THE BROUN COLLECTION

Dominion, Volume 13, Issue 238, 2 July 1920, Page 9

THE BROUN COLLECTION

Sir,—l see that yet : another step has been taken in regard to the Broun collection, . inasmuch as thd Science and Art Board has approved of its retention, in New Zealand for at least two years, during which short , time 1 jiresiime thoy propose naming a duplicate collection. When we consider the fact that it has taken the .experts; of the U.S. Department Of Agriculture _ some twelve years to make an examination of only, the new species of coccidae'named by Mr. Maskell, is it at all likely that a duplicate of the Brouri collection, of beetles, Whioh \vas three or four times greater, can be gathered together and named in two years?. That you. may understand'what sort of contract it is likely to be,'.l should Mention that tho . Cambridge Natural History, vol. : vi., 1909, page 184, gives the then number of species of beetles as 150,000, which-was nearly three-quarters /of the whole group of insects. Many of these species are. microsoopical hi size, ranging from one-hun-dredth of an inch upwards, and notwithstanding- the statement made .at the end. of your article, I' still oontend that there are noi experts in New Zealand competent to. undertake the task of naming a duplicate . collection. The Dominion .Museum may have entomologists, on its v staff, but that does;not. mean' that they have a good knowledge .of bottles. The letter read by the : Minister of Internal Affairs is a, sufficient answer to the statement' made by our Government Entomologist;, Mr. D. Millar, that tho staff .of the British Museum had already moi;e Insect material on hand than they could contend with for many years to come. Doubtless Mr. Millar, can-, give his reasons for making-this and other statements, and it would be most interesting to hear them. There is one more point I would like to emphasise, and that- is, that the trustees under the will are not bound to send the collection) to. the Dominion Museum for examination. Probably all tho work will have to be done in Auckland, which will-mean more expenso to the Government. Again, how are;they going, to. get hold of the duplicates if the trustees refuse to giye them •up—as they' have-"every right'- to' do? Surely the ■ authorities do • not propose taking them by force; that would seem too much like stealing. • On the whole, I think it would be best to accept l the offer of the British. Museum—it would not only be less expensive, but we would be reasonably oertain that mir'collection had bean oorreotly named.—l am., «tc, ' • G.iBRITTIN. Nelson, June 28, 1920.