124 



THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



EDITOR'S TABLE. 



TEE AMERICAN- ASSOCIATION AT 

 PUILADELPUIA. 



THE recent meeting of the Ameri- 

 can Scientific Association at Phil- 

 adelpliia was an eminently successful 

 one. It was the largest ever held, the 

 number of papers read was greater, and 

 their merit above the past average. The 

 presidential address by Professor Young, 

 which we reprint, was a production of 

 unusual ability. He chose the theme 

 upon which he was best qualified to 

 speak, the present state of astronomi- 

 cal science, with reference to its imper- 

 fectly solved problems, and the re- 

 searches to which attention must next 

 be given. 



The great drawback to the enjoy- 

 ment of the meeting was the intoler- 

 able heat, which was the more aggravat- 

 ing as there was so much to see, and 

 so much laid out to do ; but the Phil- 

 adelphians, by their generous hospital- 

 ity and their liberal arrangements for 

 the pleasure and entertainment of visit- 

 ors, did everything possible to mitigate 

 the calamity of the weather. 



The project of a permanent interna- 

 tional scientific association, to which 

 we have before called attention, M'as 

 taken up and favorably received, al- 

 though in the opinion of many the 

 time has not yet come when such a 

 plan can be vigorously carried out. It 

 is reported that the project "has now 

 a more assured existence " inasmuch 

 as the philanthropist, Mrs. Elizabeth 

 Thompson, has contributed $5,000 to 

 it and will give $5,000 more next year, 

 on the condition that $10,000 are fur- 

 nished from other sources. This lady 

 also donated $1,000 to the American 

 Association to promote researches in 

 light and heat. 



The coming of the British Associa- 

 tion in full force to Montreal to hold 



a meeting, to be immediately followed 

 by the session of the American Associa- 

 tion in Philadelphia in which many Brit- 

 ish scientists took part, has naturally 

 raised various questions of comparison 

 between the policy and working of 

 the two bodies. We give some of the 

 points of comparison and contrast. 



The Canadian meeting was con- 

 siderably the larger: 1,773 members 

 were registered, of whom about one 

 half crossed the ocean. This is below 

 the average of the past ten years by 

 about a hundred members. The num- 

 ber of members registered at Philadel- 

 phia was 1,261, or about five hundred 

 less than at the Montreal meeting. Of 

 these, 303 were foreign visitors. 



Fewer papers were read at the 

 American Association than at tlie Brit- 

 ish, but more in proportion to tlie mem- 

 bership, 304 being reported at Phila- 

 delphia, and 327 at Montreal. But 

 some forty, or one eighth of the entire 

 number, were contributed by American 

 gentlemen attending the Canada meet- 

 ing. The character of the work at both 

 meetings is generally admitted to be 

 above the average. Of the five papers 

 recommended by the British Associa- 

 tion to be published in full, two were 

 from the States ; one by Professor Gray, 

 and one by Professor Thurston. 



Both Associations adopt the plan of 

 appointing special committees to inves- 

 tigate and report upon designated sub- 

 jects ; but the British Association car- 

 ries it out much more thorouglily than 

 the American. "While the reports at 

 the Philadelphia meeting were so mea- 

 ger that " it can be hardly said there 

 were any," on the other hand, " in ad- 

 dition to the regular papers, there were 

 in the various sections of the British 

 Association more than fifty reports pre- 

 sented, coming from committees ap- 



