PROCEEDINGS AT GENERAL MEETINGS. 19 



WL-re callfcl niamiivs could \>c sold at. a ]iru'e \vliich would yield a coiiiini.ssion of £1 

 \>tiT toil— he llioii^dit it high lime that these were thoroughly investigated without fear 

 by this great Society, Lacked as it was Ly its large aiiiou'ut of eaiiital. The Royal 

 Society of Enghuid was not at all afraid of undertaking these analyses, and in many 

 eases of i)ublishing the results. He (Mr Waldegrave Leslie) was not at all afraid 

 of any legal action being taken in conse(|uence of wliat the Society might do in that 

 way. As to the change of site of their ollices, he reminded the Society that the Union 

 Bank, after being fouiuled for a century, he thought, in Tarlianient Si'iuare, liad found 

 it necessary to remove to Geo7-ge Street. He was not himself, either directly or in- 

 directly, concerned in any propeiiy in Edinburgli, so that he had no premises what- 

 ever to bring forward or erection to recommend. He only asked the meeting to con- 

 sider whetlier this was not a good opportunity for investing i)art of tlieir spare capital 

 —for making an investment which would not only be good in itself liut good for the 

 Society and for agriculture, by having large suitable premises, which now, nnliappily 

 for many people, couUl be got at a very reasonable rate. It was very desirable to con- 

 centrate the Ijusiness of the Society as far as possible into one spot, and he thought 

 the ailvantages to be derived from that would be such that the jirojiosal would com- 

 mend itself to those opposed to removal, even although the Hall and Chambers Com- 

 nnttee should recommend some other part of Edinburgh than that in which they w-ere 

 gathered. He understood tliere were no rooms in the neighbourhood wliich could be 

 made suitable for the object in view. Without taking up further time, he (Mr Wal- 

 degrave Leslie) would conclude Ijy submitting his motion. 



Lord Denman said that to tlie motion as it originally stood he could not have the 

 smallest ol)jection, because the Hall and Chambers Committee, in considering and 

 rejwrting to a general meeting of the Society, would enlighten all the members on the 

 subject, and not bind the Society to anything. But to give tlie committee power all at 

 once, without having a notice on the paper tliat that was intended, was too much to 

 expect the meeting to join in. He had no hesitation in seconding the motion if it was 

 confined to what was before them in print. 



Mr Melvin, Bonnington, said that the remarks of Mr Waldegrave Leslie were satis- 

 foctory so far, but it seemed to him somewhat disrespectful to the members of the 

 Society to l)ring the motion forward at what was more a formal meeting in connection 

 with the^ arrangements for the show than a meeting for the disposal of important busi- 

 ness. Three years ago last January the same subject was brought forward by the 

 directors, and submitted to the meeting held on that occasion, and after full discussion 

 by one of tlie largest meetings ever assembled within that room, it was decided by a 

 majority of twenty to one to remain where they were, and not to go to George Street 

 or the New Town. He shouhl have thought that before such a proposal was brought 

 forward again it should have been better announced, and also brought forward at the 

 corresponding meeting in January. For these reasons ho meant to propose the pre- 

 vious question. He did not object to providing suitable accommodation or sufiicient 

 accommodation for wluitever was recpiired by tlie directors for practical work by the 

 chemist. For many years he had supported the plan of having a suitable lalioratory, 

 with suitable accommodation for the chemist, as one of the most important objects 

 this Society could propose. He, however, held that the New Town of Edinburgh was 

 not the jilace for establishing a laboratory. They had Professor Crum Brown at the 

 University, and Dr Falconer King also close at hand, as well as Dr Stevenson Macadam. 

 To go away from their present place to the New Town was therefore, he held, a mis- 

 take. More than that, he had to state that he recollected of being present at one of 

 the general meetings which was held in the old hall at Albyn Place. On that occasion 

 there were several noblemen, several landed proprietors, and a good many merchants 

 jiresent, but no tenant-farmers so far as he could see. The directors found that that 

 was not as it ought to be. If it was to be a national society, it should be supported 

 by the tenantry as well as the landed iiroprietors. They found it necessary to remove 

 to the place in which they were now met ; and what was the result ? In place of a 

 membership of imder 2000, they had nearly 5000. Why ? Simply because they carried 

 the farmers along with them. To adopt the proposal now submitted without further 

 consideration was therefore, he held, unfair to all those members who, as it were, 

 ought to have their views taken on the subject. There was no donlit the Society was 

 one for the farmers' good, and he thought there should be a much larger proportion of 

 farmers on the direction of the society. If that were the case, he thought more good 

 would be done to the farmer. There were respectable men among the writers to the 

 signet ami bank directors, but it was practical men they wanted there, and until they 

 had practical men on the directorate it was not possible to have the good done to the 

 country that the Society was cajialile of. As they secured where they were the attend- 

 ance of the tenantry, was the oV)jection not likely to be urged against them if they 

 removed to the New Town— he submitted that they were in danger of it by adopting 

 Mr Waldegrave Leslie's proposal— that they were going away hack to the New Town 

 to get quit of the farmers as a body ? 



