In another mooted change, Sir William (as it lay entirely in the Department under his own special control) was, however, more successful. Previously it had been the practice in the museum to separate the skeletons and skulls and horns of mammals from the mounted skins, placing the former in a gallery by themselves, known as the Osteological Gallery. As a result of this, if a visitor wanted to ascertain the peculiarities of the skeleton of any mammal of which the skin was exhibited, he had to mount to the gallery above, and on his arrival there, very probably forgot the essential features of the skin. One of the first resolves in connection with the rearrangement was to do away with the Osteological Gallery altogether, and to place a certain proportion of the skeletons and skulls in juxtaposition with, or near by, the stuffed skins. Another feature of the old method of exhibition in vogue in the museum was the crowding together of a vast number of specimens, good, bad, and indifferent (mostly either the second or third), many of which were duplicates, in such a manner that the great majority could scarcely be seen at all, while the effect of those that were more or less visible was marred and obscured by the adjacent specimens. To add to this unsatisfactory state of affairs was the bad condition—due either to age, to bad taxidermy, or both combined—of the bulk of the specimens. Moreover, by some inconceivable Vandalism, dating apparently from a very remote epoch in the museum’s history, every specimen was mounted on a stand of polished sycamore, the effect of which was to mar even a first-class specimen of taxidermy. When to the above is added the fact that, beyond the scientific and in most cases also the popular name of the species, nothing in the way of indicating the serial position of the various groups was attempted, while all that was done in the way of descriptive labels was the suspension here and there of frames containing extracts from the “Guide” to the gallery, it may be imagined that the state of the collection was very far indeed behind the Director’s idea of what it should be. Moreover, although in the case of the smaller animals a systematic arrangement was followed, the cases containing the larger species were disposed without any reference to the systematic position of the latter. In regard to such matters the Director had, in the address quoted, already expressed his own views in no uncertain tone, as is evident from the following passage relating to the arrangement of specimens in the public galleries:—