February, ’23] 
BUSINESS PROCEEDINGS 
13 
The same committee was continued to draw up a constitution and by-laws and 
report early in the fall. 
The conference was then addressed by Dr. Kofoid, Dr. Schramm and Dr. Vernon 
Kellogg, relative to biological publications, the latter discussing the situation con¬ 
cerning bibliographies with particular reference to European conditions. The 
following committee was appointed to consider the subject of biological publications in 
cooperating with a similar committee of the Division of Biology and Agriculture, 
National Research Council: A. P. Hitchens, Army Medical School; I. F. Lewis, 
University of Virginia; C. A. Kofoid, University of California; D. R. Hooker, 
Johns Hopkins University. 
On August 4 and 5, 1922, the committee appointed to draw up a constitution met 
at Woods Hole, Mass. All members were present except Dr. Livingston whose place 
was filled by Prof. Herbert Osborn. 
The committee adopted three principles to be observed in setting up relations with 
existing organizations, viz: 
1. The federation should, for its benefit, utilize other organizations in accordance 
with their nature and purposes. 
2. The federation should, on the other hand, so direct its policies and methods 
as to strengthen the efforts of organizations with which it is affiliated. 
3. The federation should avoid unnecessary duplication of effort and expenditure. 
The proposed constitution was published in Science Sept. 29, 1922. Copies 
have been sent to each active member of this association and a supply is available 
for the use of those present at this meeting. 
It is assumed that the members have studied this constitution and are prepared to 
determine whether it shall be adopted and the Association take membership in the 
federation. I have recently been advised that the name has been changed to the 
Union of American Biological Societies. 
The question that naturally concerns us is in regard to the anticipated benefits 
that will result from this union. Substantially the same question was asked at the 
last annual meeting and the reply of our representative on the National Research 
Council was that it would enable biologists to control their own literature and enable 
the secretaries to hold a conference to avoid conflicts in programs and arrange sym¬ 
posia of interest to all. 
The objects as stated in the Constitution indicate the purpose is to stimulate 
biological investigations, organize and promote the interests of bibliographies and 
publication and to do those things of broad scope that the individual societies cannot 
do for themselves. 
These objects are worthy but it is difficult to see how this Association will profit 
greatly as a result of this new organization. Recently the principal inducement to 
membership centers around the possibility of better publication facilities. Improve¬ 
ment along these lines is very desirable but involves financial backing which must 
come either from the societies or from outside sources. 
Even if no profit accrues we should be willing to do our part in any movement that 
will benefit biology in general. 
It is evident that most of the Societies do not have sufficient funds to finance their 
share of any elaborate program for publications but it is possible that outside 
sources might be willing to do so. 
This association is in sound financial condition and with conservative management 
