700 
scope of the astronomical and other re- 
searches of the Naval Observatory and the 
duties of its staff with reference thereto. 
When appointments or details are to be 
made to the office of Astronomical Director, 
Director of the Nautical Almanac, astron- 
omer or assistant astronomer in the Naval 
Observatory, the Board of Visitors may 
recommend to the Secretary of the Navy 
suitable persons to fill such offices, but such 
recommendations shall be determined only 
by a majority vote of the members present 
at a regularly called meeting of the Board 
held in the city of Washington. 
Special attention is at this point called to 
the fact that the appointment of a Board of 
Visitors to the Naval Observatory was rec- 
ommended by Secretary Tracy in 1891, has 
been repeatedly urged by Superintendents 
of the Observatory, and is renewed by F. EH. 
Chadwick, Chief of Bureau of Equipment, 
and C. H. Davis, Superintendent United 
States Naval Observatory, in the ‘ Proposed 
Organization of a Naval Observatory,’ 
dated September 7, 1897 (Appendix, Ex- 
hibit B). The duties of the Board, as de- 
fined by these naval officers, would be in 
part as follows: ‘‘ It lays down the general 
course of policy to be pursued for the com- 
ing year, including printing and publication 
of observations ; fixes the estimates for the 
astronomical departments ; nominates to fill 
vacancies in the astronomical staff (either 
by appointment or promotion) ; recom- 
mends as to repairs and acquisitions of new 
instruments. 
If a permanent Board of Visitors as above 
recommended is established as a part of the 
administration of the Naval Observatory, it 
is evident that to it should be committed 
these questions of policy to be pursued in 
the conduct of the observatory which are 
contained in the memorandum (Appendix, 
Exhibit B), submitted to the present Board 
by the Secretary of the Navy, under date of 
June 28,1899. Wetherefore abstain from 
SCIENCE. 
[N. S. Von. X. No. 256. 
specific recommendations upon these sub- 
jects, many of which indeed call for a more 
prolonged and minute study of the situa- 
tion than the members of the present Board. 
have been able to give to it. 
We heartily endorse the recommendation 
contained in your report as Secretary of the 
Navy for the year 1897, that ‘‘ the statute 
authorizing the appointment of professors 
of mathematics be so amended that without 
disturbing those who now hold office, which 
would be unjust to them, no further ap- 
pointments shall be made’’ to the staff of 
Naval Observatory (Appendix, Exhibit L). 
In addition to the reasons for this action 
which are urged by you in that report, we 
submit for your consideration, that the con- 
ditions under which astronomical work is. 
done are so different from those which ob- 
tain in the naval service, that a fixed tenure 
of office with the certainty of a retiring 
pension in no way dependent upon the zeal 
or efficiency with which service has been 
rendered, may easily produce diminished 
diligence and a purely perfunctory discharge 
of duties. A more serious evil of the ex- 
isting system of naval commissions for as- 
tronomers, and one which has been forcibly 
exemplified within the past decade, is the 
compulsory retirement at the age of sixty- 
two of astronomers, who are then in the 
maturity of their powers, and who under 
civilian appointments would continue to 
render to the observatory a service of un- 
diminished efficiency, which they now trans- 
fer to other institutions. The reasons which 
impel the retirement of a naval officer from 
active service upon attaining a fixed age 
have no application in the case of an as- 
tronomer, and he should be placed upon the 
same footing with other officers of the gov- 
ernment performing strictly civilian duties. 
If astronomers are appointed to the 
Naval Observatory from civil life to suc- 
ceed retiring professors of mathematics, 
the salaries provided should be sufficient, 
