94 UNIVERSAL OR COSMIC TIME. 



consideration of the conditions necessary to satisfy a neutral Meri- 

 dian. For to be of importance as a Firso Meridian among others, and 

 in order to admit of no ambiguity it must contain in itself a depar- 

 ture from the principle of neutrality by the determination of its 

 position of Longitude through an observatory in the neighbourhood 

 to be designated authoritatively. 



The idea of selection on grounds of neutrality was therefore set 

 aside by a great majority. The remark of M. Janssen, on the occa- 

 sion of the discussion of this subject must be recognized as most just. 

 Namely, that the Meridian of Ferro, introduced at the commence- 

 ment of the 18th century, through De LTsle, and subsequently 

 brought into common use, lying 20° to the west of that of Paris, by 

 that fact furnished a marked objection to its selection as the common 

 First Meridian, for from this circumstance it had become purely a 

 French Meridian, and thus, to the great disadvantage of all geography, 

 the Meridian of Ferro had lost its international or neutral character. 



After the theory of a neutral Meridian was set aside, the grounds 

 on wliich Greenwich as the starting point of longitude was advocated, 

 came into prominence with their fullest force, and the choice of it as 

 the initial Meridian, followed almost with unanimity, France and 

 Brazil as advocates of the neutrality principle, abstained from voting, 

 and only the representative of San Domingo, M. de Galvan, voted 

 positively against Gi^eenwich. The latter, however, added that his 

 neo-ative vote must only be taken as an expression of his sympathy 

 with the principle of neutrality. 



The three succeeding Resolutions, the numbering of Longitudes 

 with different signs, East and West from Greenwich ; the acceptance 

 of an Universal Day for special purposes ; and the accord of this 

 Universal Day with the Time Reckoning of civil life under the 

 First Meridian, were in their essence internally connected one with 

 the other. The discussion in the Conference accordingly w'as directed 

 at the same time equally to the three Resolutions, although the vote 

 upon them was given on each proposition separately. It is a matter 

 worthy of attention, that the second, which set forth the main 

 principle, was the only one which obtained an almost unanimous vote, 

 while for the two others many countries abstained from voting, some 

 of the smaller territories even voting negatively. An explanation of this 

 manifestation is found in the fact that a great number of the Delegates 

 were not provided with special instructions in regard to particular 

 questions, but had only received as a rule of conduct that they should 

 hold to the Resolutions of the Congress at Rome, which in these two 

 particular points had decided in the opposite direction. These Dele- 

 gates evidently did not feel themselves at liberty to depart from what 

 had been laid down at Rome, even when their own personal views 

 in the course of the discussions at Washington rather inclined them 

 to the prevailing direction of the Resolutions there brought forward, 



