Knowing, as we do, the desire of France to retain the name quadrant for the practical unit of induction, it was especially gratifying to us to learn that the resolution to name this unit the Henry, after the distinguished American electrician, was introduced into the Chamber of Delegates by Mascart, of France, and seconded by Ayrton, of England. I know how much easier it is to find fault with an enterprise and to show how it should have been conducted, than it would. be to carry it on successfully oneself. I have, therefore, no little hesitancy in criticising any part of the work of the late Electrical Congress; but, looking at the recent Electrical Congress as I experienced it, I trust I may be pardoned if I point out some respects in which I believe it could have been improved. I do this, not for the purpose of finding fault with the conduct of the Congress, nor of criticising any of its officials; for, on the whole, the results achieved are excellent. I criticise it only with the hope of preventing similar errors in the future, and to correct impressions that have prevailed, especially among our foreign friends, that all the arrangements for the Electrical Congress were in the hands of the INSTITUTE. The only work with which our INSTITUTE was officially connected, was that considered by the Chamber of Delegates. As this was prepared by the SubCommittee on Provisional Programme, and printed in the TRANSACTIONS, beginning with the issue for January, 1893, you are of course familier with it. Hospitalier's system of notation was also translated and reprinted in the TRANSACTIONS, and copies furnished to the Chamber of Delegates. I think all who attend any of the many congresses held under the suspices of the Electrical Congress Committee of the World's Fair Auxiliary will agree with me that wretched judgment was displayed in holding the sessions of the congresses in the Art Institute. This building, as we know from bitter experience, was entirely unsuited for the purposes of a learned assembly, being situated in a noisy city, alongside a line of railroad that was carrying an enormous traffic, and directly opposite a great railroad yard, where the constant shifting of cars, the puffing of locomotives, the blowing of whistles and the ringing of bells rendered very much of what was said at the Congress inaudible. I believe I but voice the general sentiment when I object to the distance the place selected for holding the meetings of the Congress, was from the Fair grounds. The selection of this site necessitated a considerable loss of precious time in going between the exhibition and the Congress; time whose value can be estimated only by the loss of the rare opportunities for culture afforded by the rich exhibits within the grounds. The division of the Congress into different sections; to wit, Section A, Pure Theory; Section B, Theory and Practice; Section C, Pure Practice, was also in my judgment exceedingly unfortunate. There may be such a thing as pure theory apart from practice, though I am disposed to doubt it; for, theory is, or at least should be, based on facts, i. e., on practice, and cannot be properly dissociated from it. But, however this may be, I feel sure there can be no such thing as pure practice apart from theory; to my mind, the two necessarily go hand in hand and cannot, therefore, be separated. But apart from this, the division appears to me to be unfortunate as well as arbitrary; for there can be no doubt that the greater part of the advantage derived from congresses or other assemblies of intellectual men comes from the contact of mind with mind; not from the contact of similar, but of dissimilar minds. Any attempt, therefore, arbitrarily to divide a large cultured assembly into classes, must, I think, result disastrously. This division of the Congress into sections was also unfortunate, inasmuch as it prevented the members of the Congress from hearing many papers or discussions on subjects in which they were interested, from the impossibility of simultaneously attending the several sections. This difficulty might have been lessened, had the programme been arranged so as to give the titles of papers, and the order in which they would be presented in each section, thus affording an approximate idea of the time. This practice is well understood and followed in meetings of most technical societies. I think it was a grave mistake to have made the sittings of the Chamber of Delegates private. No harm could possibly have resulted from permitting the general Congress to listen to the debates. On the contrary, I believe much good must have so resulted. Indeed, I see no reason why the members of the general Congress should not have been permitted to take part in the discussion, though not permitted to vote. But, to my mind, the most unfortunate feature was the preliminary work of the Electrical Congress of 1893, as carried on by the Committee of the World's Congress Auxiliary. Notwithstanding the fact that the determination to hold an International Electrical Congress, originated with the AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ELECTRICAL ENGINEERS, and notwithstanding the excellent prior work of the INSTITUTE in arranging preliminary details, the World's Congress Auxiliary, an organization created for the purpose of conducting the many different congresses that were to assemble in Chicago during the World's Fair, made it a cardinal principle of procedure, that no society should be permitted to take charge of the work of a congress. When the varied character of the numerous learned congresses that were expected to meet in Chicago during 1893 is taken into consideration, we may be able to form some idea of the herculean labor the World's Congress Auxiliary thus assumed. We are, therefore, less surprised at their failure in many cases to invite the most prominent men to represent the particular subjects involved. Where the interests in any line of intellectual work were represented by different societies of fairly equal importance, we are willing to admit the advisability of preventing the influence of a single society dominating that particular congress, though even this case affords no reason why such congress should not be conducted by a joint committee fairly representing the different societies. But the INSTITUTE OF ELECTRICAL ENGINEERS is confessedly the representative electrical society of the United States. I submit, therefore, that the policy of excluding the INSTITUTE from the conduct of the Electrical Congress, and of persistently denying it official recognition, was both unfortunate and indefensible. For my part, I am unable to see how any small body of men, such, for example, as those forming the World's Congress Auxiliary, no matter how profound or extensive their erudition, could hope to be able to properly and efficiently arrange the meetings of so many different learned congresses so as to ensure the presence of the men most fitted to undertake the different characters of work. I, therefore, feel that the refusal of the World's Congress Auxiliary to permit the work of each particular congress to be arranged and carried on by the representative society or societies in the branches to which such e ngress related, was a radical error which must in most cases have seriously interfered with its usefulness, and which should be especially avoided in the future. It has occured to me, that it might, perhaps, be advisable to place on record a brief history of the part taken by the AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ELECTRICAL ENGINEERS in the World's Electrical Congress of 1893. I am indebted to our secretary, Mr. R. W. Pope, and to the official records of the INSTITUTE, for the facts. The AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ELECTRICAL ENGINEERS, being generally recognized as the national electrical organization of America, deemed it advisable, as early as 1889, to take steps towards identifying itself with international work, thereby securing proper recognition for the important electrical researches of Americans which had hitherto been ignored, not by reason of their lack of importance, but because no organized body representing America had ever participated in the International Congresses of Europe. Five delegates, representing the INSTITUTE, were accordingly appointed to attend the International Congress held in Paris in 1889. As it was believed that a World's Fair would be held in America in 1892, to commemorate the discovery of the continent, the INSTITUTE determined that an International Electrical Congress should be convened at that time in whatever city the Fair might be held. In August, 1889, a committee was appointed by President Elihu Thomson, to make preparations for such proposed International Electrical Congress of America. The postponement of the date of the World's Fair to 1893, and the holding of an International Electrical Congress at Frankfort in 1891, rendered it unnecessary for this committee to do anything more than to take advantage of the coming Frankfort Congress again to notify the world of their intention of holding an International Congress in America during 1893. On September 16th, 1890, the following resolutions were adopted by the AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ELECTRICAL ENGINEERS: Whereas, It has been the custom in the nomenclature of electrical units to perpetuate the names of men who have contributed most to electrical science; and, Whereas, In the names thus far adopted, the eminent services of Americans have not been recognized; therefore, Resolved, That in the opinion of the AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ELECTRICAL ENGINEERS a just distribution of the honors thus bestowed necessitates a recognition of one or both of America's great electricians-Benjamin Franklin and Joseph Henry : Resolved, That the name of Henry should be given to the practical unit of self-induction, since he was the discoverer and greatest investigator of this phenomenon, and because this unit at present is called a quadrant, which is merely a numerical value and not a suitable name. Resolved, That this INSTITUTE recommends to electrical societies and electrical engineers the general use of the name Henry for the unit of induction, as being the quickest and surest way to secure its final adoption. Upon the receipt of an invitation extended by the management of the Frankfort International Congress of 1891 to the AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ELECTRICAL ENGINEERS to take part in its deliberations, five delegates were appointed by the Chair to attend the Frankfort Congress. at the general meeting of the INSTITUTE, on May 21st. The adjournment of the Frankfort Congress, to meet in Chicago in 1893, was considered as settling the fact that an International Electrical Congress was to be held at that time, and the INSTITUTE, therefore continued its preparatory work, and on October 27th, 1891, its committee on the International Congress of 1893 reorganized as follows, viz.: T. COMMERFORD MARTIN, Chairman. PROF. W. A. ANTHONY, COL. CHARLES H. HASKINS, PROF. EDWIN J. HOUSTON, T. D. LOCK WOOD, C. O. MAILLOUX, PROF. ELIHU THOMSON, DR. SCHUYLER S. WHEELER, A. E. KENNELLY. Sub-Committee on Provisional Programme, CARL HERING, A. E. KENNELLY. But these preparations for an International Electrical Congress were rendered futile by the decision of the officials of the World's Fair, that the organizations of all the world's congresses that were to be held in connection with the World's Columbian Exposition should be placed in the hands of the World's Congress Auxiliary, and that all details connected with the proposed |