80 The Microscope. 



before been proposed. While therefore I fairly concede to Mr. 

 G., on his own statements and those of others, priority of sug- 

 gestion of the idea of such a session, I unhesitatingly affirm that 

 no such suggestion was made to me, but that the plan as carried 

 out at Chicago was solely my own. Whether I joined the 

 society at Detroit or at Ninevah does not alter or effect this. 

 When Mr. Vorce, et, al., testify to Mr. Griffith's speaking to 

 them at Indianapolis, Elmira, or elsewhere, of such a scheme, 

 prior to the Chicago meeting, or praise his success at Rochester, 

 they have clear right to do so, whether it is called for by what I 

 said, or not, but when they undertake to state what he or I did 

 to bring about the first session at Chicago, they go entirely be- 

 yond the bounds of their knowledge, and are not valid wit- 

 nesses. The " positive and clear statements of Mr. Brearley and 

 Mr Vorce " do not effect my statement at all. I wish no con- 

 troversy with any one, and do not regard this as a matter worth 

 controversy, and so shall not stop to notice any of the state- 

 ments of these writers in detail, except to say that F. W. Taylor 

 is entirely in error in saying that my remarks at Chicago, in 

 reply to his resolution in favor of the Working Session, were 

 " half-supporting, half-apologetic." His. remarks afforded me 

 great pleasure, endorsing so heartily as they did, the new de- 

 parture I had labored so earnestly to bring about, and I so ex- 

 pressed myself in unmistakable terms, and took occasion, also, 

 to recount the steps which I had taken to bring it about, and 

 to publicly thank, in the name of the society, Mr. Griffith for 

 his very valuable assistance, Mr. B. W. Thomas and others for 

 their advice, and the gentlemen who took part in the session — 

 including Mr. Taylor himself— for their cheerful and valuable 

 services. I greatly regret, for more reasons than one, that the 

 Proceedings, on p. 260, print a report of my remarks so very far 

 from correct. It is, doubtless, that report which has so confused 

 Mr. Taylor's memory. 



Regretting the necessity which has arisen of again referring 

 to this matter, I shall only say in concluding that if all dispas- 

 sionate readers will again read what I wrote on pp. 5-7 of this 

 journal of January, in connection with pp. 250, 251 and 260 of 

 the Proceedings of the A. S. M. for '83, (incorrect as the latter 

 page is) they will not, I think, accuse me of unfairness to Mr. 



