Museum of Practical Geology
A series of photos of the Museum of Practical Geology can be found on Geoscenic
Extract on the formation of the Museum of Practical Geology from: Bailey, E.B. Geological Survey of Great Britain, London T. Murby, 1952.
The quarters at Craig's Court soon proved too cramped for the staff and exhibits marshalled by De la Beche. Moreover, in 1839 the Treasury had sanctioned a proposal for lectures on the practical applications of geology, and Craig's Court failed to afford opportunities to make even a start in this direction. De la Beche had been greatly impressed by the achievements of the Mining Academy at Freiberg and of its virtual offspring, the Ecoles des Mines, established in Paris in 1783 and reestablished, despite political turmoil, in 1794 ; and accordingly he attached great importance to personal teaching as supplementary to research and publication. He was a persistent planner, and his ambitions were of such a kind as appealed very strongly to the Prince Consort. The year 1851 brought to both these great men the consummation of their dearest hopes: to De la Beche, the opening of his new Museum of Practical Geology at 28, Jermyn Street, off Piccadilly, with accommodation not only for the Geological Survey and Mining Record Office, but also for a Government School of Mines and of Science applied to the Arts ; and to the Prince, the triumphantly successful Great Exhibition of the Industry of all Nations.
His Royal Highness opened the Museum on the 12th of May, 1851, in the presence of a brilliant gathering. After receiving an address from Sir Henry De la Beche, he spoke as follows:—
In thanking you for the address which you have just read to me, I would express the sincere gratification with which I witness the opening, in a form more likely to make it generally and practically useful, of an institution, the progress of which I have long, watched with great interest, and the want of which had long been felt in this country.
I rejoice in the proof thus afforded of the general and still increasing interest taken in scientific pursuits, while science herself, by the subdivision into various and distinct fields of her study, aims daily more and more at the attainment of useful and practical results.
In this view it is impossible to estimate too highly the advantages to be derived from an institution like this, intended to direct the researches of scence, and, to apply their results to the development of the immense mineral riches granted by the bounty of Providence to our isles and their numerous colonial dependencies.
It will always give me the greatest pleasure to hear of, and, as far as I am able, to contribute to the continued success of the Museum of Practical Geology.
At the time of the opening of the School of Mines and Science in Jermyn Street the following were professors or lecturers under the presidency of De la Beche: Chemistry, Playfair ; Geology, Ramsay ; Mechanical Science, Hunt; Metallurgy, John Percy ; Mining and Mineralogy, Waring-ton Smyth ; Natural History, Forbes. Four out of the six were already Fellows of the Royal Society.
Next year saw the initiation of a new series of publications for the Museum of Practical Geology and Geological Survey, entitled: Records of the School of Mines and of Science applied to the Arts. Vol. i, pt. 1 preserves for us the Inaugural and Introductory Lectures to the Courses for the Session 1851-2, delivered by De la Beche and his six professors. De la Beche's own discourse is particularly delightful, free from all the parenthetical complexity we have noticed in his writings of earlier date. Its author glows with quiet enthusiasm and confidence. He explains that the exhibits in the Museum are intended to illustrate the lectures of the School, though also open to the general public. He communicates to the reader some of his own feeling for the building stones, pottery, glass, ores and metals, which he has gathered together, in large measure as presentations from generous donors. He tells how such matters as the working of coal and the ventilation of mines receive ample attention. He emphasises the value of the fossil collection, ' the most perfect of its kind,' and of the rock collection too —showing that new features of first class importance have been introduced as a result of transfer from overcrowded Craig's Court. He has evidently been subjected to criticism from carpers who prefer practice to science ; but he feels that this criticism is already losing ground: ' Those whose duties or inclinations take them among our industrial population can scarcely fail to observe how much the term practical is becoming appreciated in its true sense. . . . Science and practice are not antagonistic, they are mutual aids.' For himself he has chosen for his new building the proud title of Museum of Practical Geology.
The theme of fruitful co-operation between science and practice is developed in succession by the specialist professors, each giving a most interesting account of the achievements of applied science in his own field. It is characteristic that Percy declares himself no believer in useless metals,' and foretells a future for tungsten, at that time thrown away as waste at the Cornish tin mines.
A syllabus is provided of the courses of instruction in lecture hall, laboratory and field, leading up to a diploma, and of the corresponding fees. This must be taken in conjunction with a passage in De la Beche's discourse, which reminds us that: ' The history of the greatest discoveries teaches us, that it is not only by the rich that mankind has been advanced. As far as may be in our power, we propose to explain by evening lectures to the working men of London, those really engaged in business, and whose characters can be vouched for by their employers, such part of our collections as may be thought usefully interesting to them. Some slight payment may be required, sufficient to prove that those attending desire to do so. At the time when our collections are open gratuitously to the public the working man is usually engaged in his occupation, and yet we have much to show—much that may be important to him in his calling.' De la Beche's solicitude for the working man is distinctly reminiscent of Count Rumford's. All the lecturers participated in the evening course, which proved a most attractive perennial feature of the school's curriculum.
At the opening of Parliament in 1852 Queen Victoria announced that a comprehensive scheme was in preparation to ensure the advancement of practical science and the fine arts. Thus the Department of Science and Art was established under the Board of Trade, and on its recommendation the Royal School of Chemistry was absorbed in 1853 into De la Beche's School, which now assumed the title of Metropolitan School of Mines, and of Science applied to the Arts. Hofmann, largely concerned with distillation products of coal, remained Professor of Chemistry ; while Playfair resigned to become Secretary for Science in the new Department. Playfair's transfer was not surprising, for in 1850 he had acted as one of the Commissioners organising the Great Exhibition ; nor can one wonder that next year, 1854, De la Beche found himself, with his Survey, Museum, Records Office and School, following Playfair from the Office of Woods and Forests into the Department of Science and Art.
Playfair's zeal to employ the profits of the Great Exhibition in the advancement of science held the seeds of eventual dismemberment of De la Beche's creation ; but the prestige of the creator and of his immediate successor, coupled with the expenses of the Crimean war, 1854-56, and the untimely death of the Prince Consort, 1861, delayed the operation until 1871.
Reference has already been made to the death of the first Curator of the Museum, Richard Phillips, the day before the new building was opened. His place was taken by Trenham Reeks, who had been Assistant Curator since the beginning in 1839.
Extract on the formation of the Museum of Practical Geology from Flett, J.S. The first hundred years of the Geological Survey of Great Britain. London : HMSO, 1937.
Although De la Beche continued to visit the field regularly as often as other duties permitted and sometimes gave very sage advice to his field lieutenants, which they were not wise enough to follow, his time was now much occupied by other matters of great importance. His collections had quite outgrown the space provided for them at Craig’s Court, and the additional staff now enlisted made the congestion painfully’ obvious. De la Beche accordingly had prepared a scheme for a new and larger Museum, with offices and laboratories, and he had made great progress with the preliminary negotiations. A site had been selected at 28, Jermyn Street (221, Piccadilly), a very desirable location for a public office. The plans of the building were prepared by Pennethorne, and from the drafts which survive it is clear that De la Beche criticized them very fully and gave minute attention to all the details. For the building-stone he selected the much-criticized Anston dolomite, but he took the precaution to see that all the material sent up was examined before it ‘was used in the building. His prudence was justified by the results, as after 87 years the state of preservation of the plain and carved work on all the walls was eminently satisfactory.
The building was in hand in 1848 and was probably completed in 1849: then began the furnishing of the interior, in which the usual delays were experienced. In 1850 the work of installing the exhibits was in full course, mainly under the superintendence of Reeks, Ramsay and Edward Forbes. Very special efforts were made to get the Museum ready for opening in 1851, the year of the Great Exhibition, and it was formally opened in May of that year by His Royal Highness the Prince Consort.
As was remarked at the time, this was the first important building in Great Britain designed to be occupied by the staff of a purely scientific institution. Its creation was certainly the crowning achievement of De la Beche’s official life, even more important than the establishment of the Geological Survey. It proved that his work had been well done and had earned public approbation, including that of all the most competent critics. The Geological Survey which had started in a very modest way, sixteen years previously, was now regarded as a permanent institution of great value and importance.
For his success De la Beche was probably more indebted to the Prince Consort than to any other individual, for under his fostering care and wise foresight the advancement of scientific research and the dissemination of knowledge were regarded as objects of prime importance, deserving of Royal patronage and most beneficial to all the highest interests of the nation.
From the contemporary reports also it is clear that Sir Robert Peel was one of the strongest supporters of De la Beche’s programmes. Though himself not versed in scientific matters, Sir Robert Peel was much interested in them and ready to encourage any practical proposals for scientific progress. The Marquis of Northampton was an amateur geologist whose encouragement also was unfailing. The Geological Society of London probably played a great part. As has been noted previously, its membership included many members of Parliament, country gentlemen, bankers and others, who carried great influence, and the laudatory notices of the Survey’s work that were an almost constant feature of the Presidential Addresses in the ‘forties and ‘fifties of last century no doubt had a considerable effect in moulding public opinion.
In May 1851 the bustle of preparations was over and the new Museum was opened to the public on the 12th of that month. In presence of a brilliant assemblage comprising ambassadors, peers and peeresses, members of Parliament and prominent scientists, H.R.H. the Prince Consort, after an address by Sir Henry De la Beche, made the following speech:
- In thanking you for the address which you have just read to me, I would also express the sincere gratification with which I witness the opening, in a form more likely to make it generally and practically useful, of an institution, the progress of which I have long watched with much interest, and the want of which had long been felt in this country.
- I rejoice in the proof thus afforded of the general and still increasing interest taken in scientific pursuits, while science herself, by the subdivision into various and distinct fields of her study, aims daily more and more at the attainment of useful and practical results.
- In this view it is impossible to estimate too highly the advantages to be derived from an institution like this, intended to direct the researches of science, and to apply their results to the development of the immense mineral riches granted by the bounty of Providence to our isles, and their numerous colonial dependencies.
- It will always give me the greatest pleasure to hear of, and, as far as I am able, to contribute to the continued success of the Museum of Practical Geology.
His Royal Highness then made a general inspection of the building.
When we consider the state of London museums and of scientific education in Great Britain it is clear that De la Beche had broken new ground in several directions. The institution he had created in Jermyn Street was not only a museum under Government control but also a centre of research and a School of Science. No other Government museum in this country, even at the present day, has a centre of scientific instruction attached to it. He had also provided a large lecture hall which was to serve not only the needs of the teachers and students of the School but also, and principally, to be used for a series of popular lectures to men and women interested in the progress of science and its application to manufactures and the arts. The chemical laboratory was intended to furnish analyses of minerals and soils for moderate fees. The maps and memoirs of the Geological Survey were to be freely accessible to the public in search of information, and a special staff was to continue the compilation of records of British mining and the collection and preservation of mining plans.
At least four different services were acting in conjunction under the superintendence of the Director, viz. the Geological Survey, the Museum of Practical Geology, the School of Mines and the Mining Records Office. The staffs were to co-operate freely. The Professors of Chemistry, Zoology, Mining and Geology also took part in the activities of the Geological Survey and did much work in preparing and arranging exhibits in the new Museum. They gave lectures in turn to the general public in the Lecture Hall; they assisted in special researches such as the selection of coals suitable for the steam Navy and they contributed scientific memoirs to the publications of the Geological Survey.
The staff of scientists which De la Beche assembled in the new Museum was probably, for its size, the most brilliant that has ever served in a British educational institution. Apparently De la Beche did not lecture, but Ramsay, the Professor of Geology, was the best field geologist and the greatest physiographer of his time. The chemist was Lyon Playfair, afterwards Lord Playfair of St. Andrews, who proved to be not only an able scientist but a great administrator and educational reformer. Richard Phillips, who had been Chemist since 1839, was in bad health and died on the eve of the opening ceremony (11th May). Edward Forbes, who was Palaeontologist to the Survey and Professor of Natural History, became Professor of Natural History in Edinburgh University in November 1854 and died in December of that year at the early age of 39. His contemporaries regarded Forbes as probably the most brilliant member of the group. Sir Joseph Hooker was attached to the service for a time as Palaeobotanist. Sir Warington Smyth was the first Professor of Mining and Mineralogy. Robert Hunt, well known for his works on British mining districts, was Professor of Mechanical Science and at the same time Keeper of Mining Records. Among others who were at work in the Museum at this time were such well-known scientists as J. B. Jukes, J. W. Salter, H. W. Bristow, Trenham Reeks, W. T. Aveline, A. R. C. Selwyn.
The further progress of the School of Mines does not belong properly to the present story, but it may be remarked that among the professorial staff who subsequently taught in the Museum at Jermyn Street were Thomas Henry Huxley, John Tyndall, John Percy, Gabriel Stokes and A. W. Hofmann, and much brilliant and original scientific work was done in the old laboratories.
At first the attendance at the School of Mines seems to have been a disappointment, and complaints were made by the staff that it was discouragingly small. It has always, however, maintained its prestige as the premier institution of its class in Great Britain and worthy to rank with the great mining schools of the Continent. Under the auspices of the Government, schemes were soon on foot either to expand the School of Mines into a College of Science or to establish such a College and to absorb the existing institution. Much discussion took place on these projects, but progress was only slow. In 1854 the School of Mines, the Geological Survey and the Museum were transferred to the Department of Science and Art, which had been created under the Board of Trade after the Great Exhibition of 1851. These changes seem to have been unwelcome to De la Beche and some members of his staff. It was only the beginning, however, of a gradual and complicated series of changes which ultimately resulted in the dismemberment of the School of Mines in Jermyn Street and the transfer of the laboratories and teaching staff to South Kensington. The Professors of Physics, Biology and Chemistry were first to go. Mining under Warington W. Smyth and Metallurgy under Percy remained at Jermyn Street; these professors regarded the connexion with the Museum and Survey as of fundamental importance. The formal appellation Royal School of Mines seems to have been first used in 1862.
Bibliography
The unfortunate tale of the Museum of Practical Geology Part 1
The unfortunate tale of the Museum of Practical Geology Part 2