Document information

Physical location:

Unit 2, pp. 4-5, VPRS 1092 Governor's letter books, VA 466 Governor, Public Record Office, Victoria. 63.04.27

Preferred Citation:

Henry Barkly to Ferdinand von Mueller, 1863-04-27. R.W. Home, Thomas A. Darragh, A.M. Lucas, Sara Maroske, D.M. Sinkora, J.H. Voigt and Monika Wells (eds), Correspondence of Ferdinand von Mueller, <https://vmcp.rbg.vic.gov.au/id//letters/1860-9/1863/63-04-27-final.odt>, accessed June 13, 2026

27th April 1863
My dear Dr Mueller,
I was not able to reply to Professor Maskelyn's letter about the Bruce & Abel meteorites by the mail,
1
Nevil Maskelyne had written to the Governor on 28 January 1863 asking him to order the transmission of the meteorite purchased by James Bruce to London, evidently unaware of the limited powers the Governor had after constitutional reform in the Colony in 1855, when the role became increasingly symbolic, representing the Crown in a system of independent constitutional monarchies (see Lucas et al. (1994), pp. 73-9). The smaller meteorite from the Cranbourne cluster, owned by August Abel and exhibited in London, was bought by the British Museum to exchange for the one Bruce intended to be given to it.
as I did not hear from Professor McCoy on the subject till Saturday afternoon & did not like to forward his letter without referring to you for some information in the first instance.
2
See F. McCoy to H. Barkly, 25 April 1863 (in this edition as M63-04-25).
Professor McCoy having been notified by the Mining Department nine months ago to serve on a Board to consider what steps should be taken as to the retention of the Bruce meteorite in the colony, did not feel himself at liberty to answer the application I addressed to him without consulting the Government.
The result was a Meeting of this Board, — which as I learnt briefly from him on Saturday came to the conclusion that the meteorite should be retained as Mr Bruce had in January 1862 presented one half to the Victorian Museum, & repeated the gift by a letter published in the "Argus" just before his departure in which he merely stipulated that the British Museum should have the right of cutting off one half at their own expense if the Trustees thought proper.
This right the Board of course recognise.
I certainly did not gather anything of this sort from Mr Bruce's letters to you which I have seen from time to time, & should not have alluded to the matter in the terms which I employed in my last annual address to the Royal Society, had I supposed such to be his intentions.
3
Barkly (1865) (read 28 April 1862) has a long passage on the meteorite, pp. xli-xliii, including his own assessment of the proposals that it be cut in half and shared ( pp. xlii-xliii):
I am proud certainly to think that there are in this young country men so eminent in the study of magnetism, of mineralogy, of chemistry, and the other sciences involved, as to be capable of satisfactorily investigating the properties and the origin of such phenomena, but I must confess, nevertheless, that looking to the uniqueness of the specimen — for though three larger meteoric masses are known to exist, two in Mexico, and one in La Plata, the heaviest yet brought to Europe weighs but 14 cwt., and the next but 12 cwt. — it strikes me it would be a pity to break it up before it has been seen by the scientific world, while the number of European savans is so far greater, that it would seem almost selfish to seek to anticipate on these distant shores their experiments upon it.
The point has, I believe, been referred to the highest authorities at home, whose views will, I am confident, be cheerfully acquiesced in.
No doubt that reference on my part led to the application which Professor Maskelyn addressed to me, & which will entail a very awkward explanation on my part.
I remain &c
(Sd) Henry Barkly
Dr Mueller
&c &c &c