Without presuming upon the possession of competence to answer the question with fulness, there is no undue confidence in offering a partial reply. Part of their failure to satisfy the public expectations has arisen from a laches in Parliament itself. At the critical time when the character of the new buildings had practically to be decided, parsimoniousness led, not only to construction piecemeal, but to the piecemeal preparation of the designs themselves. Temporary makeshifts took the place of foreseeing plans. And what may have sounded like economy in 1830 has, in its necessary results, proved to be very much like waste, long before 1870. Had a comprehensive scheme of reconstruction been looked fully in the face when, forty years ago, the new buildings began to be erected, three fourths at most of the money which has been actually expended would have sufficed for the erection of a Museum, far more satisfactory in its architectural character, and affording at least one fourth more of accommodation for the National Collections. The British Museum buildings have afforded a salient instance of the truth of BURKE’S words: ‘Great expense may be an essential part in true economy. Mere parsimony is _not_ economy.’ But, in this instance, the fault is plainly in Parliament, not in the Trustees of the establishment which has suffered. The one happy exception to the general unsatisfactoriness of the new buildings—as regards, not merely architectural beauty, but fitness of plan, sufficiency of light, and adaptedness to purpose—is seen in the new Reading-Room. [Sidenote: THE NEW READING-ROOM.] And the new Reading-Room is, virtually, the production of an amateur architect. The chief merits of its design belong, indubitably, to Sir Antonio PANIZZI. The story of that part of the new building is worth the telling. That some good result should be eventually derived from the large space of ground within the inner quadrangle had been many times suggested. The suggestion offered, in 1837, by Mr. Thomas WATTS was thus expressed in his letter to the Editor of the _Mechanics Magazine_:— [Sidenote: THE SUGGESTIONS FOR BUILDING ADDITIONAL LIBRARIES OF 1837 AND OF 1847.]