Organizational Meeting of the National Academy of Sciences, 22-24 April 1863

The first meeting of the National Academy of Sciences took place 22-24 April 1863 at New York University. The meeting, the purpose of which was to settle the organization of the new Academy, was attended by up to thirty-two of the institution’s charter members. This first-hand account of the meeting was written by William Barton Rogers, a geologist and physicist who attended the meeting with his brother Robert, a chemist who was also a charter member of the Academy. W.B. Rogers became the Academy’s third President, serving from 1879 until his death in 1882. On the last day of this first meeting, he was appointed to a committee to arrange a book of members’ signatures.

The "Memoranda" presented below was transcribed from an undated manuscript in Rogers' hand. Pagination of manuscript is noted in parentheses.

Memoranda of the Meeting for Organising the National Academy of Sciences

Preliminary fact. My first information that Congress had incorporated such an Academy & that my name & that of Robert were on the list of the 50 Corporators, came from Prof. Gilliss, of Washington, who while on a business visit to Boston called at my office & asked me --how I liked the new Academy--thinking of course that my Cambridge Neighbors had acquainted me with the Scheme which they were so active in setting up. He showed great surprise at my ignorance of the matter, and gave such particulars as he knew about the plan, mentioning many of the names of the Corporators with the further statement that among the distinguished names not on the list was that of Geo. Bond the Astronomer of Cambridge. I need not record the indignant surprise with which I heard of this.

Some time after I recd. a Lithograph Circular from Senator Wilson announcing the action (2) of Congress and requesting a time to be named for holding a preliminary meeting of the Corporators for the purpose of organisation. Knowing really nothing of the purpose of the Scheme & very little of the names embodied in it--of which from Wyman & Cooke I have only hearsay reports, & finding both from what I could gather as to who were included in the list & who left out--that the organisation seemed little more than an enlargement of the Old Clique, I felt so little care to connect myself with it that I delayed replying to Mr. Wilson’s Circular for some weeks.

I at last concluded to write to him naming May as a convenient month for the meeting, & adding that as I was quite ignorant of the origin & plan of the Academy, I would be obliged to him for a copy of the Congressional act & a list of the Corporators.

On the very day on which this letter was mailed I recd. by way of Cambridge, with a note from Benj. Gould, a second Circular from Senator Wilson appointing a meeting on the (3) 22nd of April in the Chapel of the Univ. of New York.

As yet I had not seen the list of members & had recd. no information as to the origin of the plan save the meagre account given me by Gilliss. A few days later I learned from Prof Wyman and Cooke a few further particulars as to names not included. Among which were those of Prof. Lovering & Cooke. It was not however until I borrowed from B. Gould a copy of the Act of Incorporation that I became aware of the general purpose of the Organisation & learned the names of all the 50 Corporators. Of these I found many little or not at all known as Contributors to Science, & I was struck by the omission not only of Bond as already mentioned--but of Draper, Baird, Loomis & others of established reputation for scientific work.

B. Gould told me that he had been much occupied in planning the Academy & had written a great deal on the subject to Bache & I believe others. Indeed he seemed rather proud of the active part he had been taking.

(4) Some days before leaving for N. Y. & while I was hesitating as to my course a friend (Mr. Dorr) mentioned in confidence a piece of news he had just heard from my good friend C C J which though at the time I thought it a misconception has been so confirmed by subsequent events that I now believe it to be true. The story is that a Cambridge Prof. (T) mentioned to C. C. J. , as coming from Gould that my name was not on the list as furnished to Senator Wilson by those who cooked it up, and that he exclaimed against the omission & avowed that he would have nothing to do with the bill unless my name was added.

Such was the extent of my knowledge of these mysterious plans & proceedings when I entered the Hall of the Univ. of N. York on the morning of April 22..the time appointed for the meeting.

It is perhaps noteworthy that at the Brevoort House where I vainly endeavored to obtain lodging for myself & Robert—I found B. [Bache] & A. [Agassiz] & P. [Peirce] & G. [Gould] together with Frazer, Fairman R. as well as Senator W. & that these gentlemen did not invite me to join the conclave held in B.’s parlor or to join the dinner party at which they had the benefit of the Senator’s company.

(5) As Ro. [Robert] & I mounted the steps leading to the Chapel where the meeting was to be held we met Draper coming down. My heart was full, & as I overtook Jos. Henry on the landing above I spoke of my mortification at the omission of Draper & Bond..adding that it was not only a mistake but a wrong that had been committed & that such an indication of the Academy would defeat its success.

To this Henry replied that he had not been consulted & that he felt as I did on the subject.

The meeting was called to order by Sen. Wilson when he made a brief unobtrusive & pertinent address, after which Prof. Henry was called to the chair & Caswell appointed Secy. The number of Corporators present on this occasion was 31 or perhaps 32. At subsequent meetings it ranged from 25 to 28, Profs. Henry & Caswell continuing to perform the same duties as at first.

(6) At the suggestion of one of the members, (Agassiz I believe) those present were invited to express whatever views they might have as to the principles which should guide in organising the Academy & as to the objects to be promoted by it. After remarks by Agassiz, Peirce & others chiefly complimentary to Senator Wilson, & somewhat prematurely boastful of what the Academy was to achieve--I made a few observations—in which while expressing my thanks to Mr. Wilson for the patriotic earnestness with which he had labored in the cause of human progress, not only in this connection but in the wide field of his national services, I took occasion to express my deep regret & mortification to find missing from the list of Corporators the names of Bond & Draper & Baird & Loomis & others distinguished for their scientific labours. "Is it not a sad mistake, said I, if not a grievous wrong that in a society selected to represent the active sciences of the Country these brethren & co-workers of ours should have no place. I feel, (I continued) that I have no (7) right to be here when they are excluded, & you gentlemen, addressing myself to some around me, you must feel in your hearts that you have no claim to be here on such conditions." Some perhaps were unpleasantly startled by what I said, many showed by their look an earnest sympathy--no one ventured to gainsay or take offence at it. Some attempt was made by P. [Peirce] & G. [Gould] & A. [Agassiz] to avert the blow by talking of the rashness of men of Science who attempted to judge of the Merits of those with whose department of study they were not familiar--This led to some desultory talk about the danger of attempting too large a field & the necessity of concentrating the powers on special objects of investigation. A. [Agassiz] was earnest on this head & I while admitting the proposition in a qualified degree--showed on the other hand that too exclusive devotion to specialty after the German fashion was far less fruitful of high discoveries & of practical results than the more varied course of thought which had wrought in this country such marvels of practical invention & which by the same law of mind must work similar effects in every field of knowledge. (8) This discussion over, a committee of 9 nominated ostensibly by the chair was appointed to consider a report on the Organisation & Rules for the Govt. of the Academy.

We then adjourned to meet in the afternoon.

The Comm. of Organisation consisted of the following persons. Bache, B. Gould, Agassiz, Gibbs, Frazer, Peirce, Caswell, B. Silliman, W. B. Rogers though not in this order. My name standing 3rd on the list.

The Comm. met about 3 PM--Bache, Chairman & Caswell Secy. The Chairman produced from his portfolio a pile of Mss. containing a draft of Rules or as he first entitled them Laws for the govt. of the Acad. & proceeded to submit them one by one to criticism.

The first nine articles were passed upon without much discussion & after a few unimportant changes. The tenth relating to officers occupied more time and was altered in several particulars. The no. of Vice Prest. was changed from two to one--the no. of members to be annually elected to (9) the Council was reduced from (I think) six to four & the share of the Council in the Control of the Academy was much curtailed. But the great feature of the article in its original form that of having the President--Vice P. Sec. & Treasurer to hold their offices for life, excited not a whisper of comment or objection from any one of my eight colleagues on the Comm. They cheerfully voted for this provision along with the rest of the Articles as Amended & the chairman blandly & as if nothing remarkable had occurred passed to the next article.

Though strongly moved I said nothing, anxious to see whether indeed my colleagues would submit to such enslavement & resolved to call them back to the subject before our session closed.

The Article next in order prescribing the duties of the Officers was passed without material change except in the important feature of the duties or rather prerogatives of the president. In the original draft he was required to confer with the Council in framing committees of investigation & in other responsible scientific duties, but the clause was so amended as to exclude the Council from such participation, (10) giving to the Prest. almost absolute control of all the scientific action of the Academy & centering in his hands the power of dispensing the prizes of scientific labor & reputation as he pleased.

The work of formal criticism proceeded without any marked occurrence until we had passed through some twenty of the Articles submitted by Bache, when a short adjournment was taken. As B. was closing his portfolio I rose and calmly but very earnestly recalled the attention of the Comm. to Article 10. I reminded them that I had remained silent when they all without an objection voted for the provision which gave their officers tenure for life. I pointed out the utter inadmissibility of such a principle among the scientific men of this country & indeed any where. I said that to propose such a govt. for the Academy, would I thought ensure its quick destruction. The idea would be repelled as monstrous. And I asked the Prest. whether in the event of his being elected to that office, he with his known caution & respect for opinion would dare to assume such a responsibility as this.

At once several of the Comm. startled by the peril into which they had been drawn proposed to amend the provision (11) & the chairman silently wrote down the term of 6 years which had been suggested by Gould or some other member present because it was the Senatorial term & the Academy had been created chiefly by the Action of the Senate! I objected to this, as being longer than I thought right or prudent. But no one sustained me in my dissent & the Article was accepted in this form.

The afternoon session of the Comm. was devoted to considering the remaining rules which were adopted with various but comparatively unimportant alterations.

The provision in Art. 25 giving the Prest. Power to act of himself upon propositions from the Govt. of the U S or any of its branches I objected to,..& proposed to add--by & with the advice of the Council.-- But I found no one on the Comm. to sustain my view. This & other features of the Rules which I felt were calculated to concentrate undue control & dangerous patronage in hands of a few I hoped to see criticised & probably amended in general (12) meeting & I did not care to retard the work of the Comm. by persistent objections.

The preliminary task was completed late in the afternoon (22nd)--and the Academy was called together in general meeting in the evening to hear the Report of the Comm.

Prof. Henry in the chair, Secy Caswell was called on to read the Rules as they had been adopted by the Comm.

Little or no discussion took place on the first Six Articles--but that part of the Seventh which prescribes that every member shall take the Oath of Allegiance &c--gave rise to much animated remark. In its original form the Oath was copied verbatim as required of the Senators & other political or military officers of the Govt. It was in no respect too stringent for them & was such as I & each one present would I supposed be ready at any moment to take. But it entirely excluded at any future time the admission of a person who may have [been] even slightly implicated in the Rebellion & it struck me as of doubtful propriety for two reasons--first because it looked like a parade (13) of loyalty when it should be assumed that none but the most thoroughly loyal men had been selected in forming our body--& secondly it seemed not to comport with that entirely Catholic spirit which should characterise an association having Science for its object & standing aloof from all political actions and opinions. I made no objection to the Oath but heartily endorsed it. Yet it seemed to me that it was practically unimportant to retain it, & that we would place ourselves on higher ground at home as well as abroad by omitting it.

In these views I was ably seconded by Dr. Newberry--& Stephen Alexander, & supported on less satisfactory grounds by Leidy & Gilliss. But I had created an opportunity for loud declaration of loyalty & Bache--Gould--Barnard & Lesley & Gibbs made the most of it. One or two of these gentlemen are known to have halted between two opinions for a long time in the beginning of the rebellion. But their declamation was so blazing, (14) that I began to think that in spite of a lifetime spent in loyal labors for right & human liberty I might by some present by suspected of an alliance with the Copperhead & therefore I made a short speech declaring not only my loyalty but my utter abolitionism.

Yet I shall not be astonished to hear some of the to hear some of these days my doubts about the propriety of the Oath adduced as evidence of a hesitating patriotism & that too by the man who watched the game with selfish cunning & did not but declare for loyalty until he found it to be the stronger side.

At this meeting Stephen Alexander made the striking remark that while he did not assume it as a supposable case that such a body as this could come under clique govt. he thought that the Rules which had been read were as admirably adopted to secure such an end as if they had been specially contrived for that purpose.

He advocated I think most justly the necessity for great deliberation in fixing upon one plan (15) of organisation & urged with this that action on the subject be postponed for some meeting now [?], & that the draft of rules & regulations prepared by the Comm. be printed and distributed among the members, & that after they shall have had time for considering several provisions this Academy shall be called together for the special purpose of discussing & acting upon them. In this proposition I heartily seconded him. Indeed it was through my prompting, as I sat next him, that he spoke out as he did. The matter of the Oath was laid over for the next meeting & the Academy adjourned to--10 AM on Thursday 23rd next.

Thursday 23. April

We met according to adjournment at 10 AM to continue the consideration of the Rules &c reported by the Comm. on Organisation. The Question in regard to the Oath was settled by substituting in the "Rules" the general description of the Oath in place of the full transcript of its language originally proposed & this change was generally approved.

(16) The 10th Article was not suffered to pass unchallenged. Prof. Newberry to whom I had made known the proceedings in the Comm. objected to 6 years been [sic] as being too long a term. Frazer, Peirce, Agassiz & Lesley advocated this as a longer time--Lesley & Frazer avowed that they wanted to see the President with despotic power. Agassiz & Gould talked of the perpetual Secy of the French Academy & Frazer thought that it was insufficient reason to fix upon 6 years that the Senators were elected for that time. Newberry & I replied to these Sophistries, urging the serious perils to the Acad. which a six year mismanagement would entail & contending for a shorter term. But the 6 year clause was carried--by a large majority.

During this part of the morning we were assembled in the Chapel--out we now moved into the Chancellor’s room where we had held our session the previous evening & where all the subsequent meetings were held. Here resuming work we went through the various articles seriatim--making here & there an alteration of no great moment until we came to (17) the Article (5) requiring every member not excused for certain specified causes, to furnish to the Academy every two years at least one memoir on some subject conducive to science. This I objected to chiefly on two grounds--1st. many of the most active & productive investigators do not deal in "Memoirs," but present the fruits of their labors in brief papers containing often in the space of one page more actual addition to knowledge than a quarto of numerical details. 2nd. A work of great labor may often require much more than 2 years to be in a condition to be safely reported on & the requirement of the Rule would be a stimulus to hasty work, giving us long Memoirs enough perhaps, but loading our transactions with crudities & errors. After long discussion & many attempts at modifying the article, by extending the time to 4 or more years & by accepting as equivalent to memoirs any important [word illegible] contribution (18) to science however briefly described, all meeting with more or less opposition--I moved to strike out the entire provision--& to my great satisfaction the motion was carried. The remaining articles were soon disposed of & the meeting was adjourned with the understanding that the Rules as adopted should be printed & distributed among the members, the next morning for final adoption.

Friday 25.[sic] April

The Acad. met at 11 AM--but the printed Rules were not ready for distribution until after 12. Meanwhile after disposing of some matter of slight importance, which I do not recall, the prescribed Oath was administered to the Academy. First it was slowly read by Caswell to the Chariman Prof. Henry--both standing--the Chairman with raised hand repeating the words as they were read. Then the Chairman administered the Oath to the members according to the same form.

The Academy now proceeded to the election of officers--when (19) Bache was elected Prest. Dana Vice Prest. Agassiz For. Secy. Gibbs Home Secy & Fairman Rogers Treasurer. Before the balloting began, Jos. Henry asked to be allowed to decline nomination to any office in the Academy, as his duties as a public Officer in the Smith.[sonian] Ins.[titution] forbad him to assume any others connected with the Govt.

The votes for Bache-Dana & Agassiz were nearly unanimous--for Gibbs about two thirds & for Fairman R. not much more than a majority of those present.

The four Councillors were then elected in succession. In each case several names were presented--My own was repeated every time & I believe always either announced or seconded by Jos. Henry. But although the vote for me was large--the banded strength of certain parties succeeded each time in keeping me out, electing Davis, Rutherford, Torrey, & to the amazement of many P. Lesley.

I should have mentioned that before proceeding to the election--the members of the Academy were called on by name to specify the class to which (20) they proposed attaching themselves, as well as the Section of the Class. I hesitated & at first mentioned B. Geology--but immediately after before the first was recorded or even heard by the Secy. Declared for Class A. Sect. Physics.

Agassiz advised & rather urged me to join B--but I declined. He afterwards said that his Object was to have me made Chairman of B & Newberry told me that he said the same thing to him--when that class met to elect a Chairman. I confess that one impulse that had me to avoid that class--was my repugnance to any association with Lesley. Silliman Senr. was chosen Chairman, the class numbering only 3, Agassiz, Newberry & Lesley.

The very important part of the closing transactions remains to be noticed. Feeling the vital importance of securing further time & a fuller meeting of the Academy for considering & finally adopting a plan of Organisation, & certain that it was the purpose of those interested to have the present Code with its many almost intolerable features permanently fixed upon the Society I resolved the preceding evening to endeavor to have (21) the adoption made merely provisional, & for that purpose I prepared the following Resolution--"Resolved that the draft of Rules & regulations as submitted in print this the 25th April 1863--be adopted for the Govt. of the Academy provisionally until the stated meeting in Jan. when they shall be finally considered & acted on." I was prepared to submit this & found that Newberry Gilliss & several others were earnestly desirous to have this or something equivalent done before our meeting closed. Rutherford also agreed on the importance of such a postponement of the final action of the Academy on their organisation--but he thought there were technical obstacles to a provisional adoption of the Rules.

Accordingly just as I was rising to offer my Resolt., Rutherford moved as an equivalent that the Rules &c as printed be adopted after striking out the Article on Alteration of the Laws (the next to the last in the printed code). (22) I at once rose & very deliberately read my Resolution above stated, & asked him & the other members if it was the distinct understand that Mr. Rutherford’s motion would in its effect be equivalent to mine, leaving the whole subject of the Rules & each & every Article of the Code subject at the Jan. meeting to immediate alteration, additions & repeal. The answer was that the effect would [be] the same as if my resolution had been adopted—I then withdrew my Resolution & Mr. R.’s motion was adopted.

In this view Dr. Newberry, who fully sympathised in my opinion heartily coincided. In good faith therefore the Academy is (23) bound to consider at once any proposition for changing the code which I or others may see fit to offer at the meeting in question.

Since returning to Boston I have recd. by mail a copy of the Revised Rules as prepared by the Comm. appointed to correct the style & arrangement of the Articles, & this copy contains the Article just referred to as if it still formed a part of our code!! This committee was composed of Frazer &...but the work was done no doubt mainly by F.