system, the same state of affairs existed. I have endeavoured
to isolate as much as possible such incongruities one from the other,
often by partially surrounding them with ferns, etc, of their native
habitat, and by leaving little blanks here and there. Apart from this,
the general opinion of both scientific [Footnote: In this category I
may place Sir Philip Cunliffe Owen, C.B, etc.; Mr. R. Bowdler Sharpe,
F.L.S, etc.; Mr. Smith Woodward, all of South Kensington; Sir J. A.
Picton, F.S.A, etc of Liverpool; Professor St. George Mivart, F.R.S.
etc.; Professor 1. O. Miall; Professor Wm. Knight; Professor A.
Schuster, etc.; Mr. Jas. Orrock, Member of the Royal Institute of
Water-colour Painters; and several other gentlemen who have done me
the honour to speak in most flattering terms of the new arrangement.]
and unscientific people is that the scheme is a success, and that such
trifling and inevitable irreconcilements are amply condoned and
compensated for by the increased beauty of the groups, and by the
pleasure it affords, not only to artistic people, but to the general
public; indeed, if vox populi be vox Dei, there is no doubt upon the
subject whatever.

Other defects there are; for instance, repetitions of grasses in
"fitting-up," which proves how little can be done with dried things,
and how much better it would be to replace them by modelled foliage
(mentioned in Chapter XIV). [Footnote: One would-be critic wrote to
the papers condemning the whole arrangement, because, in one of the
cases, one plant was about a foot nearer the water or a yard nearer to
another plant than it should be! The same wiseacre, or his friend,
wrote quite an article upon some supposed "fir twigs" which, much to
his confusion, were nothing of the sort, but a plant quite proper to
its place in the case.]

I would now wish to point out why I object so much to carefully-managed
groups of so-called "local" birds, their nests and eggs, being
introduced in a general collection, especially if the latter be
arranged in a pictorial manner.

First, because small groups, such as of necessity the greater number
of pairs of local birds would cut up into, would be lost amidst their
larger surroundings, and be really as if an artist were to paint a
small, highly finished picture in the corner of some large, "broad"
subject; secondly, the great difficulty there is in protecting such
choice groups from moth if exposed in, say, a cubic space of 100 ft.
fi