THE AUSTRALIAN CHEMICAL INSTITUTE. 
a considerable number of highly trained men in England declined to ~ 
associate themselves with the Institute. Moreover, the Institute could 
scarcely be regarded as a body which embraced the large number of men 
employed as works chemists. For the career of public analyst, however, 
the qualifications granted by the Institute were generally regarded as 
essential. . 
It is necessary to touch on these matters, since they entered largely 
into the discussions which took place before the Australian Chemical 
Institute was formed, and it must be admitted that, to a certain extent, 
its founders were guided by a désire to avoid, if possible, any of the 
results which had been found unsatisfactory in Great Britain. The 
scheme to create an Australian Branch of the British Institute never 
matured ; it was swept aside when discussions began to take place on the 
creation of a new body formed and controlled in this country.. Even 
“had such a branch been formed, it is doubtful if it would ever have 
been able to control the chemical profession in Australia as a whole, 
since the powers delegated to it by the parent body were too limited 
in character, and would undoubtedly have proved a serious handicap. 
Whilst this proposal was under discussion, a few works chemists 
got together and formed themselves into a body named “The Aus- 
tralasian Chemical Association.” This association was moulded on the 
lines of a trade union, and persons in a position of control were ~ 
expressly prohibited from joining. No qualifications for membership 
were required, and the objects were principally the protection of the 
interests of persons employed on chemical work. One of the indirect 
results of its formation was to set a large number of men in Melbourne 
talking and thinking out a scheme, which ultimately took practical 
shape. The notion of a chemical trade union was put aside as unsuit- 
. able, and from the discussion which took place one prevailing idea 
grew up—the creation of a professional institute which should guarantee 
to the public the ability of its members and demand that skilled services 
should be adequately rewarded. 
Thoroughly imbued with the prevailing spirit, Professor Masson, 
whose lively interest and never-ending resource may well entitle him 
to be called the “Father of the Institute,’ came over to Sydney and 
addressed a meeting of chemists on the 26th July, 1916. A keen dis- 
cussion took place, and the meeting finally formed itself into a com- 
mittee to promote the formation of a “chemical association.” The 
writer was appointed provisional secretary and convener, and at a 
subsequent meeting an executive committee was appointed. The Sydney 
executive at once commenced active work, and similar committees were 
formed in Melbourne and Brisbane without delay, followed at a later 
date by committees in Adelaide and Perth. Discussions took place 
between these committees by correspondence during the next six months, 
after which a conference was held in Sydney on the 10th January, 
1917, which was attended by Dr. Cooksey (N.S.W.), Professor Masson 
(Vic.), Professor Rennie (S.A.), and Mr, J. B. Henderson (Qld.). 
Tn the previous discussions, some considerable difficulty had arisen over 
the name to be adopted, but the conference soon arrived at a decision, 
and, in addition, drew up a draft constitution. One of the great diffi- 
culties which had to be surmounted was the choice of a suitable scheme 
for the formation of a central executive. It was largely owing to the 
163 
