276 MEMOIR OF AUGUSTUS DE MORGAN. 



1861. and will emerge, if indeed it emerge at all, with crippled utility, 

 diminished honour, and wasted resources. This is my opinion. 

 I desire no one else to assent unless his own experience of col- 

 lective action should make him see the danger as I do, after that 

 reflection which I know my proceeding will excite. I do not 

 affirm that the substitution of one President for another is in 

 itself a dangerous act. I look at the whole history of the 

 Society for some years past, and on that whole I am irresistibly 

 impelled to form a very strong opinion. 



I will add something which may tend to prevent a greater 

 calamity than my own refusal to act. It ought to have been 

 evident to the promoters of the recent division that the new by- 

 laws have the effect of making what is called the balloting list 

 into two or more, whenever two sets of nominators are therein 

 exhibited. Usually when parties contest such a question each 

 gives the whole of its own list, and any two lists are not the less 

 two because there may happen to be many names common to 

 both. It is most expedient that those who originate a second 

 list should take care to ascertain that those whose names they 

 take from the other list are willing to serve in either event. For 

 two lists which differ by one name only, especially when the 

 name is that of the proposed President, may symbolise two very 

 different principles. It might easily happen that many of the 

 common names might decline to give such assent to the principle 

 of one of the lists, as would be inferred from their accepting 

 office at the hands of a majority. It cannot reasonably be 

 expected that any nominee should rise at the meeting, and 

 declare his intention of not serving except on one contingency. 

 I duly considered the propriety of such course, and rejected it 

 for three reasons. First, it would have had such an appearance 

 of disrespect to an old friend as it would have been impossible 

 to neutralise, save by such explanations as would have brought 

 on a discussion w r hich it was not for me to originate. Secondly, 

 because such a declaration a dictation, as it would have been 

 called would have been a firebrand thrown into the meeting by 

 way of commencing the discussion. Thirdly, because the 

 course announced would have caused difference of opinion among 

 those who thought as I did concerning the policy of the oppo- 

 sition to the Council. 



The true way of secur'^g a working Council would be for 

 those who differ to take care, each side for itself, to present a 

 list of those whom they have reason to know to be willing to 



