THE EARLY HISTORY OF THE BOTANICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA 3 



such terms (not incompatible with the intent of recommendation 1) as they 

 see fit." ' 



The Barnes' minority report was adopted by a two-thirds majority of the 

 Club, and the Club then elected ten charter members. This committee of ten 

 met the next day, August 2i, and elected by ballot fifteen additional mem- 

 bers. The following are the names of the twenty-five charter members: J. C. 

 Arthur, G. F. Atkinson, L. H. Bailey, C. R. Barnes, C. E. Bessey, N. L. 

 Britton, E. G. Britton, D. H. Campbell, J. M. Coulter, F. V. Coville, D. C. 

 Eaton, W. G. Farlow, E. L. Greene, B. D. Halsted, A. Rollick, C. Mac- 

 Millan, B. L. Robinson, C. S. Sargent, F. L. Scribner, J. Donnell Smith, 

 R. Thaxter, W. Trelease, L. F. Ward, W. P. Wilson, and L. M. Underwood.-' 

 Invitations were issued to the designated twenty-five to become charter mem- 

 bers of the new Botanical Society. All accepted except for Eaton, Ward, 

 Campbell, and Farlow. Later (in 1898) Bailey and Thaxter resigned. Sev- 

 eral informal meetings of those selected were held after the election, and a 

 committee was appointed to prepare a preliminary draft of the constitution 

 to be submitted at the next annual meeting of the Association. William 

 Trelease, chairman of the committee to draft the constitution, sent the fol- 

 lowing communication on November 1, 1893, to all charter members: "The 

 aim of the society was stated to be the promotion of botanical research, and 

 it was thought best that the limits of membership should be very rigidly 

 drawn. It will, I think, be evident that the original list of twenty-five mem- 

 bers contains the names of no persons not entitled to membership on the 

 basis of creditable published work. . . . The object being the promotion of 

 research, it was thought best not to make membership, at least in the char- 

 ter list, complimentary to distinguished botanists who are no longer engaged 

 in the performance of active work, hence, the omission of certain honored 

 names which must suggest themselves to every American botanist. For the 

 same reason, it was the sense of the members present that continued mem- 

 bership in the society should depend upon the continued activity of mem- 

 bers and a continued interest in the realization of this principal aim of the 

 society; and it was thought that a provision should be included in the consti- 

 tution providing that failure to attend the meetings, or to present papers at 

 the meetings, for a period of three years, should work forfeiture of member- 

 ship. . . . The feeling of the members present was, that the Society might 

 ultimately find it necessary to assume the expense of publishing papers pre- 

 sented by members; and to this end, and also to check application for mem- 

 bership from persons who were not really in sympathy with the objects of the 

 society, it was decided that the admission fee should be $25.00, and the 

 annual dues $10.00. ... It was thought best for the present that only one 

 meeting should be held each year, that meeting to be held in close con- 



'' Ibid. ^ Bot. Gaz. 18:368. 1893. 



