animals. I will describe only one out of many which agree with it. A
kitten had been trained to the habit of climbing the wire-netting
front of its cage whenever I approached. I then trained her to climb
up at the words "I must feed those cats." This was done by uttering
them and then in ten seconds going up to the cage and holding a bit of
fish to her at its top. After this had been done about forty times she
reached a point where she would climb up at the signal about fifty per
cent of the times. I then introduced a new element by sometimes
saying, "I must feed those cats," as before, and feeding her, and at
other times saying, "I will not feed them," and remaining still in my
chair. At first the kitten felt no difference, and would climb up just
as often at the wrong signal as at the right. But gradually (it took
about four hundred and fifty trials) the failure to get any pleasure
from the act of climbing up at the wrong signal stamped out the
impulse to do so, while the pleasure sequent upon the act of climbing
up at the other signal made that her invariable response to it. Here,
as elsewhere, the absence of reason was shown by the cat's failure at
any point in these hundreds of trials to think about the matter, and
make the easy inference that one set of sounds meant food, while the
other did not. But still better proof appears in what is to follow.
After an interval of eighty days I tried her again to see how
permanent the association between the signal and act was. It was
permanent to the extent that what took three hundred and eighty trials
before took only fifty this time, for after fifty trials with the "I
will not feed them" signal, mixed up with a lot of the other, the cat
once more attained perfect discrimination. But it was not permanent in
the sense that the cat at the first or tenth or twentieth trial felt,
as a remembering, reasoning consciousness surely ought to feel, "Why,
that lot of sounds means that he won't come up with fish." For instead
of at first forgetting and for a while climbing up at the _I will not
feed them_, and then remembering its previous experience and at once
stopping the performance it had before learned was useless, the cat
simply went through the same gradual decreasing of the percentage of
wrong responses until finally it always responded rightly.
What has so far been said is true regardless of any prejudice or
incompetence on my part, for the proof in all cases rests not on my
observation, but on impartial time records or such matters of fact as
the escape or nonescape, the climbing or not-climbing of the animals.
I may add that in a life among these animals of six months for from
four to eight hours a day I never saw any acts which even _seemed_ to
show reasoning powers, and did see numerous acts unmentioned here
which pointed clearly to their absence.
All that is left for the fond owner of a supposedly rational animal to
say is that though the average animal, the typical dog or cat, is by
these experiments shown to be devoid of reasoning power, yet _his_ dog
or _her_ cat is far above the average level, and is therefore to be
judged by itself. He may claim that just because my average animals
failed to infer, we have no right to deny inference to all,
particularly to his. Is it not fair to ask such a one to repeat my
experiments with his supposedly superior animal? Until he does and
systematically tries to find out how its mind works and what it is
capable of, has he any right to bear witness? It may also be said that
of the number of people who witnessed the performances of my animals
after they had fully learned a lot of these acts, but had not seen the
method of acquisition, all unanimously wondered at their wonderful
intellectual powers. "How _do_ you teach them?" "Where did you get
such bright animals?" "I always thought animals could think," and such
like were common expressions of my visitors. The fact was that the
dogs and cats were picked up in the street at random, and that no one
of them had thought out one jot or tittle of the things he had learned
to do. The specious appearance of reasoning in a completely formed
habit does not involve the presence or assistance of reasoning in the
formation of the habit.
Here, at the close of this account, I may signify my willingness to
reply, so far as is possible, to any letters from readers of the
Popular Science Monthly who may care to ask questions about any
feature of animal intelligence.
* * * * *
In a discussion of the question "How Education fails," Dr. J. T.
Searcy, of Tuscaloosa, Alabama, speaks of the tendency of too
much education as being to make the pupil too machine-cut. "The
successful, the progressive, the aggressive men, families, and
races are not the manufactured ones, but the self-made ones." In
the conditions and complexities of human society, the
accumulating data of knowledge change so rapidly that educators
can not anticipate the future in the elements and curricula of
prescribed education. The advancing man, who is able to keep up
in his day and generation, shows his excellence in his ability to
readjust to his changing environment. The schools can not give
this faculty, but rather have a tendency to weaken it; yet on it,
more than anything else, rests the success of the man and the
race. "Too much ought not to be demanded of the schools, nor
ought they to assume too much to themselves."
THE UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM.
BY HON. CHARLES D. WALCOTT,
DIRECTOR OF THE UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY.
A national museum should be the center of scientific activity in the
country in which it is located. In England the British Museum is the
Mecca of scientific men. In Paris, Copenhagen, Vienna, Berlin, and
other capitals of Europe the national museum stands in similar
relations to the scientific work of its own country. Such a relation
our National Museum should hold to scientific men and affairs in
America. It should receive and take care of all material that has been
or may be valuable for investigation or for the illustration of the
ethnology, natural history, geology, products, and resources of our
own country, or for comparison with the material of other countries.
It should furnish material for all kinds of scientific investigations
which deal with specimens or types, and give aid to such researches
and publish their results. It should present by illustration such of
the results of the scientific investigations of its corps of officers
as are susceptible of such representation. It should co-operate with
all the higher educational institutions of learning in the country,
and assist in the promotion and diffusion of knowledge in all lines of
investigation carried on by it. It should provide library facilities,
and aid all post-graduate students who may wish to take advantage of
the provisions made by the Government for scientific research.
HISTORY AND PRESENT ORGANIZATION.--Beginning in a small way in the
Patent-Office building early in the century, the "Government"
collections of "natural products" were transferred to the custody of
the Smithsonian Institution in 1858, where they were installed along
with the larger and more valuable collections of the institution.
Twenty-three years later, in 1881, the present National Museum
building was ready for the great mass of material that had accumulated
in the Smithsonian building, and had been transferred from the
Centennial Exhibition at Philadelphia. Out of these heterogeneous
collections Dr. G. Brown Goode, under the direction of Secretary
Baird, of the Smithsonian, organized a museum of broad scope, based on
all that had proved best in museum experience to that time. Faithfully
he carried forward the work until September, 1896, when his health
broke under the strain of too many duties, and one of the best museum
administrators the world has yet produced, if not the very best one,
passed from us. In January, 1897, I was placed in temporary charge of
the administration of the museum as an acting Assistant Secretary of
the Smithsonian Institution, and remained in charge until July 1,
1898.
On July 1, 1897, in order to meet changed conditions, a new plan of
organization went into effect. The various divisions and sections of
anthropology, biology, and geology, which had previously been
conducted independently of one another, the curators and custodians
reporting directly to the assistant secretary in charge of the museum,
were united under three head curators--one of anthropology, another of
biology, and a third of geology. This secured direct expert
supervision, and correlated the work of each department. Before this
such correlation had been impossible, owing to the large number of
independent heads of sections and divisions in each department, who
planned and executed the work more or less independently of one
another.
In the department of anthropology the system of installation
inaugurated by Prof. W. H. Holmes is somewhat elaborate. The primary
arrangement is founded, first, on the geographical or ethnographical
assemblage, and, second, on the developmental or genetic assemblage.
Other methods may be classed as special; they are the chronologic, the
comparative, the individual, etc. The primary methods are adapted to
the presentation of the general truths of anthropology, and the
special methods are available for limited portions of the field.
In many ways the department of biology, under the charge of Dr. F. W.
True, was, at the date named, in much better condition than either of
the other two departments. Many of the zoölogical divisions had been
in existence since the reorganization of the museum in 1883, and
several of them for a much longer period, and as the biological
specimens had been in charge of curators and assistants who followed
well-defined and long-established methods, the reorganization of the
department was a relatively simple matter, no radical changes in the
scientific methods or in the business administration being required.
To the organization and administration of the department of geology,
Dr. George P. Merrill brought the results of a recent study of various
European museums. He found it necessary to make a systematic
examination of the written and printed records of the various
Government exploring expeditions and surveys, with a view to
ascertaining what geological material had been collected which could
properly be considered the property of the Government, and what
disposition had been made of the same. The law[8] provides that
collections made for the Government shall, when no longer needed for
investigations in progress, be deposited in the National Museum. It
was found that this law had not in all cases been strictly enforced,
and that several important collections had not been transferred to the
museum, although some of the earlier exploring expeditions had passed
out of existence, and in several instances the individuals making the
collections had likewise passed away. This investigation has resulted
in the transfer to the museum of several car loads of specimens no
longer needed elsewhere.
[Footnote 8: "And all collections of rocks, minerals, soils,
fossils, and objects of natural history, archæology, and
ethnology, made by the Coast and Interior Survey, the Geological
Survey, or by any other parties for the Government of the United
States, when no longer needed for investigations in progress,
shall be deposited in the National Museum...."--_Supplement to
the Revised Statutes of the United States_, vol. i, second
edition, 1874-1891, p. 252.]
The National Museum is unique among permanent museums in having large
sections of its collections almost constantly away from it. It made
displays at London in 1883, at Louisville in 1884, at Minneapolis in
1887, at Cincinnati and Marietta in 1888, at Madrid in 1892, at
Chicago in 1893, at Atlanta in 1895, at Nashville in 1896, and at
Omaha in 1898. The injury to the museum resulting from the packing and
transportation of specimens and from the interruption of systematic
work and development has been keenly felt at times by the scientific
staff. The advantages have consisted in showing to the people of many
sections of the country what the museum is doing, in securing
collections that otherwise would not have been obtained, and in
extending the educational sphere of influence.
RELATIONS TO THE SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION.--The museum is a child that
has by its vigorous growth already overshadowed the parent institution
in the extent of its buildings, its expenditures, and its direct
influence upon the people of the United States. In the larger fields
for which the Smithsonian Institution was organized, for the purpose
of increasing and diffusing knowledge among men throughout the world,
the museum is subordinate to the institution, and if the latter is
administered in the future as it has been in the past, it will
continue to hold a unique place among all institutions for the
increase and diffusion of knowledge.
In 1877 Prof. Asa Gray, as chairman of a special committee of the
Regents of the Smithsonian, submitted a report which recommended that
a distinction between the institution itself and the museum under its
charge should be made as prominent as possible. The fear was expressed
that if the museum was developed to its full extent and importance
within the Smithsonian Institution it would absorb the working
energies of the institution, and it was thought that such a
differentiation would pave the way to entire separation of
administration or to some other adjustment, as the Board of Regents
might think best or be able to accomplish. Professor Baird, in 1878,
in his report to the regents, called attention to the frequent mention
in the reports of his predecessor of the relations existing between
the Smithsonian Institution and the National Museum, and remarked that
"it is only necessary to mention briefly that the museum constitutes
no organic part of the institution, and that, whenever Congress so
directs, it may be transferred to any designated supervision without
affecting the general plans and operations connected with the
'increase and diffusion of knowledge among men.'"
During the administration of the museum by Dr. Goode, under the
direction of Professor Baird, and later Professor Langley, no movement
was made toward the separation of the museum from the Smithsonian. On
the contrary, Dr. Goode was strongly opposed to any such action, and
in this he was heartily supported by Secretary Langley. He felt that
the result of placing the museum under the control of one of the great
departments of the Government, or leaving it to be buffeted about in
the sea of politics as an independent organization, would be the
destruction of its scientific character.
I have been intimately acquainted with the administration of the
museum since 1886, and less so with the administration of other
scientific bureaus of the Government, one of which, the Fish
Commission, is independent of departmental control. After a careful
reconsideration of the subject of the relations of the National Museum
to the Smithsonian Institution, I have come to the conclusion that the
present welfare and the future development of the museum will be best
served by administrative connection with the Smithsonian Institution.
Under the present organization there is no necessity for large demand
upon the time and energies of the secretary by the affairs of the
museum. If in the future it should become otherwise, relief could
readily be secured by action of the Board of Regents, requiring the
officer in charge of the museum to report to them through the
secretary, much as the various bureaus of the departments report
through their respective secretaries to Congress. It is not probable,
however, that this will become necessary, for at any time an assistant
secretary could be appointed to take sole charge of the museum, thus
relieving the secretary of all but the most general administrative
supervision.
RELATIONS TO A NATIONAL UNIVERSITY.--A national museum should radiate
an educational influence to the remotest portions of the country. It
should set the standard for all other museums, whether in public
school, academy, college, university, or the larger museums under
municipal and State control. Its influence should be exercised largely
through its publications and through those who come to study its
collections and the methods of work of the investigators connected
directly or indirectly with its scientific staff. In its library
system the student should have access to the literature bearing upon
the subjects with which the museum is concerned. In its exhibition
halls each object should be labeled and arranged with the view of
presenting, by graphic illustration and concise description, all that
it is capable of teaching, either as a discrete object or as one of a
series of objects telling the story of the evolution of the group to
which it belongs. Such a museum is not a place where the uninformed
student may obtain the elements of a university training; it is an
institution where the post-graduate student can secure access to
material for study and research in connection with men who are
carrying forward scientific work of the highest type. Dr. D. C. Gilman
would go further than this. He says:[9]
[Footnote 9: Century Magazine, vol. lv, 1897, p. 156.]
"Any person of either sex, from any place, of whatever age, without
any question as to his previous academic degree, should be admissible;
provided, however, that he demonstrate his fitness to the satisfaction
of the leader in the subject of his predilection."
Dr. Gilman thinks that such an organization "may be developed more
readily around the Smithsonian Institution, with less friction, less
expense, less peril, and with the prospect of more permanent and
widespread advantages to the country, than by a dozen denominational
seminaries or one colossal university of the United States.
"To the special opportunities that the Smithsonian and its
affiliations could offer, every university, at a distance or near by,
might be glad to send its most promising students for a residence of
weeks, months, or years, never losing control of them. Many other
persons, disconnected with universities, but proficient to a
considerable degree in one study or another, would also resort with
pleasure and gratitude, and with prospect of great advantages, to the
rare opportunities which Washington affords for study and
investigation in history, political science, literature, ethnology,
anthropology, medicine, agriculture, meteorology, geology, geodesy,
and astronomy."
I fully agree with him, but would make the National Museum the center
of activity, rather than the Smithsonian Institution. It would then be
under the control of the Board of Regents, through the secretary or
the assistant secretary, who could have direct charge. It seems to me
that the function of the Smithsonian Institution is to aid at the
beginning of such a movement, and then place the administration in
charge of one of its bureaus or transfer it to some other suitable
organization.
With the National Museum as a center or base, the student in
Washington may avail himself of the Library of Congress and of the
facilities offered for study and investigation by the various
scientific bureaus of the Government, such as the Fish Commission, the
Zoölogical Park, the Geological and Coast and Geodetic Surveys, the
Naval Observatory, and the Weather, Botanical, Biological, and
Entomological Bureaus of the Department of Agriculture, and systematic
courses of lectures will place before him the most advanced ideas and
conclusions of the largest body of scientific investigators in the
world.
A single well-trained man, with a few assistants, could render
invaluable aid to hundreds of post-graduate and special students,
whose only need is direction as to the best means of pursuing studies
and investigations. Such an organization could be located in the
administrative building that it has been proposed to erect as a
nucleus of the National University. From this beginning a national
university of the broadest type could be developed with as much
rapidity as the educational interests of the country might demand.
The National Museum can not at present give facilities to more than a
score of students, but with the erection of a modern museum building,
well equipped with laboratory space and a suitable staff to conduct
the necessary work of installation and investigation, the scientific
side of the National University would be established. It should be
remembered that many of the officers of the scientific bureaus of the
Government are directly connected with the museum staff as honorary
curators and custodians, and that a number of them have laboratories
within the museum building.
NEED OF A NEW BUILDING.--The growth of the United States National
Museum was rapid under the successful administration of Dr. Goode.
When the character of the building and the funds available for the
maintenance of the museum are considered, it compares favorably with
any modern museum. It has received large collections from the
scientific departments of the Government, by private contribution, by
purchase, and by exchange, which have been accommodated as well as
possible in the inadequate laboratories, storerooms, and exhibition
spaces. During the fiscal year 1897-'98, accessions to the number of
1,441 were received, containing upward of 450,000 specimens--the
largest number for any one year since the museum was opened. The total
number of specimens recorded to July 1, 1898, exceeds four million.
The galleries just completed have added sixteen thousand square feet
of floor space, which is available for the spreading out and proper
exhibition of material that has previously been crowded in the
exhibition halls and courts on the floor; but, as an illustration of
the present congested conditions, it may be stated that the
anthropological collections now in the possession of the Government,
illustrating the development and progress of man and his works, if
properly placed on exhibition, would occupy the entire space in the
present museum building. The great collections in biology, botany,
economic geology, general geology, and paleontology should be placed
in a building properly constructed for their study and exhibition. A
considerable portion of the collections are still in the Smithsonian
building, where the crowding is scarcely less than in the museum
building.
Moreover, in the present building there is great deficiency in
laboratory facilities. Curators and assistants are hampered for want
of room in which to lay out, arrange, classify, mount, and label
specimens. There should also be rooms in which students could bring
together and compare various series of objects, and have at hand books
and scientific apparatus. The present museum building contains a few
rooms suitable for the purposes mentioned, but the majority have to be
used as storerooms, laboratories, and offices, and are therefore too
much crowded to serve in any one of these capacities. Owing to the
pressure for space, courts, halls, and galleries intended for
exhibition purposes, both in the Smithsonian building and in the
museum building, are unavoidably occupied to a considerable extent as
laboratories and storerooms. There is also need of storage room, an
increase of the scientific staff, and a purchasing and collecting
fund. The American Museum of Natural History expends annually $60,000
for the increase of its collections; the National Museum has from
$3,000 to $4,000 for the purpose.
The immediate and greatest need, however, is a suitable museum
building. The present building is 375 feet square. The space on the
ground floor is 140,625 square feet, and that in the galleries 16,000
square feet; exhibition space, 96,000 square feet. The entire cost is
$315,400.