The Genesis of f/ir Uui'led S/a/es A^i/ioinil ^fnseiDN. 105 



much more secure in its project of retaiuing the control of the National 

 Museum, and either of training eventually the management of the Smith- 

 son fund or of obtaining an appropriation from Congress. 



Senator Woodbury," in commenting upon the form of the charter, 

 remarked that — 



Care was taken originally to make the Institute different from all other chartered 

 bodies, even in this District, so as to elevate it above every motive of personal gain, 

 dedicating its labors exclusively to objects of a public character, and vesting all the 

 property possessed for this purpose in the Government itself ; and thus, by rendering 

 it national in substance, as well as name, to obviate any constitutional objection 

 which might arise against measures in its behalf. 



The change of the name from Institution to Institute .seems to have 

 been made in deference to a stiggestion by Doctor Duponceau in a letter 

 written April, 1842, in which he said: 



I have seen with great pleasure the bill brought into the vSenate by the Hon. Mr. 

 Preston. It fully coincides with the views that I have expressed. The object, in 

 my opinion, is, to preserve the .superiority of the National Institution over the Smith- 

 sonian, and that of the Government over both. 



I would beg leave to sugge.st, whether it would not be advisable to make some 

 small alteration in the name of the National Institution, so that it should not bear 

 exactly the same name with the Smithsonian, but one expressive of some degree of 

 superiority. I would reconnnend, for instance, that of Institute, which appears to 

 me more dignified than that of institution, which is equally applicable to a school or 

 college as to a great national establishment for the promotion of science. My idea 

 would be to call the national establishment the "National Institute for the Promo- 

 tion of Science," and the subordinate one the "Smithsonian In.stitution," without 

 more. 



No appropriation came, however, and the charter and changed name 

 failed to make the society more prcsperous. 



At a meeting June 20,- 1842, a resoltition was passed appointing a com- 

 mittee to solicit private contributions of money and property. 



At another meeting, August 8, 1842, a report- was made by this com- 

 mittee in which they proposed to in.stitute an annual scientific conven- 

 tion at Washington, during the session of Congress, and tmder the 



(S. No. 258), February 17, 1841, in Rhees, Documents, pp. 239-341. See also Memorial 

 of the Officers of the National Institution for the Promotion of Science, Jamiary 21, 

 1842 (House Doc. No. 59, Twenty-seventh Congress, second session, II), .submitting 

 draft of a bill of incorporation. 



'See remarks of Senator Woodburj- in full, Proceedings of the National Institute, 

 3d Bull. , pp. 336, 337. 



" Kvidently not June 13, thout^h so stated in one portion of minutes. See Pro- 

 ceedings of the National In.stitute, 3d Bull., pp. 236, 241, 335. 



3The committee appointed to devi.se and execute .such measures as should be 

 deemed expedient to obtain contributions and other aid to the Institute would make 

 an informal report. 



They propose making an appeal to the public, by disseminating an account of the 

 Institute, its past efforts, its condition, and its pro.spects, and an exhibition of the 

 many reasons why it .should be sustained and encouraged by the citizens of the 

 United States. In their judgment the best means of doing this will be the i)ublica- 



