FORMATION OF GEOLOGICAL SOCIETIES IN UNITED STATES 29 



that its spirit, necessarily and properly, is not favorable to the development 

 of any special work through its own agency. 



4. The geologists, as a body, have no way of expressing their views on 

 important State, national, or international measures, except through the 

 medium of the American Association, at the meetings of which there is a per- 

 ceptible and increasing lack of attendance and interest on the part of geolo- 

 gists, in consequence of which the actual views of the geologists of the country 

 on such questions can not be obtained and expressed correctly. 



5. There is no strictly geological magazine or journal in America. 



6. There is no strictly geological society in America. 



7. There are numerous such societies and journals in Europe, as well as 

 journals and societies devoted exclusively to the branches of paleontology and 

 mineralogy. 



The committee desire also to disclaim any intention to trespass on the field 

 and plans of the American Association for the Advancement of Science or to 

 ciiticise it in any way as to the discharge of its functions. Its tendency is 

 to popularize science and to advance its acceptance by the world by diffusing 

 scientific knowledge' and by announcing important discoveries, and, as such, 

 its sphere of activity is one that no special scientific body can occupy, but 

 which still will be aided by the existence of tributary organizations, such as 

 that contemplated by this circular. 



At Montreal responses were read from the following geologists : S. A. Miller, 

 James Macfarlane, Franklin Piatt, W. P. Blake, J. D. Dana, P. A. Chadbourne, 

 J. E. Todd, E. W. Claypole, Wm. M. Davis, M. C. Read, Chas. E. Billin, 

 W. H. Pettee, Geo. H. Stone, John Collett, R. E. Call, Warren Upham, W. G. 

 Piatt, C. A. Ashburner, R. T. Cross, G. K. Warren, A. Winchell, Robert Bell, 

 P. W. Schaeffer, S. E. Tillman, E. O. Ulrich, C. H. Hitchcock, Edward Orton, 

 W. J. Davis, J. W. Dawson. 



The official report of the proceedings at Montreal states that A. Winchell 

 was chosen chairman and C. H. Hitchcock secretary. Several sessions were 

 held. Ninety answers to the circular which had been issued were reported 

 by the chairman of the committee, all but two of which spoke favorably of 

 the project. The secretary (Williams) reported answers from 30 persons and 

 S. A. Miller reported answers from six persons, all favorable, making a total 

 of 126 opinions in favor of and only two dissenting from the formation of the 

 proposed society. 



A committee consisting of Jed Hotchkiss, R. P. Whitfield, and C. H. Hitch- 

 cock, appointed to consider the situation, recommended that the first step to 

 be taken should be the establishment of a geological magazine. This report 

 was accepted and adopted. The Cincinnati committee also reported a pro- 

 posed constitution, which was discussed and laid upon the table pending 

 further labors by the committee and a report at the Minneapolis meeting in 

 1883. 



At the Minneapolis meeting of the American Association for the Advance- 

 ment of Science (1883) those who had been active for the proposed geological 

 society met August 21 and listened to further discussions and some objections. 

 Some dilatory motions were brought forward and carried, namely, that a 

 committee be appointed to confer with the Mineralogical and Geological Sec- 

 tion of the Philadelphia Academy of Sciences with reference to the formation 

 of an American society and the establishment of a geological magazine. Prior 



