The Aquarist

the aquarium has a high and useful mission to perform for the public good above there mere value as profitable i financial investments

The aquarium was one of a succession of enthusiasms associated with the Victorian interest in natural history. Barber records the 'invention' of the aquarium as occurring in 1850 and soon after they were a common feature of every drawing room.ii Although the home aquarium craze ended about 1870, it was replaced by the 'sudden fashion in huge purpose- iii built public aquaria and soon every large town in England was clamouring to have its own. The development of the steam engine allowed large volumes of water to be circulated for the first time and to charge the water with compressed air. The first public aquarium in London, 'The Fish House' in Regents Park, was developed by the then Secretary of the Zoological Society, W.D.Mitchell, with water circulated through the tanks by gravity between two cisterns and returned by a hand pump. Machinery was first used to circulate the water in the Paris Aquarium that opened in 1859. The wonders of the deep could now be brought into the heart of every large town, and observed in comfort for the price of an entrance ticket.

The new facilities were built by private companies as a business venture based on entertainment, but also offered superb research opportunities. Francis Buckland had been demonstrating his techniques of salmon culture at the South Kensington Museum since 1863, and after 1867 he became an energetic advocate for the use of aquaria to study commercial sea fish.iv The success in Europe of W.A.Lloyd, a well-recognised naturalist and aquarist, had led him to invest in England. His Crystal Palace Aquarium Company opened in February 1872, with sixty large tanks ranging up to twenty feet long displaying a wide range of fish and invertebrates. After Richard Owen opened the facility, Buckland spoke on the desirability of using these aquaria for more than entertainment and instruction. His experience as Inspector of Salmon Fisheries had demonstrated that effective regulation of commercial sea fisheries demanded an understanding of the life cycle and behaviour of these species as a pre-requisite, and much of this information could be obtained from observations in large aquaria.

Brighton opened its aquarium in 1872, Manchester and Southport followed in 1874, and two more, Westminster and Great Yarmouth began in 1876. 'The Brighton and Crystal Palace aquaria will do much to spread a correct knowledge of the life and habits of all kinds of fish'.v The privately owned public aquaria provided Saville-Kent with an enticing opportunity: he was offered the position of resident biologist at the new Brighton Aquarium. The use of these modern temples of the Victorian age in the scientific study of fishes became his new passion. There were 'high hopes that Mr Lloyd and Mr Saville-Kent would solve a great many of the questions regarding to the acclimatisation of various kinds of foreign fish' but the real value of these institutions will be in the solution to problems connected with food vi fishes'. To this time Saville-Kent's prime professional interest had been the description and classification of museum specimens. Now he turned to the behaviour of living marine species.

Life in the Prince Regent's city

Brighton was an obvious location for this type of new attraction, but construction was delayed by the necessity of obtaining parliamentary approval to reclaim the foreshore to create the site. Construction began a year later in 1869 but the contractor defaulted and the Aquarium was finished under the direction of the Council architect John Sloper Nightingale, who was awarded a medal at the 1872 London International Exhibition for the design.vii Due to the delay the Aquarium was not opened until August 1872. Following the ceremony the Mayor, Cordy Burrows, hosted a lavish luncheon at the Royal Pavilion. The absence of Royalty was much regretted but 'the amiable young Prince Arthur had, so to speak, partially opened the institution' during a visit to the unfinished aquarium the previous Easter.viii Amongst the honoured guests was Frank Buckland. The scientific community was represented by Dr William Carpenter, the President-elect of the British Association who was in Brighton for the annual meeting of the Association; the official opening had been postponed a week to coincide with that event. Carpenter also encouraged naturalists to use the facility for research, drawing attention to the abundant availability of saltwater compared to the cost of carrying water to the Crystal Palace. Both Carpenter and the Mayor invoked the national aspirations of the establishment.

The Aquarium was built and operated by the Brighton Aquarium Company with a board of directors made up of local businessmen chaired by George Somes. The first General Manager and Secretary of the facility was John Keast Lord, a friend of Buckland since 1863 and a staff member of Buckland's journal Land and Water. Almost immediately Lord fell ill and Buckland and another writer from Land and Water, Henry Lee FLS, stepped in to help.ix They stocked the tanks and, with Lord's death, Lee became Naturalist/Manager. Five months later the Times reported the appointment of Saville-Kent, 'favourably known for his biological and zoological researches' and that his position of curator was 'occasioned by the lamented decease of Mr. J.K.Lord'.x Writing in Land and Waterxi Buckland referred to Saville-Kent as 'my friend and colleague'; it seems likely he had encouraged the move from the Museum to the new venture. Buckland was not only a regular visitor at the Museum but a close family friend of Saville-Kent's sponsor, Richard Owen. Lee was also a well-known microscopist and quite probably he and Saville-Kent originally met through this interest.

William and Elizabeth left Stoke Newington and moved their home to 1 Upper Rock Gardens in Brighton. The shift from the cloistered surroundings of the British Museum to the commercial world was a shock. He told Gunther: I speedily discovered that in several members of the Board I had to encounter the strongest prejudices against the scientific status my election as resident Naturalist was calculated to lend to the Institution, and that those men who regarded the undertaking merely as a financial speculation were altogether opposed to the appointment of myself or any other scientific representative as an unnecessary extravagance.xii Not one to be put off by such lack of appreciation for his vocation, Saville-Kent began scientific observations and a review of the design of the aquarium. A new guidebook for the facility was one of his early accomplishments. He found the design of the aquarium system adequate but inefficient for display purposes and limited for research use. Diligent attempts were made to hold specimens of all the commercially important species; Bertram was intrigued to see the hatching of the herring. The live herring display was of both scientific and lay interest.xiii

To provide a place of entertainment, strenuous efforts were made to stock the tanks with exotic specimens, and providing a continuous supply was not easy. When the prize specimens died, telegrams were sent out to potential suppliers for replacements. The Times reported such an effort in March 1873 following the death of the prize octopus. Telegrams preceded the passage of 'the interesting stranger' from Cornwall by night mail to Paddington Station and thence in the early morning to Brighton under the care of 'sub-curator Lawler'.xiv Less than three hours after Lawler returned to Brighton, another telegram arrived announcing the dispatch of another octopus from Jersey, and he immediately left for Southampton to receive it. The effort was obviously worthwhile for the octopus received favourable notices in various newspapers throughout the summer. A performance of Man and Wife at the Brighton Theatre Royal was delayed when the star, Charles Collette, was 'allegedly drawn into the octopus tank by its resident star'. Collette was said to have been unsuccessfully demonstrating his powers as a snake charmer to the general manager of the aquarium. The actor was fortunately prised loose from the cephalopod by aquarium staff in time for a late curtain call. In August a small seal arrived at the Aquarium, again by train, to charm visitors with 'beautiful soft eyes' and an impersonation of 'a cabman warming the tips of his fingers on a wintry day'.xv

Saville-Kent wanted 'aquaria built on more correct and perfect principles' than he found at Brighton. His decision to extensively aerate the water much improved the performance of the facility but upset W.A.Lloyd who had been the consultant to the designer. Saville-Kent had been supported in his application for the Brighton position by Henry Lee, with whom he had 'cordial relations', but the enthusiasm and drive with which the new Naturalist tackled the modifications of the operations of the aquarium resulted in the Board looking on him rather than Lee, 'as their chief officer and responsible for the entire management of the tanks and their contents'. Lee, who now signed himself as 'Consulting Naturalist' in his regular contributions to Land and Water may have therefore begun to doubt the wisdom of the appointment of the new scientist. When the Board planned to introduce Saville-Kent to the King of the Belgians as 'curator and chief officer in charge', relations between the two scientists cooled. The Mayor, now Sir Cordy Burrows, had joined the Board and was 'kindly disposed' to Saville-Kent.xvi

Despite Huxley's public campaign to promote the profession, scientists were still a rarity in Brighton. Saville-Kent discovered that not everyone treated naturalists from London with unqualified respect: 'I was soon exposed to a series of petty annoyances and studied insults to which as a gentleman I had never before been called upon to submit'.xvii Whereas Buckland was known for his easy-going and courteous nature, Saville-Kent's demeanour appears to have been devoid of such characteristics. Very well aware of his financial position and the scarcity of alternative employment, he resisted the temptation to leave at once. Appointing a naturalist from the British Museum thwarted the ambition of sub-curator Lawler, the pre- existing assistant to Lee. This 'uneducated man entirely wanting in principles of honour and rectitude did not hesitate to turn to best advantage every opportunity of undermining my authority'.xviii One can but imagine the poisonous relationship which quickly developed between the incumbent with thwarted ambitions, and Saville-Kent bent on reforming the institution and starting a scientific research facility. Saville-Kent might have had an smoother career had he adopted Owen's practice of courtesy and tolerance with subordinates, or Buckland's good humour.

Observing the swimming of fish in tanks prompted him to write a short paper for Nature, and the Zoologist published another on his work shortly afterward.xix Saville-Kent also began to take an interest in the way fish, particularly demersal species, changed their colour and appearance. Nature published a note on these observations in May 1873. Another of his research project included involving detailed observations of the behaviour of the several species in the Aquarium and one such study, the copulation, incubation and hatching of the much publicised octopus, became the immediate cause of his resignation. The circumstances were described in a reply by Saville-Kent to a request from Owen for details of the octopus behaviour. Later, after witnessing the intriguing sex life of the octopus and reporting the details to the Board, he sent a brief note to several newspapers. According to Saville-Kent, after he had written to the papers Lee suggested they write a joint paper of the observations and he agreed. Lee, who was an accomplished self-publicist and regular contributor to the Times and Land and Water, assumed that there would be no publication until their joint paper appeared. Saville-Kent 'thought it rather hard that he might not reap the credit of my own observations' and was greatly offended when Lee, having read his letter to the Times, accused him of 'duplicity and disingenuousness'. Saville-Kent felt he had no option, 'in the light of their former friendship and services, but to resign', and did so in emphatic fashion.xx

When his father-in-law heard of the events during a weekend visit he feared for the impact on his daughter. Bennett concluded that William 'had been the victim of a cowardly plot' and vowed to have the Board reconsider his appointment. The resignation of a noted London naturalist so soon after the appointment was so fulsomely welcomed, might not reflect well on the Board. A distressed Bennett went to Owen. 'I am truly concerned for Saville Kent' Owen wrote to Lee a few days later. 'We were very sorry to lose Mr. Kent at the British Museum, both on account of his scientific & personal qualifications. I trust the squall will blow over without harm to Kent or the Aquarium'.xxi The combined efforts of Bennett and Owen were successful and the Board reviewed the situation at its next meeting, but, offended by the perceived 'ungentlemanly treatment' he had received, Saville-Kent rashly persisted with his resignation.

Later, when he realised that Lawler and others were not prepared to let him depart without counter-attack, he regretted his hot-headed decision. He now found himself 'without employment or prospects of immediate engagement' and some people at the Brighton Aquarium attempting to 'ruin my reputation and .... prejudicing against me the minds of those who have come to Brighton to make enquiries respecting the engagement of my services'.xxii It was not surprising that 'some people' took a somewhat jaundiced view when his unflattering analysis of the Aquarium's circulation system was published in Nature.xxiii He looked back to the Museum 'where if the emolument was not very large, he had held an honourable position and received the treatment of a gentleman'. He wistfully hoped that Gunther, who helped him obtain the position, might take him back as an assistant keeper or curator of an aquarium. Now he must write to all those who had provided him with testimonials explaining how it had all gone wrong.

[Since publishing this book I discovered a letter that throws more light on the above events. Saville-Kent expected little sympathy from his mentor after he resigned. ‘If I may judge from the opinion you expressed upon my leaving my post at the British Museum for this last one ...... anticipate that you are not altogether surprised.’

William describes Lee as ‘an old friend to whom he was indebted for the post’ but later as ‘one of the consultant naturalists, he only ‘came down once a week for his amusement.’ At the time of the dispute ‘Lee threatened to leave and take Frank Buckland and the goodwill of the London Press’ with him. Saville-Kent then says ‘I should not remain a month after his departure.’ This remark seems to reflect William’s view that, despite their tiff over the octopus paper, only Lee was capable of retaining some science at the facility. In August and September comments in Nature confirmed that entertainment was now pre-eminent and several prize specimens had died after Saville-Kent departed.xxiv He advised Huxley that Flower would ‘report independently’ on the events to him.xxv]

Moving North

Leaving Brighton, William and Elizabeth retreated to London and stayed with Mr Bennett at Stoke Newington. In December William wrote to Gunther advising him that he would be in London for a few months whilst he wrote a report of his time at the Brighton Aquarium, and that he then intended to leave England 'for an indefinite and prolonged absence'. A letter to Huxley reveals that he expected to go to New York. ‘Meeting you in the dining hall at South Kensington some few weeks back I referred to a scheme started by Messers Appleton of establishing an aquarium in Central Park New York. (THH authorises SK to use his name as a referee and offers general help.)

I am just now devoting myself especially to the study of embryology so as to be in a position to make the most of the splendid opportunities that will be offered. A brief sketch of the scheme will appear in Nature this week.’ (also referred to interest in the New York Press and the government authorities are keen on hatcheries.)xxvi The article in Nature says that the well known scientific publisher, Mr Appleton, reading of Saville-Kent’s departure from Brighton in this publication, ‘at once placed themselves in communication with that gentleman with the view of securing his aid in their scheme’.xxvii The next week’s issue announced that it is intended to raise the funds for construction by public subscription and Saville-Kent would be the superintendent.

Probably Mr Appleton was unwilling to pay his new superintendent until funds had been raised and construction underway for of travelling overseas Saville-Kent went to Lancashire insteadxxviii. The new Manchester Aquarium was nearing completion in Alexander Park and opened in May 1874. Plans to open a marine aquarium in the city were announced in April 1872 and subsequently reported in Nature. The Aquarium was virtually the same size as Brighton and 1.2 million litres of seawater was brought from Blackpool to fill its tanks. Steam pumps capable of moving 350 litres a minute were able to circulate and filter all the water every 40 hours. The facility was privately financed with the purpose of promoting 'scientific education'. On Saturdays and Mondays the price of admission was one penny whilst midweek visitors were charged sixpence for a less crowded visit. Friday was set aside for students but the charge then was a shilling. As Buckland officially opened this facility, it is safe to assume that he played some role in the appointment and was not disturbed by Saville-Kent's departure from Brighton.

In July 1874 he gave the first of a series of lectures ‘to a fairly large audience’.xxix The lectures continued through the summer with growing audiences. The popularity of public aquaria grew and a new one was announced for London in the same month and another in nearby Southport in September. Visitors were particularly interested to see seaweed alive rather than as drab wracks washed up on the shore. Whilst in Manchester Saville-Kent solved the hitherto insurmountable problem of maintaining large seaweeds alive by ensuring the plants were partly exposed to air and greatly increasing the rate of circulation.xxx Later, he experimented with seaweed culture at the Great Yarmouth Aquarium.

The position of Curator and Naturalist gave Saville-Kent more freedom and responsibility than he enjoyed in Brighton and he exploited it to the full to conduct research. The Manchester Aquarium was well placed to facilitate his studies on whitebait and in the summer of 1874 he collected several batches from Colwyn Bay and studied their growth for a year and a half, demonstrating in the process their transformation into herring. He discovered the versatility of minced mussel as food for fish naturally preferring live food, and the need to supply schooling fish like whitebait, dogfish and herring with dim light at night in order to avoid a loss of navigation. He was quick to point out the relevance of this observation to drift net fishermen. When a large batch of lobster eggs hatched in the aquarium he was able to collect them and subsequently follow the metamorphosis over two months. This experiment formed the basis of his paper on the culture of lobsters presented to a symposium during the International Fisheries Exhibition in 1883.

Another tragedy befell him in February 1875 when Elizabeth, his wife of just three years, died suddenly. The death certificate recorded 'intestinal obstruction' as the cause; Sarah Jeffreys was with her when she died and provided the information on her death certificate. It seems likely that it was during his preparation for the cruise on the Norna in 1870 that Saville-Kent first met Dr. J.Gwyn Jeffreys FRS, a lawyer and conchologist who used his yacht Osprey for dredging expeditions around the coast. Retiring from the law in 1866, Jeffreys became the nation's authority on marine molluscs and deepsea research. He had supported William's fellowship of the Linnean Society in June 1873 and later agreed to be a member of the scientific council for Saville-Kent's proposed British Zoological Station. Jeffreys' son-in-law, Professor H.M.Mosely of Oxford, also agreed to be on the Council. Following Elizabeth's death Saville-Kent threw himself into a busy programme of experiments in the aquarium and advised the builders of the new Aquarium at Great Yarmouth.xxxi

The widower did not remain alone for long, re-marrying in just over a year. His new bride was Mary Ann Liversey whom Taylor referred to as 'a young woman of some financial means ... who was to become a great champion of his work'.xxxii The wedding took place on 5 January 1876 in the bride's parish church in Prestwick near Manchester. Shortly after the marriage he resigned from the Manchester Aquarium and the newly married couple moved back to London, living at 1 Beaufort Villas, Queens Road, South Norwood. He retained his position as consulting naturalist at the Great Yarmouth Aquarium and assumed a position of curator and naturalist at the newest and grandest of the public aquaria in London.

Mary Ann Liversey

Research and the Public Aquarium

The Royal Aquarium, officially called the Royal Aquarium and Summer and Winter Gardens, opened in January 1876 on a prime site of two and a half acres, from where visitors looked out on Westminster Abbey and the Houses of Parliament. In a glittering opening the son of the Queen, the Duke of Edinburgh, drew attention to 'the extensive aquarium, which is the main object of the institution which if properly directed, could not fail to stimulate the love of natural history and the acquirement of scientific knowledge'.xxxiii After the opulent opening, the royal patronage and the pious hopes of the Company directors, it was disquieting that, when it opened, there were no fish! Saville-Kent arrived in April 1876 and his skills were sorely needed to alleviate the Director's embarrassment. The Times reported that 'It is not so much an aquarium - as yet indeed, it is not an aquarium at all, for the tanks are at present empty even of water, the caution of the naturalist having been unable to keep pace with the rapidity of the builder'.xxxiv That so much had been achieved in just eleven months was not the least of the wonders of the building, the reporter observed, and thus one might not cavil with the absence of fish.

At Westminster the major problem was the huge reservoirs that required water to be moved some three miles during circulation with corresponding loss of oxygen. The numerous joints in the system also caused trouble. So serious were the defects that what was billed as 'the largest salt-water tank in the world', was never filled. Within a few months Saville-Kent had identified and solved the problems and stocked the tanks. He was clearly at home amongst the surroundings and happy to accept the new challenge. By September he was confident enough to invite Gunther to visit and view a collection of freshwater fish just received from China, 'some of which have not been brought to this country before'.xxxv

By 1876, with the experience of a number of large aquaria now behind him, Saville-Kent was an authority on the subject and felt confident enough to challenge the father of the art, W.A.Lloyd, before the Society of Arts. He identified the two systems then used to maintain aquatic animals in a natural state; first by oxygenating the water by a stream of air discharged into the bottom of the tanks and secondly by recirculating the water. Saville-Kent gives credit for the first method to Dr. Ball of the Dublin Zoo, and to P.H.Gosse for the second.xxxvi When Lloyd built the Crystal Palace Aquarium he employed very large reservoirs in which sea water could be stored in the dark to stabilise before use. The reservoirs held 100,000 gallons, five times the volumes of all the tanks used to contain fish. When the Brighton Aquarium was built the reservoirs and tanks there held 300,000 gallons pumped from an outlet just off the beach. Brighton adopted Ball's technique of aeration that Saville-Kent maintained allowed large animals like sturgeons and porpoises to be kept, and allowed most of the water to be used in display tanks. Notwithstanding the advances made at Brighton, Lloyd maintained that very large storage was necessary for inland facilities. His views resulted in the Royal Aquarium in Westminster installing reservoirs with a capacity of 600,000 gallons in order to serve tanks with a total capacity of only a quarter of that. Saville- Kent criticised the wasteful expenditure that this entailed, calculating that to fill the reservoirs once would cost £2500; the circulating system supplemented with aeration would be much more economical. He proved his point at the Manchester Aquarium. The operators of both the Royal and the new Yarmouth aquaria took his advice and made considerable savings while maintaining acceptable levels of clarity in the display tanks.

Another point of disagreement between the two was the place of research. Whereas Saville- Kent wished to use the commercial capacity of the public aquaria to offset the cost of investigations, Lloyd saw little scope for science in his aquaria.xxxvii The younger man wished both to contribute to the scientific understanding of aquatic life, as well as to entertain and educate. Before the large public aquaria were built, experimental aquatic biology by S.Bowerbank, Ray Lankester, and others was severely limited by the small size of the containers. Saville-Kent reviewed the use of aquaria as experimental facilities in a paper xxxviii presented to the Royal Society of Arts on 1 March 1876. There he reminded the audience that it was experiments at the Brighton Aquarium that had confirmed Sars' suggestion that the eggs of cod and whiting floated and consequently eggs could not be xxxix protected by banning trawling in the spawning season. Observations in the same facility showed that the phyllosoma was a larval lobster. Henry Lee was praised for his recently completed observations on the growth rate of salmon, a matter 'of the highest importance'. Saville-Kent defended his previous employer by claiming that this work was 'sufficient in itself to rebut the charge of unprofitableness which has been brought against the Brighton Institution, by one whose experience would appear to have been confined to a less productive field'.xl

The object of the Royal Aquarium was unashamedly amusement. Typical of the era's architecture it contained picture and sculpture galleries, a skating rink, restaurants and a theatre. It was also designed to be an educational facility to 'contribute to the advancement of science, literature and art in all its branches' but research was not encouraged. Its theatre was the dominant feature, and displayed the talents of luminaries of the day such as Jenny Lee, Lilly Langtry, and Ellen Terry.xli The singer George Leybourne, better known as ‘Champagne Charlie’ sang of ‘Lounging in the Aq’ and a poster of the acrobat and aerialist, Zaeo, drew cries of ‘indecent ‘ from the Society for the Repression of Immorality when she appeared in 1890. Nevertheless she was a star attraction for over a year. Ironically the Royal Aquarium was sold to the Methodist Church in 1903 as a site for their Westminster Central Hall.

Saville-Kent was not likely to stay long and was soon searching for his ideal facility. In March 1877 he undertook a temporary position with the Zoological Society restoring their Aquarium and Fish House in Regents Park, which had fallen into disrepair and now compared unfavourably with the newer facilities.xlii He found the water saturated with chalk and the tanks almost empty of fish. He offered to spend three to four months on the project in return for payment at the rate of £300 per annum but Dr Sclater approved his appointment for three months at a fee of only £50, and declined a further offer to supervise the facility on a half time basis for £200 a year. However the temporary work provided a platform from which to launch a new project.

Naples on Jersey

In his presentation to the Royal Society of Arts in March 1876, Saville-Kent had concluded with a plea to use the facilities offered by the large public aquaria to provide a national research station. Since leaving the British Museum he had demonstrated their value as centres of research rather than just entertainment; henceforth his abiding ambition was to see established a British Marine Research Station along the lines of the one already established by Anton Dorn in Naples in 1872.xliii Dorn had unsuccessfully sought British support for this laboratory at the 1870 meeting of the British Association but instead received backing from Germany. He returned to the conference the next year to urge the British to establish one of their own and the Association established a committee to investigate. Philip Sclater was an original member of the Committee and later Huxley and Gwyn Jeffreys joined the group.xliv Although Dorn had stirred an interest in a British marine biological station, nothing definite had been done. Saville-Kent decided that the solution lay not in having research as an adjunct to a public aquarium, but in building a research station and offsetting the cost by including public attractions.

As a beginning he acquired a site on Jersey in the Channel Islands and during the late winter of 1877 he achieved support for his project. Whilst at work on the Fish House in Regents Park, and using the Zoological Society as his address, he wrote to a number of eminent aquatic scientists and societies outlining his proposal and canvassing potential support. On 26 March he wrote to Gunther indicating his 'intention to establish an aquarium on such a footing that it shall be a real benefit to science as well as a sound financial investment'.xlv He wanted to add Gunther's prestige to the venture and to add him to the Honorary Scientific Committee that would supervise the research programme and priorities. In the draft prospectus for an Aquarium, Zoological Station and Cercle des Bains to be built at St Helier, he described the facilities for science, which would be separate from the other 'accessory attractions', and stressed the encouraging prospects for lobster culture. Outlining the success achieved in Manchester in lobster culture, the leaflet suggested that the combination of abundant local stocks and the current very high prices paid for the crustacean boded well for this aspect of the project. The non-scientific attractions - cercle des bains, concert hall, ballroom, reading, and refreshment rooms 'will be maintained on the most select and recherché principles, and, being likely to receive support from the numerous French visitors to the island, will be conducted on the continental system, and under the immediate supervision of a Frenchman'. The estimated capital needed was to be less than £12,000, half to be devoted to the scientific side, and all to be raised through £5 shares. Probably these plans were discussed with Buckland for it was the latter's enthusiasm for just such a research facility that appeared to guide Saville-Kent's endeavours.

Concluding work in Regent's Park, he and Mary Ann moved to St Helier during the summer as the venture seemed to be approaching reality. On 26 October he excitedly wrote to Owen that he had a definite prospect of accomplishing what I may say has been the main object of my ambition during my several years 'Apprenticeship' as naturalist to the leading English Aquaria. Namely the establishment of an institution specially devoted to the interests of marine zoology and pisciculture and that I shall place at the disposal of British Naturalists facilities for pursuing marine biological research which under existing auspices can be obtained no nearer than Naples.xlvi Disappointed that the facility had to be financed by way of a public company rather than 'private munificence' he acknowledged that 'now-a-days (science) must make the most of such opportunities that present themselves'. The aquarium was now to be financed by public shares valued at £1 each. The company was registered in Jersey in October 1877 and active building was expected by the next January. Saville-Kent invited Owen to be a member of the Scientific Committee (now referred to as a Technical Committee), and Gunther and the British Museum were offered the use of the facility's depot for holding specimens. In early 1878 he was confident of starting the technical department. A number of rooms for the use of students had been equipped, and the depot for supplying specimens for various museums and schools was in preparation.

The Channel Island Zoological Station, Museum & Institute of Pisciculture Society Limited, 16 Royal Square, St Helier, was established as a limited liability company to protect those donating to its establishment from further pecuniary responsibility. Yet it was to be operated like a scientific society, with directors receiving no fees, and returns to shareholders limited to 5%. All other income was to be devoted to 'the further development of the scientific departments of the institution, or otherwise for direct aid of scientific research'.xlvii Sclater was a keen supporter of the venture; indicating potential investors, taking up a few shares and giving advice. By February 1878 £1000 had been raised and a further £500 promised from leading residents of the island. When construction of temporary buildings began in April 1878, Saville-Kent approached the Royal Society for a small grant to aid the project: Since a society founded upon this purely scientific status cannot command much support from the ordinary commercial community, but has to trust mainly to the assistance of those directly interested in science, and who are not a wealthy class, the collection of the amount of funds requisite for successful organisation of the institution is necessarily a slow and somewhat arduous task; and it is only under such circumstances that your applicant begs leave to lay before you this application for pecuniary aid.xlviii He now estimated the final cost to be under £4000 and needed another £1000 to commence building. He told Owen that by April he was confident of commissioning the permanent buildings and hoped that as the British Association had recently donated £100 to the Naples laboratory 'charity would be as judiciously bestowed nearer home'. The Government Grants Committee declined to provide the £250 he sought from the £4000 dispensed that year. The project could not be firmly established; a symbolic grant from the Government would have made all the difference.

i W. Saville-Kent, "Aquaria, their Construction, Management, and Utility", 1876. p. 298.(A term in use in the Victorian period to describe those entrepreneur/ naturalists developing and directing the public aquaria.) ii L. Barber, The Heyday of Natural History 1820-1870, p.117. iii Ibid., p.123. iv C. Lever, They Dined on Eland, p.20-32: G.H.O. Burgess, The Curious World of Frank Buckland. v J.G. Bertram, Harvest of the Sea; 3rd ed. vi Ibid., p.295-6. vii Donald Watson & Judith McKay, Queensland Architects of the 19th Century, a Biographical Dictionary, p.133. viii Brighton Examiner, 13 August 1872. ix Lord was a naturalist who had surveyed the fauna of British Columbia and Egypt and unfortunately suffered a series of strokes in late 1872. x Times, 16 January 1873. xi Times, 10 March 1873. xii Gunther correspondence, 31 October 1873, British Museum [Natural History] manuscripts. xiii Bertram, op.cit., p.294. xiv Times, 4 March 1873. xv Times, 25 August 1873. xvi Saville-Kent to Richard Owen, 1 July 1873: Owen Correspondence, British Museum [Natural History] manuscripts. Saville-Kent asked Owen to write a few lines to Burrows to buttress his position. xvii Gunther Correspondence, British Museum [Natural History] manuscripts. xviii Ibid. xix "Fish distinguished by their action", and "Notes from the Brighton Aquarium", both 1873. xx Owen Correspondence, British Museum [Natural History] manuscripts. xxi Richard Owen to Henry Lee, 5 July 1873; kindly supplied by Jacob Gruber. xxii Ibid. xxiii W. Saville-Kent, "The Brighton Aquarium", 1873, p.531-533. xxiv Nature 1873, Vol VIII, no. 198 p 313 and no. 201 p 373 xxv WSK to THH 2 sep 1873 (Imperial College Archives) xxvi WSK from Brighton to THH, Jan 15 1874. (Imperial College Archives) xxvii Nature, Vol IX no. 222 p243-4 Jan 1874. xxviii The New York Aquarium did not open until late in 1876. xxix Nature, Vol X no. 244 p. 172 Jul 1874. xxx W. Saville-Kent, "Aquaria, their Construction, Management, and Utility", 1876. xxxi The foundation stone of the Great Yarmouth Aquarium was laid on 11 October 1875. In November 1875 Nature announced that Saville-Kent was to be appointed naturalist and manager. xxxii Taylor, Cruelly Murdered, p.352. Her family was wealthy and her inheritance supported them in the years before Saville-Kent obtained the position in Tasmania. However her actions after Saville-Kent's death seem to reflect a different attitude. A true champion might have made better provision for preserving his papers and collections and creating a better memorial. xxxiii Times, 24 January 1876. xxxiv Ibid. xxxv Gunther Correspondence, 8 September 1876: British Museum [Natural History] manuscripts. xxxvi W. Saville-Kent, "Aquaria, their Construction, Management, and Utility", op.cit., p.292- 3. Lloyd and Mitchell were in the audience. xxxvii Ibid. xxxviii Later published in its Journal, v.24, p.292-298. Both Mitchell and Lloyd were present. The former took the opportunity in question time to give his view but Lloyd declined the chairman's offer to comment 'preferring to make his reply in print'. xxxix Michael Sars (1805-1869) born in Bergen, Norway. A specialisist in the larval stages of fish and invertebrates and acclaimed as one of the fathers of marine zoology. xl W. Saville-Kent, "Aquaria; their Construction and Maintenance", 1875, p.295. xli John Munro, "The Royal Aquarium. Failure of Victorian Compromise", p.11. xlii Sclater correspondence, 12 March 1877: Zoological Society manuscripts. xliii Anton Dorn (1840-1909) a German biologist and student of Haeckel. Naples offered clean temperate seawater close to shore. xliv A.E. Gunther, A Century of Zoology at the British Museum, p.393. xlv Gunther Correspondence, British Museum [Natural History] manuscripts. xlvi Saville-Kent to Owen, 26 October 1877: Owen Correspondence, British Museum [Natural History] manuscripts. xlvii From Saville-Kent's application to the Government Grants Committee of the Royal Society of London in 1878. xlviii Ibid.