualities which made all rely upon him, and which were the foundation of his ability to deal with men. To them was joined that scientific knowledge without which he could not have been a Museum administrator, but even with this knowledge he could not have been what he was, except from the fact that he loved the Museum and its administration above every other pursuit, even, I think, Memorial Meeting. 9 above his own special branch of biological science. He was a man of the widest interests I have ever known, so that whatever he was speak- ing of at any moment, seemed to be the thing he knew best. It was often hard to say, then, what love predominated; but I think that he had, on the whole, no pleasure greater than that in his Museum administra- tion, and that, apart from his family interests and joys, this was the deepest love of all. He refused advantageous offers to leave it, though I ought to gratefully add here, that his knowledge of my reliance upon him and his unselfish desire to aid me, were also among his determining motives in remaining. ‘They were natural ones in such a man. What were the results of this devotion may be comprehensively seen in the statement that in the year in which he was first enrolled among the officers of the Museum the entries of collections numbered less than 200,000, and the staff, including honorary collaborators and all subordi- nates, thirteen persons, and by comparing these early conditions with what they became under his subsequent management. Professor Baird at the first was an active manager, but from the time that he became Secretary of the Institution he devolved more and more of the Museum duties on Doctor Goode, who for nine years preceding his death was practically in entire charge of it. It is strictly within the truth then to say that the changes which have taken place in the Museum in that time are more his work than any other man’s, and when we find that the number of persons employed has grown from thirteen to over two hundred, and the number of specimens from 200,000 to over 3,000,000, and consider that what the Museum now is, its scheme and arrangement, with almost all which make it distinctive; are chiefly Doctor Goode’s, we have some of the evidence of his administrative capacity. He was fitted to rule and administer both men and things, and the Museum under his management was, as someone has called it, ‘““A house full of ideas and a nursery of living thought.”’ Perhaps no one can be a ‘‘naturalist,’’ in the larger sense, without being directly a lover of Nature and of all natural sights and sounds. One of his family says: He taught us all the forest trees, their fruits and flowers in season, and to know them when bare of leaves by their shapes; all the wayside shrubs, and even the flow- ers of the weeds; all the wild birds and their notes, and the insects. His ideal of an old age was to have a little place of his own ina mild climate, surrounded by his books for rainy days, and friends who cared for plain living and high thinking, with a chance to help someone poorer than he. He was a loving and quick observer, and in these simple natural joys his studies were his recreations, and were closely connected with his literary pursuits. I have spoken of his varied interests and the singular fullness of his -knowledge in fields apart from biologic research. He was a genealogist of professional completeness and exactitude, and a historian, and of him in IO Memorial of George Brown Goode. these capacities alone, a biography might be written; but his well-founded claim to be considered a literary man as well as a man of science, rests as much on the excellent English style; clear, direct, unpretentious, in which he has treated these subjects, as on his love of literature in general. I pass them, however, with this inadequate mention, from my incompetence to deal with him as a genealogist, and becayse his aspect as a historian will be presented by another; but while I could only partly follow him in his-genealogical studies, we had together, among other common tastes, that love of general literature just spoken of, and I, who have been a widely discursive reader, have never met a mind in touch with more far- away and disconnected points than his, nor one of more breadth and variety of reading, outside of the range of its own specialty. This read- ing was also, however, associated with a love of everything which could illustrate his special science on this literary side. The extent of this illustration is well shown by the wealth and aptness of quotation in the chapter headings of his American Fishes, his Game Fishes of North America, and the like, and in his knowledge of everything thus remotely connected with his ichthyologic researches, from St. Anthony’s Sermon to Fishes, to the Literature of Fish Cookery, while in one of his earliest papers, written at nineteen, his fondness for Isaac Walton and his familiarity with him, are evident. He had a love for everything to do with books, such as specimens of printing and binding, and for etchings and engravings, and he was an omnivorous reader, but he read to collect, and oftenest in connection with the enjoyment of his outdoor life and all natural things. One of these unpublished collections, The Music of Nature, contains literally thousands of illustrated poems or passages from his favorite poets. These were his recreations, and among these little excursions into literature, ‘‘the most pathetic, and yet in some respects the most con- solatory,’’? says his literary executor, ‘‘seems to have been suggested by an article on the literary advantages of weak health, for with this thought in mind he had collected from various sources accounts of literary work done in feeble health, which he brought together under the title Mens Sana in Corpore /zsano.’’ Still another collection was of poems relating to music, of which he was an enthusiastic lover. He sang and played well, but this I only learned after his death, for it was characteristic of his utter absence of display, that during our nine years’ intimacy he never let me know that he had such accomplishments; though that he had a large acquaintance with musical instruments I was, of course, aware from the collections he had made. We must think of him with added sympathy, when we know that he lost the robust health he once enjoyed, at that early time during his first connection with the Museum, when he gave himself with such uncalcu- lating devotion to his work as to overtask every energy and permanently impair his strength. It was only imperfectly restored when his excessive Memorial Meeting. rigs labors in connection with the Centennial Exposition brought on another attack, and this condition was renewed at times through my acquaintance with him. When we see what he has done, we must remember, with now useless regret, under what conditions all this was accomplished. I have scarcely alluded to his family life, for of his home we are not to speak here, further than to say that he was eminently a domestic man, finding the highest joys that life brought him with his family and children. Of those who hear me to-night most knew him personally, and will bear me witness, from his daily life, that he was a man one felt to be pure in heart as he was clean of speech, always sociable, always considerate of his associates, a most suggestive and helpful man; an eminently unselfish man—imay I not now say that he was what we then did not recognize, in his simplicity, a gveaf man? It is a proof [says one who knew him] of the unconsciousness and unobstrusive- ness which chracterized Doctor Goode in all his associations and efforts that, until his death came, few, if any, even of his intimate friends, realized the degree to which he had become necessary to them. All acknoweledged his ability, relied on his sincerity, knew how loyally he served every cause he undertook. The news of his death showed them for the first time what an element of strength he was in the work and ambitions of each of them. With a sudden shock they saw that their futures would have less of opportunity, less of enthusiasm and meaning, now that he was gone. He has gone; and on the road where we are all going, there has not preceded us a man who lived more for others, a truer man, a more loyal friend. Rahs oy 6 ives ea Ce! ohm GOODE AS A HISTORIAN AND CITIZEN. By WILLIAM LYNE WILSON, Postmaster-General of the United States. It has been most appropriately assigned to those who saw, and were privileged to see, more of Doctor Goode than myself, in his domestic life and in daily official intercourse, to speak of his virtues and his most charming and lofty traits as a man; and to speak of him in his chosen field of science must be assigned to those who do not, like myself, stand outside of the pale of scientific attainment. The somewhat humbler part is mine to speak of Doctor Goode in those relations in life in which he was probably less known and less thought of than as a man of science or in other fields of his distinguished attainment. The German professor, of whom it is related that on his deathbed he mourned the waste of his life work in expending his energies on the entire Greek language instead of concentrating them on the dative case, gives a ludicrous and extreme illustration of that necessity for division of labor and of specialization which all men recognize in this age of ours. In the field of intellectual, as in that of mechanical, occupation, the “‘jack-of-all-trades’’ is master of none; and while the rule for the intellectual man and for the great student must always be to endeavor to know everything of something and something of everything—at least of everything connected with that something—it is becoming more and more difficult in the compass of human life and human attainment to live up to that rule. Doctor Goode was honored in his own country and in other countries as an eminent man of science, and deservedly so honored, and his lasting fame must rest upon his solid and substantial contributions to science and the advancement of human knowledge, on his eminent success as an administrator of scientific organizations, and on that work which all his life shows to have been most congenial to him—the bringing of science down to the interest and instruction of the people. He was a richly endowed man, first with that capacity and that . resistless bent toward the work in which he attained his great distinction that made it a perennial delight to him; but he was scarcely less richly 3 14 Memorial of George Brown Goode. endowed in his more unpretending and large human sympathies, and it was this latter that distinguished him as a citizen and a historian. It has been said time and again, with more or less truth, of the great English universities, and possibly of similar great schools in our own country, that they tend to make a caste, and that men who come out from them find themselves separated from the great mass of their fellow- citizens, out of sympathy with the thought, the action, and the daily life of the generation in which they move. ‘This certainly could never be said of Doctor Goode. As a citizen he was full of patriotic American enthusiasm. He understood, as all must understand who look with seriousness upon the great problems that confront a free people and who measure the difficulties of those problems—he understood that at least one preparation for the discharge of the duties of American citizenship was the general education of the people, and so he advocated as far as possible bringing within the reach of all the people not only the oppor- tunities but the attractions and the incitements to intellectual living. It was one of his favorite ideas that there should be in every town, and even in the villages of the country, at least some sort of a library, at least some sort of a reading room, at least some sort of a museum, to quicken and generate the intellectual life of that community, and possibly to stimulate men to the high career which he and others like him have been stimulated to from such beginnings. But Doctor Goode knew also that mere education—literary or scien- tific—whatever it might do for the individual, however much of power or distinction it might give to him, and however much of personal enjoy- ment and luxury it might bring to him, is not the only thing required to make an American citizen, and I am satisfied that the work which he did in the field of American history was connected, closely connected, with this general idea. It is not only that we have free institutions in this country, it is not only that we have universal education, at least within the reach of the people of this country ; we have as our chief reli- ance for success in the future, as it has been our chief safety in the past, the rich political heritage of hundreds of years’ training in these institu- tions, and Doctor Goode, with the quick and warm sympathies of the man and of the historian, seems to have felt that he could do no greater service to the people of his day and generation and to his country than in the most attractive and concrete way (if I may so express it) to lead the young men of this country to the study of the history of the past— to the deeds and the writings of the great men to whom we owe the foundation and the perpetuation of our institutions. This was probably somewhat the result of his personal sympathies, feeling that what influenced him would influence others, and it was a wise and proper conclusion. The study of the past, the study of the lives of those who have been eminent and useful men in the past, is a potent influence on high, intel- Memorial Meeting. ES ligent, patriotic effort in the present. The zodlesse oblige of a patriotic and substantial ancestry, not only for the individual but for the country itself, is a power whose influence we can scarcely exaggerate. I have thought, as I have visited the great universities of England and seen in their common halls, where once a day the students meet to partake of one meal at least in common, as upon their walls I have seen in living canvas the portraits of the great men of their special colleges—of Isaac Barron, Thomas Babington Macaulay, and all the English bishops at Trinity—and each exhibiting groups of those who have risen to useful- ness and done great deeds in literature, in science, in public life, in war, or in any of the elements and fields of English greatness, that there was a mute appeal to every Englishman from those walls to be worthy of his country and of his college. It must have been something of this idea that induced the old Roman to place in the entrance to his house the effigies of every member of his family who had borne a high office in the state. As his son came in and out of that house, he passed between effigies, as lifelike as Roman art could make them, of every member of that family who had held a high office, or magistracy, in the Roman commonwealth. He was stimulated to patriotism by the examples of his fathers—of those who had led armies, of those who had extended the limits of the empire, of those who had triumphed on returning from foreign fields of conquest and vic- tory, of those whose names were revered in the annals of his country— and so it must have been, consciously or unconsciously, some feeling of this kind that seems almost from Doctor Goode’s youth to have led him into the field of genealogical inquiry and study, led him into the field of historic study, grouping his studies, as he seems to have done, around great and inspiring characters. Perhaps no family in this country has had so perfect a book, so com- plete a study of all of its branches, as Doctor Goode gave to the family whose name he bore in that book entitled Virginia Cousins, and it is especially gratifying to me to know that Virginia history, so much neglected, was perhaps the favorite field of Doctor Goode’s study and investigation. He was a student of the writings of Washington, and gathered all the material he could find about that great Virginian. He was a student of the writings of Jefferson; he was a student of the lives of other distinguished men of that old Commonwealth, and I am told that he had in contemplation the publication of a book to be called Virginia Worthies, in which doubtless he would have tried to give the proper standing to that minor and second class of Virginia’s great men of whom the country at large knows so much less to-day than it ought to know. Not only, however, in the study of the men and the history of the _ Commonwealth from which in one line of his ancestry he was sprung was Doctor Goode a student. He was a student of American history at 16 Memorial of George Brown Goode. large. He was one of the Council of the American Historical Associa- tion, and it was particularly through his efforts that the connection between that association and the Smithsonian Institution was brought about. He was one of the organizers here but a few months ago of the Southern History Association, and took great interest in the work that is projected by it. He was connected with the great organizations, the Sons of the American Revolution and the Sons of the Revolution, presi- dent of the first and vice-president of the other, and not as a mere office- holder, not as a mere member, but as a zealous, enthusiastic, intelligent worker. But Doctor Goode was not only a historian in this respect and in this peculiar way. He was also a historian of science, and he seems here likewise to have followed the same general idea of grouping scientific history—the history of scientific progress—around the particular men and individuals connected with that progress. Iam assured by those who are more capable of speaking authoritatively on such a subject than I am, that in certain papers of his, partly pub- lished, and partly as yet unpublished, he has given us the most interest- ing and instructive history yet produced of the progress of science in the United States; so that it is not attributing to Doctor Goode a novel and undeserved character to speak of him to-night asa historian. Had his life been spared, in his peculiar way, in his own personal and attractive manner, he would doubtless have made most substantial contributions to the study of American history, and I can not doubt, as I have already said, that in doing this he was impelled by the patriotic idea that he was helping to build up a strong American intelligent citizenship in the country he loved so well. GOODE AS A NATURALIST. By HENRY FAIRFIELD OSBORN, DaCosta Professor of Zoology, Columbia University. The designation ‘‘ naturalist’? was one which Goode richly earned and which he held most dear, and our deep sorrow is that his activity as a naturalist extended only over a quarter of a century. We are cheered by the thought that he was a man of whom no adverse word can ever be spoken either in science or in character. We think of both at this time, because in him the man and the profession were inseparable and con- stantly interacting. His scientific virtues were of the order rare as the Christian virtues, and we can not thoroughly understand his scientific career unless we understand him as a man. Errors of judgment, mis- leading tenets, and adherence to false hypotheses among some of the most gifted of our professional ancestors have arisen as often from defect of principle and from personal prejudices as from defect of knowledge. We see in our friend, on the other hand, that the high standard of scien- tific achievement was constantly parallel with and very largely the out- growth of a high standard of personal character and motive. In brief, the work of the true naturalist is ever lighted by the four lamps, of love, of truth, of breadth, and of appreciation, and all of these shone brightly upon the path of Goode. His love of nature was inborn, predetermining his career, and so far surpassing his self-interest we fear it is only too true that he sacrificed his life for the diffusion of natural truth. So far as I know, he never entered a scientific controversy and was never under temptation to warp or deflect facts to support an hypothesis; yet he was incapable of tampering with truth under any circumstances which might have arisen. His presidential address of 1887 before the Biological Society of Washington showed him as scrupulous not to overestimate as he was eager not to underestimate the existing status of American science. While largely cultivated by wide experience in contact with nature and men, his breadth of view was certainly innate. If Goode had a fault, it was that his interests were too numerous and his sympathies too broad. He displayed not only a warm appreciation of those around him and an enthusiasm for contemporary research, but an exceptional sense of the close bonds between the present and the past— NAT MUS 97, PT 2 2 17 18 Memorial of George Brown Goode. as seen in his admiration for the pioneers of American science and his repeated vindication of their services. This passion for history led to an important phase of his literary work. His fine addresses, The Begin- nings of Natural History in America (1886), The Beginnings of Amer- ican Science (1887), The Literary Labors of Benjamin Franklin (1890), The Origin of the National Scientific and Educational Institutions of the United States (1890), and An Account of the Smithsonian Institution (1895), sprang from the same instinct which prompted him to compile the valuable bibliographies of Baird, of Girard, of Lea, and of Sclater, and to undertake the remarkable genealogy of his own family entitled Virginia Cousins. ‘The time between 1887 and 1895 which he devoted to these subjects caused some of his fellow-naturalists anxiety; yet I fancy this work was largely sought by him for diversion and rest, just as Michael Foster tells us that philosophy and controversy served as recreation to Huxley, at a time when overwork had given hima passing distaste for morphology. His trend of life guided by these four beacon lights was swayed by two countercurrents—first, his strong impulses as an original investiga- tor, and, second, his convictions as to the duty of spreading the knowl- edge of nature. These currents moved him alternately. The most superficial view of his career shows that his whole environment fostered his public spirit and made difficult and at times impossible the retirement so essential to studies in nature. Goode’s practical and public achievements for natural history there- fore do him even more honor than his writings, because from June, 1870, _ when he graduated from Wesleyan University, to September, 1896, administrative service became paramount, and he was free to devote only the odd intervals of his time to research. Our great gain in the national institutions he has advanced is our corresponding loss in ichthyology and the kindred branches of zoology. Goode’s successful work in the natural history courses at Wesleyan led at graduation to a place in the college museum, where in 1870 he at once showed his great talent for systematic arrangement. In further preparation for zoology, he went to Harvard, and for a few months came under the genial influence of Louis Agassiz. But the turning point in his life came in 1872, when, working as a volunteer upon the United States Fish Commission, at Eastport, he met Spencer F. Baird. The kind of simple but irresistible force which Abraham Lincoln exerted among statesmen Baird seems to have exerted among naturalists. He at once noted young Goode’s fine qualities, adopted him, and rapidly came to be the master spirit in his scientific life. Goode delighted to work with a man so full of all that constitutes true greatness. He fre- quently spoke of Baird as his master, and intimate friends say that he never showed quite the same buoyant spirit after Baird’s death—he felt the loss so keenly. Baird took Goode to Washington in the winter of 1872 and practically determined his career, for he promoted him rapidly Memorial Meeting. 19 through every grade of the Fish Commission and Museum service. It is hard to realize now the intensely rapid and eager development of our national scientific institutions in those years. No doubt Baird’s mantle fell fittingly upon Goode’s shoulders, and he had all but the magnificent physique of his master to qualify him for this heavy burden. His talents and methods were of a different order. Both men enjoyed universal admiration, respect, and even love, but Baird drove men before him with quiet force while Goode drew men after him. Lacking the self-confidence of Baird, Goode was rather per- suasive than insistent. His success of administration also came partly from an instinctive knowledge of human nature and his large faculty of putting himself in other men’s shoes. He sought out the often latent best qualities of the men around him and developed them. When things were out of joint and did not move his way, he waited with infinite patience for the slow operation of time and common sense to set them right. He was singularly considerate of opinion. Not ‘‘I think,’’ but *‘Don’t you think,’’ was his way of entering a discussion. I am reminded of the gentleness of my teacher, Francis Balfour, when one of his students carelessly destroyed a rare and valuable preparation, as I. learn from one of Goode’s associates that under similar provocation, without a word of reproof, he stooped over to repair the damage himself. ' He was fertile of original ideas and suggestions, full of invention and of new expedients, studying the best models at home and abroad, but never bound by any traditions of system or of classification. He showed these qualities in a marked degree in the remarkable fisheries exhibit which he conceived and executed for Berlin in 1879, and continued to show them in his rapid development of the scope as well as of the detail of a great museum. ‘To all his work also he brought a refined artistic taste, shown in his methods of printing and labeling, as well as in his encour- agement of the artistic, and, therefore, the truthful and realistic develop- ment of taxidermy in the arrangement of natural groups of animals. To crown all, like Baird, he entered into the largest conception of the wide- reaching responsibilities of his office under the Government, fully realiz- ing that he was not at the head of a university or of a metropolitan museum, but of the Museum of a great nation. Every reasonable request from another institution met a prompt response. I well recall Goode’s last visit to the American Museum in New York, and his hearty approval of the work there, especially his remark, ‘‘I am glad to see these things being done so well in this country.’’ Not the advancement of Washing- ton science but of American science was his dominating idea. In fact, every act and every word of Goode’s breathed the scientific creed which he published in 1888: The greatest danger to science is, perhaps, the fact that all who have studied at all within the last quarter of a century have studied its rudiments*and feel competent * to employ its methods and its language and to form judgments on the merits of cur- rent work. . . . Inthe meantime the professional men of science, the scholars, 20 Memorial of George Brown Goode. and the investigators seem to me to be strangely indifferent to the questions as to how the public at large is to be made familiar with the resultsof their labors. . . . It may be that the use of the word naturalist is to become an anachronism, and that we are all destined to become generically biologists and specifically morphologists, histologists, embryologists, physiologists. I can but believe, however, that it is the duty of every scientific scholar, however minute his specialty, to resist in himself, and in the professional circles which sur- round him, the tendency toward narrowing technicality in thought and sympathy, and above all in the education of nouprofessional students. Ican not resist the feeling that American men of science are in a large degree responsible if their fellow-citizens are not fully awake to the claims of scientific endeavor in their midst. I am not in sympathy with those who feel that their dignity is lowered when their investigations lead toward improvement in the physical condition of mankind, but I feel that the highest function of science is to minister to their mental and moral welfare. Here in the United States, more than in any other country, it is necessary that sound, accurate knowledge and a scientific manner of thought should exist among the people, and the man of science is becoming, more than ever, the natural custodian of the treasured knowledge of the worid. ‘To him, above all others, falls the duty of organizing and maintaining the institutions for the diffusion of knowl- edge, many of which have been spoken of in these addresses—the schools, the museums, the expositions, the societies, the periodicals. To him, more than to any other American, should be made familiar the words of President Washington in his farewell address to the American people: ‘Promote, then, as an object of primary importance, institutions for the general diffusion of knowledge. In proportion as the structure of a government gives force to public opinions it should be enlightened.”’ As a naturalist Goode did not close any of the windows opening out intonature. His breadth of spirit in public affairs displayed itself equally in his methods of field and sea work and in the variety of his observa- tions and writings. While fishes became his chief interest, he knew all the Eastern species of birds after identifying and arranging the collection in his college museum. He loved plants, and in the latter years of his life took great pleasure in the culture of the old-fashioned garden around his house. He was not wedded to his desk, to dry bones, nor to alcoholic jars. His sea studies and travels ranged as early as 1872 from the Ber- mudas to Eastport on the Bay of Fundy; to Casco Bay in 1873, to Noank,. on Long Island Sound, in 1874. Here he conceived a great Index Bibliography of American Ichthyology, a work which he did not live to complete, and here he met his future colleague, Bean, who describes him as ‘‘a young man with plump cheeks and a small moustache.’’ During the following two years his assistant curatorship at the National Museum confined him, but in 1877 he was studying the fisheries off Halifax, and in 1879 at Provincetown. ‘The work of the fishery census was starting up in earnest, and Goode was busy planning and getting together his men. Special agents were sent out, to every part of the coast and to the Great Lakes, to gather information. Goode worked at it himself on Cape Cod, and manifested the same enthusiasm as in every other piece of work he took up. He interested himself in getting together Memorial Meeting. 2% a collection representing the methods of the fisheries and the habits of the fishermen. Neglecting neither the most trivial nor important objects, branching out into every collateral matter, he showed his grasp both of principles and of details. His literary bent and facility of written expression showed itself before his graduation at Wesleyan in the College Argus, which contains seven brief papers, including his first scientific article, prophetically entitled Our Museum. He contributed to the American Naturalist in 1871 a note upon The Billfish in Fresh Water, and in 1872 A Sea Bird Inland. He published and presented before the American Association in 1873 his first paper of importance, entitled Do Snakes Swallow Their Young? These studies of real merit foreshadow two marked features of his later work—first, his recognition of the importance of distribution, which cul- minated in the preparation of his unfinished memoir upon the Geographi- cal Distribution of Deep Sea Fishes; second, his close observance of the habits of animals, which was of marked usefulness in his subsequent Fish Commission service and treatises upon fish-culture. His Catalogue of the Fishes of the Bermudas, from his visit in 1872, indicates how early in life he had thought out a thoroughly philosophical method of studying a local fauna: ‘‘In working up my notes,’’ he says, ‘‘I have endeavored to supplement previous descriptions by (1) descriptions of the colors of the fishes while living, (2) notes on size and proportions, (3) observa- tions on habits, (4) hints in reference to the origin and meaning of their popular names, (5) notes upon modes of capture and economic value.’’ He increased the number of recorded species from seven to seventy-five, and gave a careful analysis of their probable geographical derivation. Many of his briefer papers deal directly with the biological problems which attracted his interest, especially among reptiles and fishes, touch- ing such questions as migration, coloring, albinism, mimicry, parasitism, feeding and breeding habits, and the relation of forest protection to the protection of fishes. It is difficult to classify the papers, long and short, which we find rap- idly succeeding each other in the valuable bibliography prepared by Doctor Adler and Mr. Geare. Of his 193 independent papers, 21 are biological, g treat of reptiles and amphibians, 38 are devoted to the structure, life habits, and distribution of the fishes, in addition to 15 purely systematic contributions upon the fishes. Among the former are his large memoirs upon the Menhaden, his shorter treatises upon the Trunk Fishes, the Pampanos, the Sword Fishes, and the Eel. The work of the Fish Com- mission is described, and published at home and abroad, in 30 reports and popular papers. ‘The special branch of Fisheries Exhibits is treated in 8 papers, and of fish-culture in 12 papers. Besides his 14 reports as Director of the National Museum he published, between 1881 and 1896, 13 papers developing the theory and practice of museum administra- tion, leading up to his very notable articles, Museums of the Future, 22 Memorial of George Brown Goode. Museum History and Museums of History in 1889, and his invalu- able memoir upon Museum Administration in 1895. His labors and writings placed him in the lead of museum experts in this country and upon the level of the distinguished leader of museum development in England, Sir William Flower. ‘The closing sentence of his address before the English Museums Association must be quoted. ‘‘The degree of civ- ilization to which any nation, city, or province has attained is best shown by the character of its public museums and the liberality with which they are maintained.’’ His popular works include the Game Fishes of the United States, pub- lished in 1879, a book written in charming literary style, besides innu- merable short articles in the Chautauquan, Forest and Stream, and Science. In 1888 appeared his American Fishes: A Popular Treatise upon the Game and Food Fishes of North America, with special refer- ence to habits and methods of capture. These writings give us a further insight not only into the two sides of Goode’s scientific nature, the theo- retical and the practical, but into his artistic and poetical sentiment and into the wide extent of his reading. Besides the long list enumerated above, he published 51 joint ichthyological papers with G. Brown, W. O. Atwater, R. E. Earll, A. Howard Clark, Joseph W. Collins, Newton P. Scudder, but his main collaborateur was Tarleton H. Bean. Under their names appear 35 papers, but, chief of all, the Oceanic Ichthyology, a Treatise on the Deep Sea and Pelagic Fishes of the World, based chiefly upon the collections made by steamers Llake, Albatross, and Fish Hawk in the Northwestern Atlantic. In 1877 Goode saw his first deep-sea fish drawn fresh from the bottom, and experienced a sensation which he thus describes in the preface of his monograph: The studies which have led to the writing of this book were begun in the summer of 1877, when the first deep-sea fishes were caught by American nets on the coast of North America. This took place in the Gulf of Maine, 44 miles east of Cape Ann, on the 19th of August, when from the side of the United States Fish Commission steamer Speedwell the trawlnet was cast in 160 fathoms of water. ‘The writers were both standing by the mouth of the net when, as the seamen lifted the end of the bag, two strange forms fell out on the deck. A single glance was enough to tell us that they were new to our fauna, and probably unknown to science. They seemed like visitors from another world, and none of the strange forms which have since passed through our laboratory have brought half as much interest and enthusiasm. Macrurus bairdii and Lycodes verrillii were simply new species of well-known deep-dwelling genera, and have since been found to be very abundant on the conti- nental slope, but they were among the first fruits of that great harvest in the field of oceanic ichthyology which we have had the pleasure to garner in the fifteen years which have passed since that happy and eventful morning. It seems incredible that American naturalists should not then have known that a few miles away there was a fauna as unlike that of our coast as could be found in the Indian Ocean or the seas Ot Chinas. o, In one of the latest of his 45 contributions to the Bulletins of the United States National Museum is the description of the discovery of the Memorial Meeting. 23 new deep-sea Chimezeroid, for which, true to his appreciation of the past, he proposed the name Harriotta, in memory of Thomas Harriott, the earliest English naturalist in America. The quaint, old-fashioned style of some of Goode’s essays gives us an insight into his historic sense and his reversion to the ideas and principles of his Virginia ancestors. Seldom have we known the loyal conservative spirit, of reverence for old institutions, fealty to independence of socie- ties, combined with such a grandly progressive spirit in the cooperation of the Government with the state, and of one country with another in the promotion of science. Again, what impresses us most is Goode as the apostle of scientific knowledge. A conviction of his mission in life breathes forth from his earliest papers in the College Argus to his final appeal in Science for the ** Admission of American students to the French universities.’’ One of his intimate friends writes: Sometimes we talked of more far-reaching matters, and in such discussions I often took a position I had no faith in, hoping to draw him out. I remember once we fell to talking of the province of science, and for the sake of argument I took the position that most scientific work was merely a form of intellectual amusement, and benefited noone. He became quite earnest in his protest against that view, and asserted his belief that the majority of scientific men were working toward the improvement of things and that it was the destiny of science to be the salvation of the world. At another time he unfolded the idea that man through science was approaching step by step nearer the Infinite Ruler of the Universe, and that it was only through these activities that he could hope to reach his proper destiny; that every amelioration of life, every improvement in manners, every change in theological tenets was a token of man’s unfolding through the working of intellectual forces. Our lasting regret must be that Goode’s life terminated just as he had richly earned the right to retire from the scientific service of his country— from your service and mine, my friends—to devote himself more exclu- sively to his own researches. As early as 1880, during the Herculean task of entering the new National Museum building, Goode remarked to one of his friends, ‘‘ We have had pretty hard scrambling—I think we will take a rest presently ’’— but, alas! the rest days never came. One duty after another fell heavily upon his too-willing shoulders. All must have observed in later years a certain quiet melancholy which marked his overwork, and conscious inability to cope with all that his ambitious and resourceful spirit prompted. None the less he showed a continuous and rapid intellectual development during the last ten years of his life, and it was evident that his powers were constantly expanding, and that his brightest and most productive days were to come in his projected independent and joint researches. As before noted, his Geographical Distribution of Deep Sea Fishes was nearly completed, the charts having been exhibited before the Biological Society, and a mass of voluminous notes and valuable “observations are ready to show that the distribution of deep-sea fishes is far from being so general as has been supposed, and that there are certain 24 Memortal of George Brown Goode. well-defined thalassic faunal regions. Another projected work for which extensive materials were collected was upon the Fishes of America, in which Doctor Theodore Gill was to have cooperated. Goode was always encouraged by his supreme faith in the reward of honest intellectual labor, and it is pleasant to recall now that he took the keenest satisfaction in the completion and publication of the Oceanic Ichthyology, which revived in him all his old natural-history spirit. He regarded it as his chief life work, and once observed to his fellow-writer, Tarleton Bean, ‘‘It will be our monument,’’ little foreseeing that so soon after its publication he would be gone and that his friends and admirers all over the world would share this very thought in receiving the fine monograph a few weeks after his sudden and unexpected death. Our friend has gone to his fathers. As a public-spirited naturalist he leaves us the tender memory and the noble example, which helps us and will help many coming men into the higher conception of duty in the service and promotion of the truth. We can not forget his smile nor his arm passing through the arm of his friend. ‘Thinking little of him- self and highly of others, faithful to his duties and loyal to his friends, full of good cheer and hopefulness—it is hard for us to close up the ranks and march on without him. -GOODE’S ACTIVITIES IN RELATION TO AMERICAN SCIENCE, By WILLIAM HEALEY DALL, Paleontologist, United States Geological Survey. Most persons unacquainted with the interior working of our executive bureaus have an impression that they are the creation of law, in the sense in which the term ‘‘creation’’ was formerly used to describe the coming into being of some part of the material universe. Perhaps this impres- sion is seldom definitely formulated, but, nevertheless, it is common to hear arguments from intelligent people, bent on ameliorating govern- ment, which tacitly assume that an act of Congress by some inherent magic will accomplish that which they desire. It is a truism that whole schemes of social reorganization are built on no better foundation, and thousands of earnest reformers work, suffer, and even die for theories erected on this hypothesis. Whatever of truth there may be in the application of this idea to the purely business offices of the Government, where finance, commerce, invention, or transportation are provided for, nothing could be more mis- taken than its application to the scientific bureaus. For each and every one of them the world is indebted to some individual. In the majority of cases the man came with his purpose before the law was thought of, and his devotion to his self-imposed mission, his persistence, and his energy were the inciting causes of some lines in an appropriation bill, with all its potentialities, the seed of the present organization. Some- times the sower, given the opportunity to dig and water, was spared to reap the first fruits of the harvest. On other occasions worthy suc- cessors arose, bore the burden and heat of the day, and carried out the plans to final triumph. Thus, to Hassler and Bache we owe the Coast Survey, which has spread the fame of American achievements in geodetic science through every civilized community; to Hayden, King, and Powell are due the organization and success of the Geological Survey of the United States; to the initiative of Smithson and guiding hand of Henry we owe the Smithsonian Institution; the Fish Commission was the embodied work of Baird; and to Baird and Goode’s untiring labors we are indebted for the National Museum. ‘There remain very few per- sons with intimate personal knowledge of the unwritten history of the 25 ”) 26 Memorial of George Brown Goode. gradual development of the Museum. ‘To Professor Henry American science owes a debt which is but seldom realized and can hardly be exag- gerated. It is difficult for anyone, even with the printed records before him, to form an adequate idea of the conditions under which the Smith- sonian Institution grew to its present stature, nor what unceasing vigi- lance was required of its head to avoid the pitfalls which everywhere beset its path in adolescence. Opinions, emphatic and divergent, were abundant, in and out of Congress, as to the policy and methods deemed desirable for the Institution. Men would have used the fund for a great library, museum of art, or university. The original act by which it was constituted was a compromise, leaving a door open for the advocates of either opinion to modify the policy of the Institution should the time come when any particular view could command a majority in the gov- erning board. Professor Henry was determined that the ‘‘increase and diffusion of knowledge among men’’ in the highest and broadest sense of the words should be the object to be attained, and that nothing local or special should absorb the funds or the energies of the Institution. Such things as could and would be done by other agencies were not to be attempted by the Smithsonian, but rather the things worth doing, which, except for the aid given by the Institution, could not get done at all. ‘TShose branches of activity prescribed by the act creating the Insti- tution, but which tended to outgrow a strict subordination and absorb undue proportions of the income, were rigorously pruned and sternly repressed. It seems strange to recall a time when free speech did not exist in the capital of the nation, yet it is within my memory when so great was the irritability of the proslavery element in Washington that Professor Henry, with an eye single to the welfare of his beloved Insti- tution, felt it necessary to warn foreign men of science invited to work or lecture here that certain topics must not be touched upon, directly or indirectly. Professor Henry knew that the resources of the Smithsonian could not support a great museum or a great library and still carry out the promotion of science in the wider sense, which was his ideal aim. He wished for a national museum and a national library, but only at national expense. He approved of the far-reaching explorations and collections which the genius of Professor Baird initiated and by untiring labors promoted, but he did not wish the enormous mass of material thus brought together to be a charge upon the slender funds of the Institu- tion. His policy was to distribute to other institutions of learning, museums, and colleges, as soon as worked up, everything except a typical series of the specimens, thus at once promoting research at other points and economizing space and the expenses of preservation. Arrangements were made with naturalists all over the country by which material in their special lines of research was shipped to them as soon as received, to remain indefinitely, until reported upon. The same policy led to placing in the Corcoran Gallery of Art such objects of art spared by the Memortal Meeting. 27 great fire of 1865 as that establishment could utilize ; and to the deposit in the Library of Congress of the great collection of scientific books and periodicals, which was rapidly outgrowing all the limits set by his pru- dence. In his determination that nothing should be permitted to divert the progress of the Institution from the lines laid down for it, Professor Henry thought no labor too great, no personal supervision too minute, no just economy too paltry. Who shall say that his lofty purposes and unceasing struggles have not been justified by his success? Meanwhile Baird’s ambitions and endeavors were leading toward the establishment of a national museum in fact, if not inname. Multitu- dinous expeditions were set on foot for Pacific railway routes, military surveys, the coast survey, the routes for an Isthmian canal, the explora- tion of the Hudson Bay territory, Lower California, and Alaska. From each and all of these a stream of the most precious material for study flowed toward the Smithsonian Institution. The natural sciences all over the world were enriched by the countercurrent of published researches which poured from those Elizabethan towers. A bevy of students, poor in purse, but rich in enthusiasm, in energy and devotion, found shelter there. From time to time, as opportunities came, they sallied forth, one by one, to the ends of the earth, bent on enriching the collection and advancing science, in which they usually succeeded. How difficult in such a case tohold the balance true! ‘To preserve for study what was needed and yet not to exceed the limits imposed by cir- cumstances. To be loyal and true in spirit, as well as in the letter, to the policy of the chief, and yet to hold securely for the future that which the future would need. Yet this task, so perplexing and so difficult, was successfully performed by Baird. He had for Henry an affectionate loyalty and veneration asstrong in its way as his devotion to biological research, and which supplied a never-failing and most elevating example to the younger men about him. The establishment of the Fish Commission with its separate income partly available for research somewhat ameliorated the situation. The establishment of a national museum, as urged by Baird and Henry, became a more familiar idea to Congress and the country. With the Centennial Exposition of 1876, came an opportunity of which Baird was not slow to take advantage. He determined that the exhibition made by the United States should bear testimony to what the Museum could do both in the way of material and in its presentation. The Government made a loan of several millions to the Exposition, which no one then supposed would ever be repaid. Members of the appro- priations committee felt quite safe in half jokingly assuring Professor Baird that if the money ever was repaid an appropriation for a National Museum building should not be withheld. The entire staff of the . Museum, including several unpaid volunteers, with Goode at their head, gave all their energies for nearly a year to make the Government and 28 Memorial of George Brown Goode. especially the Museum exhibit a success, feeling that the future of the Museum was really at stake. Individuals all over the country were called upon to assist by advice or material in their special lines. "Thousands of letters were written and thousands of exhibits gathered. Here Goode had his first training in the artsof exposition, in which he finally became the acknowledged master. Many were the discussions as to system, selec- tion of exhibits, cases, labels, and methods in general. It was indeed a liberal education to those engaged in the work. No test could have been contrived which would better have revealed the strength or weakness, on certain sides, of all engaged in it. Men of whom much was expected failed utterly. Others developed unexpected capacity and talent. The result was a glorious success, acknowledged by all beholders. After a certain time the Government loan was repaid, and at last the unofficial promises of members of Congress were kept. A sum, pitiably small if compared with the money devoted by most civilized nations to housing their national museums, was appropriated, and, by a lucky chance, an unparalleled depression in the iron trade enabled contracts to be made to the great advantage of the Government.