The Project Gutenberg EBook of International Congress of Arts and Science, Volume I, by Various This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org Title: International Congress of Arts and Science, Volume I Philosophy and Metaphysics Author: Various Editor: Howard J. Rogers Release Date: December 10, 2011 [EBook #38267] Language: English Character set encoding: UTF-8 *** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK INT'L CONGRESS--ARTS, SCIENCE, VOL I *** Produced by Robin Monks, Carol Brown, and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net. This file was produced from images generously made available by The Internet Archive. Illustration: Book Cover Illustration: Title Page OF THE Cambridge Edition There have been printed seven hundred and fifty sets of which this is copy No. 337 INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS OF ARTS AND SCIENCE Illustration: Alma Mater ALMA MATER Photogravure of the Statue by Daniel C. French The colossal figure of French's Alma Mater adorns the fine suite of stone steps leading up to the picturesque library building of Columbia University. It is a bronze statue, gilded with pure gold. The female figure typifying "Alma Mater" is represented as sitting in a chair of classic shape, her elbows resting on the arms of the chair. Both hands are raised. The right hand holds and is supported by a sceptre. On her head is a classic wreath, and on her lap lies an open book, from which her eyes seem to have just been raised in meditation. Drapery falls in semi-classic folds from her neck to her sandalled feet, only the arms and neck being left bare. Every University man cherishes a kindly feeling for his Alma Mater, and the famous American sculptor, Daniel C. French, has been most successful in his artistic creation of the "Fostering Mother" spiritualized—the familiar ideal of the mother of minds trained to thought and consecrated to intellectual service. INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS OF ARTS AND SCIENCE EDITED BY HOWARD J. ROGERS, A.M., LL.D. director of congresses VOLUME I PHILOSOPHY AND METAPHYSICS LONDON NEW YORK comprising Lectures on Philosophy in the Nineteenth Century, Philosophy of Religion, Sciences of the Ideal, Problems of Metaphysics, The Theory of Science, and Logic Illustration: University Alliance logo UNIVERSITY ALLIANCE Copyright 1906 by Houghton, Mifflin & Co. all rights reserved Copyright 1908 by University Alliance ILLUSTRATIONS VOLUME I facing page Alma Mater Frontispiece Photogravure from the statue by Daniel C. French Dr. Howard J. Rogers 1 Photogravure from a photograph Dr. Simon Newcomb 135 Photogravure from a photograph The University of Paris in the Nineteenth Century 168 Photogravure from the painting by Otto Knille TABLE OF CONTENTS VOLUME I THE HISTORY OF THE CONGRESS 1 Howard J. Rogers, A.M., LL.D. Programme 47 Purpose and Plan of the Congress 50 Organization of the Congress 52 Officers of the Congress 53 Speakers and Chairmen 54 Chronological Order of Proceedings 77 Programme of Social Events 81 List of Ten-Minute Speakers 82 THE SCIENTIFIC PLAN OF THE CONGRESS 85 Hugo Muensterberg, Ph.D., LL.D. Introductory Address. The Evolution of the Scientific Investigator 135 Simon Newcomb, Ph.D., LL.D. NORMATIVE SCIENCE The Sciences of the Ideal 151 By Prof. Josiah Royce, Ph.D., LL.D. Philosophy. Philosophy: Its Fundamental Conceptions and its Methods 173 By Prof. George Holmes Howison, LL.D. The Development of Philosophy in the Nineteenth Century 194 By Prof. George Trumbull Ladd, D.D., LL.D. Metaphysics. The Relations Between Metaphysics and the Other Sciences 227 By Prof. Alfred Edward Taylor, M.A. The Present Problems of Metaphysics 246 By Prof. Alexander Thomas Ormond, Ph.D., Ll.D. Philosophy of Religion. The Relation of the Philosophy of Religion to the Other Sciences 263 By Prof. Otto Pfleiderer, D.D. Main Problems of the Philosophy of Religion: Psychology and Theory Of Knowledge in the Science of Religion 275 By Prof. Ernst Troeltsch, D.D. Some Roots and Factors of Religion 289 By Prof. Alexander T. Ormond. Logic. The Relations of Logic to Other Disciplines 296 By Prof. William Alexander Hammond, Ph.D. The Field of Logic 313 By Prof. Frederick J. E. Woodbridge, LL.D. Methodology of Science. On the Theory of Science 333 By Prof. Wilhelm Ostwald, LL.D. The Content and Validity of the Causal Law 353 By Prof. Benno Erdmann, Ph.D. Illustration: Howard J. Rogers HOWARD J. ROGERS, A.M., LL.D. Howard Jason Rogers, born Stephentown, Rensselaer Co., N. Y., November 16, 1861; graduated from Williams College, 1884; admitted to bar, 1877; Superintendent New York State Exhibit World's Columbian Exposition, 1893; Deputy State Superintendent Public Institution, 1895-1899; Republican Director Department of Education and Social Economy of U. S. Commission to Paris Exposition 1900; Chief Department of Education, St. Louis Exposition, 1904; First. Asst. Commissioner State Department of Education, N. Y., since 1904, when he received degree of A.M. from Columbia and degree of LL.D. from Northwestern University. He is an officer of the Legion of Honor of France; Chevalier of San Maurice and Lazare, Italy; Chevalier de l'Etoile Polaire, Sweden; Chevalier Nat. order of Leopold, Belgium; and officer of the Red Eagle, Germany. THE HISTORY OF THE CONGRESS BY HOWARD J. ROGERS A.M., LL.D. The forces which bring to a common point the thousandfold energies of a universal exposition can best promote an international congress of ideas. Under national patronage and under the spur of international competition the best products and the latest inventions of man in science, in literature, and in art are grouped together in orderly classification. Whether the motive underlying the exhibits be the promotion of commerce and trade, or whether it be individual ambition, or whether it be national pride and loyalty, the resultant is the same. The space within the boundaries of the exposition is a forum of the nations where equal rights are guaranteed to every representative from any quarter of the globe, and where the sovereignty of each nation is recognized whenever its flag floats over a national pavilion or an exhibit area. The productive genius of every governed people contends in peaceful rivalry for world recognition, and the exposition becomes an international clearing-house for practical ideas. For the demonstration of the value of these products men thoroughly skilled in their development and use are sent by the various exhibitors. The exposition by the logic of its creation thus gathers to itself the expert representatives of every art and industry. For at least two months in the exposition period there are present the members of the international jury of awards, selected specially by the different governments for their thorough knowledge, theoretical and practical, of the departments to which they are assigned, and selected further for their ability to impress upon others the correctness of their views. The renown of a universal exposition brings, as visitors, students and investigators bent upon the solution of problems and anxious to know the latest contributions to the facts and the theories which underlie every phase of the world's development. The material therefore is ready at hand with which to construct the framework of a conference of parts, or a congress of the whole of any subject. It was a natural and logical step to accompany the study of the exhibits with a debate on their excellence, an analysis of their growth, and an argument for their future. Hence the congress. The exposition and the congress are correlative terms. The former concentres the visible products of the brain and hand of man; the congress is the literary embodiment of its activities. Yet it was not till the Paris Exposition of 1889 that the idea of a series of congresses, international in membership and universal in scope, was fully developed. The three preceding expositions, Paris, 1878, Philadelphia, 1876, and Vienna, 1873, had held under their auspices many conferences and congresses, and indeed the germ of the congress idea may be said to have been the establishment of the International Scientific Commission in connection with the Paris Exposition of 1867; but all of these meetings were unrelated and sometimes almost accidental in their organization, although many were of great scientific interest and value. The success of the series of seventy congresses in Paris in 1889 led the authorities of the World's Columbian Exposition in 1893 to establish the World's Congress Auxiliary designed "to supplement the exhibit of material progress by the Exposition, by a portrayal of the wonderful achievements of the new age in science, literature, education, government, jurisprudence, morals, charity, religion, and other departments of human activity, as the most effective means of increasing the fraternity, progress, prosperity, and peace of mankind." The widespread interest in this series of meetings is a matter easily within recollection, but they were in no wise interrelated to each other, nor more than ordinarily comprehensive in their scope. It remained for the Paris Exposition of 1900 to bring to a perfect organization this type of congress development. By ministerial decree issued two years prior to the exposition the conduct of the department was set forth to the minutest detail. One hundred twenty-five congresses, each with its separate secretary and organizing committee, were authorized and grouped under twelve sections corresponding closely to the exhibit classification. The principal delegate, M. Gariel, reported to a special commission, which was directly responsible to the government. The department was admirably conducted and reached as high a degree of success as a highly diversified, ably administered, but unrelated system of international conferences could. And yet the attendance on a majority of these congresses was disappointing, and in many there was scarcely any one present outside the immediate circle of those concerned in its development. If this condition could prevail in Paris, the home of arts and letters, in the immediate centre of the great constituency of the University and of many scientific circles and learned societies, and within easy traveling distance of other European university and literary centres, it was fair to presume that the usefulness of this class of congress was decreasing. It certainly was safe to assume, on the part of the authorities of the St. Louis Exposition of 1904, that such a series could not be a success in that city, owing to its geographical position and the limited number of university and scientific circles within a reasonable traveling distance. Something more than a repetition of the stereotyped form of conference was admitted to be necessary in order to arouse interest among scholars and to bring credit to the Exposition. This was the serious problem which confronted the Exposition of St. Louis. No exposition was ever better fitted to serve as the groundwork of a congress of ideas than that of St. Louis. The ideal of the Exposition, which was created in time and fixed in place to commemorate a great historic event, was its educational influence. Its appeal to the citizens of the United States for support, to the Federal Congress for appropriations, and to foreign governments for coöperation, was made purely on this basis. For the first time in the history of expositions the educational influence was made the dominant factor and the classification and installation of exhibits made contributory to that principle. The main purpose of the Exposition was to place within reach of the investigator the objective thought of the world, so classified as to show its relations to all similar phases of human endeavor, and so arranged as to be practically available for reference and study. As a part of the organic scheme a congress plan was contemplated which should be correlative with the exhibit features of the Exposition, and whose published proceedings should stand as a monument to the breadth and enterprise of the Exposition long after its buildings had disappeared and its commercial achievements grown dim in the minds of men. DEVELOPMENT OF THE CONGRESS The Department of Congresses, to which was to be intrusted this difficult task, was not formed until the latter part of 1902, although the question was for a year previous the subject of many discussions and conferences between the President of the Exposition, Mr. Francis; the Director of Exhibits, Mr. Skiff; the Chief of the Department of Education, Mr. Rogers; President Nicholas Murray Butler of Columbia University, and President William R. Harper of Chicago University. To the disinterested and valuable advice of the two last-named gentlemen during the entire history of the Congress the Exposition is under heavy obligations. During this period proposals had been made to two men of international reputation to give all their time for two years to the organization of a plan of congresses which should accomplish the ultimate purpose of the Exposition authorities. Neither one, however, could arrange to be relieved of the pressure of his regular duties, and the entire scheme of supervision was consequently changed. The plan adopted was based upon the idea of an advisory board composed of men of high literary and scientific standing who should consider and recommend the kind of congress most worthy of promotion, and the details of its development. In November, 1902, Howard J. Rogers, LL.D., was appointed Director of Congresses, and the members of the Advisory (afterwards termed Administrative) Board selected as follows:— Chairman: Nicholas Murray Butler, Ph.D., LL.D., President Columbia University. William R. Harper, Ph.D., LL.D., President University of Chicago. Honorable Frederick W. Holls, A.M., LL.B., New York. R. H. Jesse, Ph.D., LL.D., President University of Missouri. Henry S. Pritchett, Ph.D., LL.D., President Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Herbert Putnam, Litt.D., LL.D., Librarian of Congress. Frederick J. V. Skiff, A.M., Director of Field Columbian Museum. * * * * * The action of the Executive Committee of the Exposition, approved by the President, was as follows:— There shall be appointed by the President of the Exposition Company a Director of Congresses who shall report to the President of the Exposition Company. There shall be appointed by the President of the Exposition Company an Advisory Board of seven persons, the chairman to be named by the President, who shall meet at the call of the Director of Congresses, or the Chairman of the Advisory Board. The expenses of the members of the Advisory Board while on business of the Exposition shall be a charge against the funds of the Exposition Company. The duties of the said Advisory Board shall be: to consider and make recommendations to the Director of Congresses on all matters submitted to them; to determine the number and the extent of the congresses; the emphasis to be placed upon special features; the prominent men to be invited to participate; the character of the programmes; and the methods for successfully carrying out the enterprise. There shall be set aside from the Exposition funds for the maintenance of the congresses the sum of two hundred thousand dollars ($200,000). The standing Committee on Congresses from the Exposition board of directors was shortly afterwards appointed and was composed of five of the most prominent men in St. Louis:— Chairman: Hon. Frederick W. Lehmann, Attorney at Law. Breckenridge Jones, Banker. Charles W. Knapp, Editor of The St. Louis Republic. John Schroers, Manager of the Westliche Post. A. F. Shapleigh, Merchant. To this committee were referred for consideration by the President all matters of policy submitted by the Director of Congresses. This committee had jurisdiction over all congress matters, including not only the Congress of Arts and Science, but also the many miscellaneous congresses and conventions, and a great part of the success of the congresses is due to their broad-minded and liberal determination of the questions laid before them. IDEA OF THE CONGRESS OF ARTS AND SCIENCE It is impossible to ascribe the original idea of the Congress of Arts and Science to any one person. It was a matter of slow growth from the many conferences which had been held for a year by men of many occupations, and as finally worked out bore little resemblance to the original plans under discussion. The germ of the idea may fairly be said to have been contained in Director Skiff's insistence to the Executive Committee of the Exposition that the congress work stand for something more than an unrelated series of independent gatherings, and that some project be authorized which would at once be distinctive and of real scientific worth. To support this view Director Skiff brought the Executive Committee to the view of expending $200,000, if need be, to insure the project. Starting from this suggestion many plans were brought forward, but one which seems to belong of right to the late Honorable Frederick W. Holls, of New York City, contained perhaps the next recognizable step in advance. This thought was, briefly, that a series of lectures on scientific and literary topics by men prominent in their respective fields be delivered at the Exposition and that the Exposition pay the speakers for their services. This point was thoroughly discussed by Mr. Holls and President Butler, and the next step in the evolution of the Congress was the idea of bringing these lecturers together at the Exposition at about the same time or all during one month. At this stage Professor Hugo Münsterberg, who was the guest of Mr. Holls and an invited participant in the conference, made the important suggestion that such a series of unrelated lectures, even though given by most eminent men, would have little or no scientific value, but that if some relation, or underlying thought, could be introduced into the addresses, then the best work could be done, which would be of real value to the scientific world. He further stated that only in this case would scientific leaders be likely to favor the plan of a St. Louis congress, as they would feel attracted not so much through the honorariums to be given for their services as through the valuable opportunity of developing such a contribution to scientific thought. Subsequently Professor Münsterberg was asked by Mr. Holls to formulate his ideas in a manner to be submitted to the Exposition authorities. This was done in a communication under date of October 20, 1902, which contained logically presented the foundation of the plan afterwards worked out in detail. At this juncture the Department of Congresses was organized, as has been stated, the Director named, and the Administrative Board appointed, and on December 27, 1902, the first meeting of the Director with the Administrative Board took place in New York City. A thorough canvass of the subject was made at this meeting and as a result the following recommendations were made to the Exposition authorities:— (1) That the sessions of this Congress be held within a period of four weeks, beginning September 15, 1904. (2) That the various groups of learned men who may come together be asked to discuss their several sciences or professions with reference to some theme of universal human interest, in order that thereby a certain unity of interest and of action may be had. Under such a plan the groups of men who come together would thus form sections of a single Congress rather than separate congresses. (3) As a subject which has universal significance, and one likely to serve as a connecting thread for all of the discussions of the Congress, the theme "The Progress of Man since the Louisiana Purchase" was considered by the Administrative Board fit and suggestive. It is believed that discussions by leaders of thought in the various branches of pure and applied science, in philosophy, in politics, and in religion, from the standpoint of man's progress in the century which has elapsed, would be fruitful, not only in clearing the thoughts of men not trained in science and in government, but also in preparing the way for new advances. (4) The Administrative Board further recommends that the Congress be made up from men of thought and of action, whose work would probably fall under the following general heads:— a. The Natural Sciences (such as Astronomy, Biology, Mathematics, etc.). b. The Historical, Sociological, and Economic group of studies (History, Political Economy, etc.). c. Philosophy and Religion. d. Medicine and Surgery. e. Law, Politics, and Government (including development and history of the colonies, their government, revenue and prosperity, arbitration, etc.). f. Applied Science (including the various branches of engineering). (5) The Administrative Board recommends further referring to a special committee of seven the problem of indicating in detail the method in which this plan can best be carried out. To this committee is assigned the duty of choosing the general divisions of the Congress, the various branches of science and of study in these divisions, and of recommending to the Administrative Board a detailed plan of the sections in which, in their judgment, those who come to the Congress may be most effectively grouped, with a view not only to bring out the central theme, but also to represent in a helpful way and in a suggestive manner the present boundary of knowledge in the various lines of study and investigation which the committee may think wise to accept. These recommendations were transmitted by the Director of Congresses to the Committee on Congresses, approved by them, and afterwards approved by the Executive Committee and the President. The first four recommendations were of a preliminary character, but the fifth contained a distinct advance in the formation of a Committee on Plan and Scope which should be composed of eminent scientists capable of developing the fundamental idea into a plan which should harmonize with the scientific work in every field. The committee selected were as follows:— Dr. Simon Newcomb, Ph.D., LL.D., Retired Professor of Mathematics, U. S. Navy. Prof. Hugo Münsterberg, Ph.D., LL.D., Professor of Psychology, Harvard University. Prof. John Bassett Moore, LL.D., ex-assistant Secretary of State, and Professor of International Law and Diplomacy, Columbia University. Prof. Albion W. Small, Ph.D., Professor of Sociology, University of Chicago. Dr. William H. Welch, M.D., LL.D., Professor of Pathology, Johns Hopkins University. New York, January 19, 1903. Hon. Elihu Thomson, Consulting Engineer General Electric Company. Prof. George F. Moore, D.D., LL.D., Professor of Comparative Religion, Harvard University. * * * * * In response to a letter from President Butler, Chairman of the Administrative Board, giving a complete résumé of the growth of the idea of the Congress to that time, all of the members of the committee, with the exception of Mr. Thomson, met at the Hotel Manhattan on January 10, 1903, for a preliminary discussion. The entire field was canvassed, using the recommendations of the Administrative Board and the aforementioned letter of Professor Münsterberg's to Mr. Holls as a basis, and an adjournment taken until January 17 for the preparation of detailed recommendations. The Committee on Plan and Scope again met, all members being present, at the Hotel Manhattan on January 17, and arrived at definite conclusions, which were embodied in the report to the Administrative Board, a meeting of which had been called at the Hotel Manhattan for January 19, 1903. The report of the Committee on Plan and Scope is of such historic importance in the development of the Congress that it is given as follows, although many points were afterwards materially modified:— President Nicholas Murray Butler, Chairman Administrative Board of World's Congress at The Louisiana Purchase Exposition: Dear Sir,—The undersigned, appointed by your Board a committee on the scope and plan of the proposed World's Congress, at the Louisiana Purchase Exposition, have the honor to submit the following report:— The authority under which the Committee acted is found in a communication addressed to its members by the Chairman of the Administrative Board. A subsequent communication to the Chairman of the Committee indicated that the widest scope was allowed to it in preparing its plan. Under this authority the Committee met on January 10, 1903, and again on January 17. The Committee was, from the beginning, unanimous in accepting the general plan of the Administrative Board, that there should be but a single congress, which, however, might be divided and subdivided, in accord with the general plan, into divisions, departments, and sections, as its deliberations proceed. PLANS OF THE CONGRESS As a basis of discussion two plans were drawn up by members of the Committee and submitted to it. The one, by Professor Münsterberg, started from a comprehensive classification and review of human achievement in advancing knowledge, the other, by Professor Small, from an equally comprehensive review of the great public questions involved in human progress. Professor Münsterberg proposed a congress having the definite task of bringing out the unity of knowledge with a view of correlating the scattered theoretical and practical scientific work of our day. This plan proposed that the congress should continue through one week. The first day was to be devoted to the discussion of the most general problem of knowledge in one comprehensive discussion and four general divisions. On the second day the congress was to divide into several groups and on the remaining days into yet more specialized groups, as set forth in detail in the plan. The plan by Professor Small proposed a congress which would exhibit not merely the scholar's interpretation of progress in scholarship, but rather the scholar's interpretation of progress in civilization in general. The proposal was based on a division of human interests into six great groups:— I. The Promotion of Health. II. The Production of Wealth. III. The Harmonizing of Human Relations. IV. Discovery and Spread of Knowledge. V. Progress in the Fine Arts. VI. Progress in Religion. The plan agreed with the other in beginning with a general discussion and then subdividing the congress into divisions and groups. As a third plan the Chairman of the Committee suggested the idea of a congress of publicists and representative men of all nations and of all civilized peoples, which should discuss relations of each to all the others and throw light on the question of promoting the unity and progress of the race. After due consideration of these plans the Committee reached the conclusion that the ends aimed at in the second and third plans could be attained by taking the first plan as a basis, and including in its subdivisions, so far as was deemed advisable, the subjects proposed in the second and third plans. They accordingly adopted a resolution that "Mr. Münsterberg's plan be adopted as setting forth the general object of the Congress and defining the scope of its work, and that Mr. Small's plan be communicated to the General Committee as containing suggestions as to details, but without recommending its adoption as a whole." DATE OF THE CONGRESS Your Committee is of opinion that, in view of the climatic conditions at St. Louis during the summer and early autumn, it is desirable that the meeting of this general Congress be held during the six days beginning on Monday, September 19, 1904, and continuing until the Saturday following. Special associations choosing St. Louis as their meeting-place may then convene at such other dates as may be deemed fit; but it is suggested that learned societies whose field is connected with that of the Congress should meet during the week beginning September 26. The sectional discussions of the Congress will then be continued by these societies, the whole forming a continuous discussion of human progress during the last century. PLAN OF ADDRESSES The Committee believe that in order to carry out the proposed plan in the most effective way it is necessary that the addresses be prepared by the highest living authorities in each and every branch. In the last subdivisions, each section embraces two papers; one on the history of the subject during the last one hundred years and the other on the problems of to-day. The programme of papers suggested by the Committee as embraced in Professor Münsterberg's plan may be summarized as follows:— On the first day four papers will be read on the general subject, and four on each of the four large divisions, twenty in all. On the second day those four divisions will be divided into twenty groups, or departments, each of which will have four papers referring to the divisions and relations of the sciences, eighty in all. On the last four days, two papers in each of the 120 sections, 240 in all, thus making a total of 340 papers. In view of the fact that the men who will make the addresses should not be expected to bear all the expense of their attendance at the Congress, it seems advisable that the authorities of the Fair should provide for the expenses necessarily incurred in the journey, as well as pay a small honorarium for the addresses. The Committee suggest, therefore, that each American invited be offered $100 for his traveling expenses and each European $400. In addition to this that each receive $150 as an honorarium. Assuming that one half of those invited to deliver addresses will be Americans and one half Europeans, this arrangement will involve the expenditure of $136,000. This estimate will be reduced if the same person prepares more than one address. It will also be reduced if more than half of the speakers are Americans, and increased in the opposite case. As the Committee is not advised of the amount which the management of the Exposition may appropriate for the purpose of the Congress, it cannot, at present, enter further into details of adjustment, but it records its opinion that the sum suggested is the least by which the ends sought to be attained by the Congress can be accomplished. To this must be added the expenses of administration and publication. All addresses paid for by the Congress should be regarded as its property, and be printed and published together, thus constituting a comprehensive work exhibiting the unity, progress, and present state of knowledge. This plan does not preclude the delivery of more than one address by a single scholar. The directors of the Exposition may sometimes find it advisable to ask the same scholar to deliver two addresses, possibly even three. The Committee recommends that full liberty be allowed to each section of the Congress in arranging the general character and programme of its discussions within the field proposed. As an example of how the plan will work in the case of any one section, the Committee take the case of a neurologist desiring to profit by those discussions which relate to his branch of medicine. This falls under C of the four main divisions as related to the physical sciences. His interest on the first day will therefore be centred in Division C, where he may hear the general discussion of the physical sciences and the relations to the other sciences. On the second day he will hear four papers in Group 18 on the Subjects embraced in the general science of anthropology; one on its fundamental conceptions; one on its methods and two on the relation of anthropology to the sciences most closely connected with it. During the remaining four days he will meet with the representatives of medicine and its related subjects, who will divide into sections, and listen to four papers in each section. One paper will consider the progress of that section in the last one hundred years, one paper will be devoted to the problems of to-day, leaving room for such contributions and discussions as may seem appropriate during the remainder of the day. COÖPERATION OF LEARNED SOCIETIES INVOKED In presenting this general plan, your Committee wishes to point out the difficulty of deciding in advance what subjects should be included in every section. Therefore, the Committee deems it of the utmost importance to secure the advice and assistance of learned societies in this country in perfecting the details of the proposed plan, especially the selection of speakers and the programme of work in each section. It will facilitate the latter purpose if such societies be invited and encouraged to hold meetings at St. Louis during the week immediately preceding, or, preferably, the week following the General Congress. The selection of speakers should be made as soon as possible, and, in any case, before the end of the present academic year, in order that formal invitations may be issued and final arrangements made with the speakers a year in advance of the Congress. CONCLUDING SUGGESTIONS With the view of securing the coöperation of the governments and leading scholars of the principal countries of Western and Central Europe in the proposed Congress, it seems advisable to send two commissioners to these countries for this purpose. It seems unnecessary to extend the operations of this commission outside the European continent or to other than the leading countries. In other cases arrangements can be made by correspondence. It is the opinion of the Committee that an American of world-wide reputation as a scholar should be selected to preside over the Congress. All which is respectfully submitted. (Signed) Simon Newcomb, Chairman; George F. Moore, John B. Moore, Hugo Münsterberg, Albion W. Small, William H. Welch, Elihu Thomson, Committee. The Administrative Board met on January 19 to receive the report of the Committee on Plan and Scope which was presented by Dr. Newcomb. Professor Münsterberg and Professor John Bassett Moore were also present by invitation to discuss the details of the scheme. In the afternoon the Board went into executive session, and the following recommendations were adopted and transmitted by the Director of Congresses to the Committee on Congresses of the Exposition and to the President and Executive Committee, who duly approved them. To the Director of Congresses:— The Administrative Board have the honor to make the following recommendations in reference to the Department of Congresses:— (1) That there be held in connection with the Universal Exposition of St. Louis in 1904, an International Congress of Arts and Science. (2) That the plan recommended by the Committee on Plan and Scope for a general congress of Arts and Science, to be held during the six days beginning on Monday, September 19, 1904, be approved and adopted, subject to such revision in point of detail as may be advisable, preserving its fundamental principles. (3) That Simon Newcomb, LL.D., of Washington, D. C., be named for President of the International Congress of Arts and Science, provided for in the foregoing resolution. (4) That Professor Münsterberg, of Harvard University, and Professor Albion W. Small, of the University of Chicago, be invited to act as Vice-Presidents of the Congress. (5) That the Directors of the World's Fair be requested to change the name of this Board from the "Advisory Board" to the "Administrative Board of the International Congress of Arts and Science." (6) That the detailed arrangements for the Congress be intrusted to a committee consisting of the President and two Vice-Presidents already named, subject to the general oversight and control of the Administrative Board, and that the Directors of the Exposition be requested to make appropriate provision for their compensation and necessary expenses. (7) That it be recommended to the Directors of the World's Fair that appropriate provision should be made in the office of the Department of Congresses for an executive secretary and such clerical assistance as may be needed. (8) That the following payment be recommended to those scholars who accept invitations to participate and do a specified piece of work, or submit a specified contribution in the International Congress of Arts and Science: For traveling expenses for a European scholar, $500. For traveling expenses for an American scholar, $150. (9) That provision be made for the publication of the proceedings of the Congress in suitable form to constitute a permanent memorial of the work of the World's Fair for the promotion of science and art, under competent editorial supervision. (10) That an appropriation of $200,000 be made to cover expenses of the Department of Congresses, of which sum $130,000 be specifically appropriated for an International Congress of Arts and Science, and the remainder to cover all expenses connected with the publication of the proceedings of said International Congress of Arts and Science, and the expenses for promotion of all other congresses. In addition to the foregoing recommendations, Professor Münsterberg was requested at his earliest convenience to furnish each member with a revised plan of his classification, which would reduce as far as possible the number of sections into which the Congress was finally to be divided. With the adjournment of the Board on January 19 the Congress may be fairly said to have been launched upon its definite course, and such changes as were thereafter made in the programme did not in any wise affect the principle upon which the Congress was based, but were due to the demands of time, of expediency, and in some cases to the accidents attending the participation. The organization of the Congress and the personnel of its officers from this time on remained unchanged, and the history of the meeting is one of steady and progressive development. The Committee on Plan and Scope were discharged of their duties, with a vote of thanks for the laborious and painstaking work which they had accomplished and the thoroughly scientific and novel plan for an international congress which they had recommended. It was determined by the Administrative Board to keep the services of three of the members of the Committee on Plan and Scope, who should act as a scientific organizing committee and who should also be the presiding officers of the Congress. The choice for President of the Congress fell without debate to the dean of American scientific circles, whose eminent services to the Government of the United States and whose recognized position in foreign and domestic scientific circles made him particularly fitted to preside over such an international gathering of the leading scientists of the world, Dr. Simon Newcomb, retired Professor of Mathematics, United States Navy. Professor Hugo Münsterberg, of Harvard University, and Professor Albion W. Small, of the University of Chicago, were designated as the first and second Vice-Presidents respectively. The work of the succeeding spring, with both the Organizing Committee and the Administrative Board, was devoted to the perfecting of the programme and the selection of foreign scientists to be invited to participate in the Congress. The theory of the development of the programme and its logical bases are fully and forcibly treated by Professor Münsterberg in the succeeding chapter, and therefore will not be touched upon in this record of facts. As an illustration of the growth of the programme, however, it is interesting to compare its form, which was adopted at the next meeting of the Organizing Committee on February 23, 1903, in New York City, with its final form as given in the completed programme presented at St. Louis in September, 1904 (pp. 47-49). No better illustration can be given of the immense amount of labor and painstaking adjustment, both to scientific and to physical conditions, and of the admirable adaptability of the original plan to the exigencies of actual practice. At the meeting of February 23, 1903, which was attended by all of the members of the Organizing Committee and by President Butler of the Administrative Board, it was determined that the number of Departments should be sixteen, with the following designations:— A. NORMATIVE SCIENCES 1. Philosophical Sciences. 2. Mathematical Sciences. B. HISTORICAL SCIENCES 3. Political Sciences. 4. Legal Sciences. 5. Economic Sciences. 6. Philological Sciences. 7. Pedagogical Sciences. 8. Æsthetic Sciences. 9. Theological Sciences. C. PHYSICAL SCIENCES 10. General Physical Sciences. 11. Astronomical Sciences. 12. Geological Sciences. 13. Biological Sciences. 14. Anthropological Sciences. D. MENTAL SCIENCES 15. Psychological Sciences. 16. Sociological Sciences. SECTIONS 1. a Metaphysics. b Logic. c Ethics. d Æsthetics. 2. a Algebra. b Geometry. c Statistical Methods. 3. a Classical Political History of Asia. b Classical Political History of Europe. c Medieval Political History of Europe. d Modern Political History of Europe. e Political History of America. 4. a History of Roman Law. b History of Common Law. aa Constitutional Law. bb Criminal Law. cc Civil Law. dd History of International Law. 5. a History of Economic Institutions. b History of Economic Theories. c Economic Law. aa Finance. bb Commerce and Transportation. cc Labor. 6. a Indo-Iranian Languages. b Semitic Languages. c Classical Languages. d Modern Languages. 7. a History of Education. aa Educational Institutions. 8. a History of Architecture. b History of Fine Arts. c History of Music. d Oriental Literature. e Classical Literature. f Modern Literature. aa Architecture. bb Fine Arts. cc Music. 9. a Primitive Religions. b Asiatic Religions. c Semitic Religions. d Christianity. aa Religious Institutions. 10. a Mechanics and Sound. b Light and Heat. c Electricity. d Inorganic Chemistry. e Organic Chemistry. f Physical Chemistry. aa Mechanical Technology. bb Optical Technology. cc Electrical Technology. dd Chemical Technology. 11. a Theoretical Astronomy. b Astrophysics. 12. a Geodesy. b Geology. c Mineralogy. d Physiography. e Meteorology. aa Surveying. bb Metallurgy. 13. a Botany. b Plant Physiology. c Ecology. d Bacteriology. e Zoölogy. f Embryology. g Comparative Anatomy. h Physiology. aa Agronomy. bb Veterinary Medicine. 14. Anthropological Sciences: a Human Anatomy. b Human Physiology. c Neurology. d Physical Chemistry. e Pathology. f Raceomatology. aa Hygiene. bb Contagious Diseases. cc Internal Medicine. dd Surgery. ee Gynecology. ff Ophthalmology. gg Therapeutics. hh Dentistry. 15. Psychological Sciences: a General Psychology. b Experimental Psychology. c Comparative Psychology. d Child Psychology. e Abnormal Psychology. 16. Sociological Sciences: a Social Morphology. b Social Psychology. c Laws of Civilization. d Laws of Language and Myths. e Ethnology. aa Social Technology. It was also resolved, that the discussion of subjects falling under the first four divisions should be held in the forenoon of each of the four days, from Wednesday until Saturday, and those relating to the three divisions of Practical Science in the afternoon of the same days. The programme was thus rearranged by the addition of the following:— E. UTILITARIAN SCIENCES 17. Medical Sciences: a Hygiene. b Sanitation. c Contagious Diseases. d Internal Medicine. e Psychiatry. f Surgery. g Gynecology. h Ophthalmology. i Otology.