74 UNIVERSAL OR COSMIC TIME, 
APPENDIX TO REPORT ON THE WASHINGTON CONFERENCE. 
Extract (1) from the Protocols of Session, October 13th, referred to in the 
foregoing Report, page 69. 
Mr. Sandford Fleming, Delegate of Great Britain:—I have listened with 
great attention and deep interest to the remarks which have fallen from the 
several gentlemen who have spoken, and I desire your kind indulgence for a 
few moments while I explain the views I have formed on the motion of the 
distinguished Delegates from France. 
I feel that the important question which this Conference has to consider 
must be approached in no narrow spirit. It is one which affects every nation- 
ality, and we should endeavour, in the common interest, to set aside any na- 
tional or individual prejudices we possess, and view the subject as members of 
one community—in fact, as citizens of the world. Acting in this broad 
spirit, we cannot fail to arrive at conclusions which will promote the common 
good of mankind. 
In deliberating on the important subject before us, it seems to me there are 
two essential points which we should constantly bear in mind. 
1. We should consider what will best promote the general advantage, not 
now only, but for all future years, while causing at the present time as little 
individual and national inconvenience as possible. 
2. We should, in coming to a determination on the main question for which 
this Conference is called, leave nothing undone to avoid offence, now or here- 
after, to the sensitiveness of individual nations. 
The motion is, that the initial meridian to be chosen should be selected on 
account of its neutrality. This undoubtedly involves the selection of an en- 
tirely new meridian, one which has never previously been used by any nation, 
as all initial meridians in use are more or less national, and, as such, would 
not be considered neutral in the sense intended by the honourable Delegates 
from France, * 
Let us suppose that this Conference adopted the motion. Let us suppose, fur- 
ther, that we found a meridian quite independent of, and unrelated to any exist- 
ing initial meridian. Would we then have accomplished the task for which 
we are met? I ask, would the twenty-six nations here represented accept our 
recommendation to adopt the neutral meridian? I greatly fear that the pass- 
ing of the resolution would not in the least promote the settlement of the im- 
portant question before the Conference. The world has already at least eleven 
different first meridians. The adoption of the new meridian contemplated by 
the Delegates from France would, I apprehend, simply increase the number 
and proportionately i increase the difficulty which so many Delegates from all 
parts of the earth are assembed here to remove. 
This would be the practical effect of fhe passing of the resolution. If it had 
any effect, it would increase the difficulty, and I need not say that is not the 
object which the different Governments had in view when they sent Delegates 
to this Conference. The President has well pointed out in his opefing address 
the advantages which would be gained, and the great dangers which, at times, 
would be avoided by seafaring vessels having one common zero of longitude. 
Besides the benefits which would accrue to navigation, there are advantages of 
equal importance in connection with the regulation of Time, to spring, I trust, 
from our conclusions. 
It does not appear to me that the adoption of the motion would in any way 
advance these objects. I do not say that the principle of a neutral meridian is 
wrong, but to attempt to establish one would, I feel satisfied, be productive of 
no good result. A neutral meridian is excellent in theory, but I fear it is en- 
