Various - International Conference Held at Washington for the Purpose of Fixing a Prime Meridian and a Universal Day. October, 1884.

V >> Various >> International Conference Held at Washington for the Purpose of Fixing a Prime Meridian and a Universal Day. October, 1884.

Pages:
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17

I have no desire, however, to press on the Conference the
consideration of the question of local time reckoning. But, as the
system adopted in the United States and Canada has proved successful,
and is now firmly established, I have deemed it proper that a
statement of this fact and of the possibilities of the application of
the system to other parts of the world should be made to the Congress.
I will now, therefore, withdraw my amendment.

Mr. RUTHERFURD, Delegate of the United States. The Delegate of Italy
has moved, as an amendment to the first part of the resolution offered
by me, the fifth resolution adopted in the Conference at Rome. Really,
in spirit and in substance, there is little or no difference between
them, except that the Conference at Rome has specified that the
objects they had in view as suitable for regulation by universal time
were these, namely: "For the internal service of the great
administrations of means of communication, such as railways,
steamships, telegraphs, and post-offices."

Now, I submit that in the words used in my resolution all this is
embraced, and a good deal more, for this universal day is to be
adopted "for all purposes for which it may be found convenient." If it
were desirable that every purpose for which the universal day may be
found convenient should be specified, it would make a very long
resolution. On the other hand, however, we might find in the end that
we had omitted some of the purposes for which it was eminently
convenient. It appears, also, that in this same fifth Roman resolution
all questions of chronology of universal date, etc., are omitted,
although they are brought forward and appear in the sixth resolution.
It seems to me, Mr. President, that nothing would be gained by the
adoption of this amendment, for everything that is embraced there is
more comprehensively embraced in the original resolution.

General STRACHEY, Delegate of Great Britain. In explanation of the
amendment offered by the Delegate of Italy, let me call attention to
what really passed at the Roman Conference. I find, first of all, in
the report of the Roman Conference, in the abstract of the discussion
before the Special Committee, these words, (p. 49 of the reprint:)

"The fourth resolution, in favor of a universal hour for
certain scientific and practical purposes, is unanimously
adopted."

There appears no discussion whatever upon it; not a word seems to have
been said as to how it should be defined or acted upon. I then turn
back to the report of the committee which prepared the resolutions,
and there we see what, in reality, they had in their minds when they
drew up that resolution. It is perfectly evident that they had no
intention of tying the hands of anybody. This is what they say on page
26 of the report:

"The administrations of railroads, of the great steamship
lines, telegraph lines, and postal routes, which would thus
secure for their relations with each other a uniform time,
excluding all complication and error, could nevertheless
not entirely avoid the use of local time in their relations
with the public. They would probably use the universal time
only in their internal service, for the rules of the road,
for the time-tables of their engineers and conductors, for
the connection of trains at frontiers, etc.; but the
time-tables for the use of the public could hardly be
expressed otherwise than in local or national time. The
depots or stations of the railroads, post-offices, and
telegraph offices, and the waiting-rooms, could exhibit
outwardly clocks showing local or national time, while
within the offices there would be, besides, clocks
indicating universal time. Telegraphic dispatches could show
in future the time of despatch and of receipt, both in local
and universal time."

Now, I think that the subject of universal time is dealt with in a
better manner in the proposition offered by Mr. RUTHERFURD than in the
proposition which emanated from the Congress at Rome. This Conference
cannot designate positively the manner in which local time may be best
reckoned. We are concerned now only with universal time. It may,
however, be proper that the resolution offered by Mr. RUTHERFURD in
regard to the employment of universal time should be supplemented by
something more specific--something, for instance, of this sort:

The Conference will not designate the system on which local
time may best be reckoned so as to conform, as far as
possible, to universal time; this should be determined by
each nation to suit its convenience.

The arrangements for adopting universal time for the use of
international telegraphs will be left for regulation by the
telegraph international congress.

This last idea was expressed, I forget now by whom, but by one of the
Delegates since the Conference met, and it appears to me that inasmuch
as there is an international congress specially appointed to regulate
all matters of international telegraphy, this subject can be left to
them with the firm belief that it will be regulated satisfactorily.

The question was then put to the vote; and upon the amendment offered
by the Delegate of Italy the following States voted in the
affirmative:

Colombia, Paraguay,
Italy, Spain,
Netherlands, Sweden.

The following in the negative:

Brazil, Liberia,
Chili, Mexico,
Costa Rica, Russia,
France, Salvador,
Germany, San Domingo,
Great Britain, Switzerland,
Guatemala, Turkey,
Hawaii, United States,
Japan, Venezuela.

Austria-Hungary abstained from voting.

Ayes, 6; noes, 18; abstaining, 1.

So the amendment was lost.

The question then recurred upon the original resolution.

Mr. RUTHERFURD, Delegate of the United States. Mr. President, it has
been represented to me that it may, perhaps, be found advantageous in
different countries and different localities to use a time that would
not be accurately described as local time. In one place the standard
of time may be strictly local time; in another place it may be
national time; in another place it may be railroad time.

In order to meet this condition of things, I propose to alter the
phraseology of the original resolution in this way: by inserting the
words "or other," so that it shall read "which shall not interfere
with the use of local or _other_ time where desirable."

Professor ADAMS, Delegate of Great Britain. May it not be better to
put it in this way: "Which shall not interfere with the use of local
or other _standard_ time where desirable."

Mr. RUTHERFURD, Delegate of the United States. I accept the amendment
offered by the Delegate of Great Britain.

Mr. JEAN VALERA, Delegate of Spain. As I consider that both the
amendment which was just rejected and the present proposition really
signify the same thing, I shall vote for the proposition, as I before
did for the amendment.

The PRESIDENT. The question is now upon the resolution, as modified.
It will be read.

The resolution was then read, as follows:

"_Resolved_, That the Conference proposes the adoption of a
universal day for all purposes for which it may be found
convenient, and which shall not interfere with the use of
local or other standard time where desirable."

The following States voted in the affirmative:

Austria-Hungary, Mexico,
Brazil, Netherlands,
Chili, Paraguay,
Colombia, Russia,
Costa Rica, Salvador,
France, Spain,
Great Britain, Sweden,
Guatemala, Switzerland,
Hawaii, Turkey,
Italy, United States,
Japan, Venezuela.
Liberia,

There were no negative votes.

Germany and San Domingo abstained from voting.

Ayes, 23; noes, 0; abstaining, 2.

So the resolution was carried.

Mr. RUTHERFURD, Delegate of the United States. Mr. President, I now
propose to offer the other portion of the resolution, or rather I
propose to offer the other portion in the form of a distinct
resolution. It will run as follows:

"_Resolved_, That this universal day is to be a mean solar
day; is to begin for all the world at the moment of midnight
of the initial meridian, coinciding with the beginning of
the civil day and date of that meridian; and is to be
counted from zero up to twenty-four hours."

This is, in substance, the resolution adopted by the Conference at
Rome, with the exception that the Conference at Rome proposed that the
universal day should coincide with the astronomical day instead of the
civil day, and begin at Greenwich noon, instead of Greenwich midnight.

Professor ADAMS, Delegate of Great Britain. I desire to make one
remark merely. Would it not be a little more correct if we said "at
the moment of mean midnight?" I think I have mentioned this before,
but, to be clear, I think it should be made.

Mr. RUTHERFURD accepted Professor ADAMS'S suggestion.

Mr. JUAN VALERA, Delegate of Spain. Mr. President, I wish to call
special attention to the proposition now before us, on which we are
called upon to vote, as it is of very great importance.

As for me, I acknowledge that my mission is already fulfilled. The
Government of Spain had directed me to admit the necessity or the
usefulness of a common prime meridian, and also to accept the meridian
of Greenwich as the universal meridian. I have attended to these
directions.

We have now to deal with a scientific question on which I cannot well
express an opinion, as I do not feel that I am competent in such
matters; besides, I am not authorized to do so. This may be due to my
ignorance in matters of this kind, but I fear that extraordinary
difficulties may arise in the adoption of this proposition, and if we
proceed with too great haste, we run the risk of placing ourselves in
contradiction to common sense. All the popular ideas of men for
thousands of years past will, perhaps, be overturned. It may happen
that when the day begins at Greenwich it will be 23 hours later at
Berlin. The east will be confounded with the west, and the west with
the east. If we made the day begin at the anti-meridian these
questions would be avoided, and we should at one be with the rest of
the human race. I believe that it would be better to adjourn till
to-morrow to give us time to reflect; in this way we shall not risk by
our devotion to science drawing upon ourselves popular criticism.

I propose, therefore, that the vote on this question be put off till
to-morrow.

M. LEFAIVRE, Delegate of France. Not to-morrow.

Count LEWENHAUPT, Delegate of Sweden. I beg to propose as an amendment
the sixth resolution adopted by the Conference at Rome, which is as
follows:

The Conference recommends as initial point for the universal hour and
the cosmic day the mean midday of Greenwich, coinciding with the
moment of midnight or the beginning of the civic day at the meridian
12 hours or 180 deg. from Greenwich.

The universal hours are to be counted from 0 up to 24 hours.

The PRESIDENT. The Chair quite concurs with the Delegate of Spain in
thinking that it would be very proper for us to take some time to
consider this matter.

A motion to adjourn would be in order, but before that motion is made,
the Chair would like to read a communication which he has just
received from the Assistant Secretary of State. It is this:

"The President of the United States will receive the members
of the Conference on Thursday, the 16th instant, at 12
o'clock, at the White House."

The Assistant Secretary of State proposes that we shall meet here at a
quarter before 12, and go to the White House from this hall.

The PRESIDENT. If the Delegate of Spain will withdraw his motion to
adjourn for one moment, the Delegate of Sweden desires to offer a
resolution.

Count LEWENHAUPT, Delegate of Sweden, then read the following
proposal:

Hereafter the reports of the speeches, whether in English or
French, will be sent as soon as possible to the Delegates
who made them, and the proofs should be corrected and
returned by them without delay to the Secretary. No
correction will be allowed afterward, except such as are
considered necessary by the Secretaries, who will meet as
soon as possible after the first corrections shall have been
printed to prepare the protocols for the approval of the
Conference.

The motion being put to a vote by the President, was unanimously
carried.

The PRESIDENT. The Chair would very informally state that he has
received to-day a letter from Sir William Thomson, the distinguished
scientist who addressed the Conference yesterday, expressing his
regret that he did not then say something which he had in his mind and
which he wished to say, namely, that the meridian of Greenwich passes
directly through the great commercial port of Havre.

Mr. JANSSEN, Delegate of France. Since the Chairman refers to this
subject, I may state to my colleagues that I have received a telegram
from Sir William Thomson, in which he makes certain propositions of
the nature described.

Yet it is not possible to make out precisely, by this telegram, what
are Sir William Thomson's ideas. All that I can say is, that whatever
proceeds from such an eminent man should be treated with great
consideration, and that is a reason for asking Sir W. Thomson to be
good enough to explain to me his ideas more fully. If we could adjourn
to Monday, I think that it would be better. The preparation of the
protocols is very much behind-hand, and it is desirable that the
members of the Conference be kept fully acquainted with all the
discussions. I would, therefore, suggest that we adjourn till Monday.

The PRESIDENT. There are several propositions to adjourn to different
days. The Chair will take them up in order and will first put the
question upon the motion to adjourn until Monday.

The motion was carried, and at four o'clock the Conference adjourned
until Monday, the 20th instant, at one o'clock p. m.

VI.

SESSION OF OCTOBER 20, 1884.

The Conference met, pursuant to adjournment, in the Diplomatic Hall of
the Department of State, at one o'clock p. m.

Present:

Austro-Hungary: Baron IGNATZ VON SCHAEFFER.
Brazil: Dr. LUIZ CRULS.
Chili: Mr. F. V. GORMAS and Mr. A. B. TUPPER.
Colombia: Commodore S. R. FRANKLIN.
Costa Rica: Mr. JUAN FRANCISCO ECHEVERRIA.
France: Mr. A. LEFAIVRE, Mr. JANSSEN.
Germany: Baron H. VON ALVENSLEBEN, Mr. HINCKELDEYN.
Great Britain: Sir F. J. O. EVANS, Prof. J. C. ADAMS,
Lieut.-General STRACHEY, Mr. SANDFORD FLEMING.
Gautemala: Mr. MILES ROCK.
Hawaii: Hon. W. D. ALEXANDER.
Italy: Count ALBERT DE FORESTA.
Japan: Professor KIKUCHI.
Liberia: Mr. Wm. COPPINGER.
Mexico: Mr. LEANDRO FERNANDEZ, Mr. ANGEL ANGUIANO.
Netherlands: Mr. G. DE WECKHERLIN.
Paraguay: Capt. JOHN STEWART.
Russia: Mr. C. DE STRUVE, Major-General STEBNITZKI, Mr.
J. DE KOLOGRIVOFF.
San Domingo: Mr. DE J. GALVAN.
Spain: Mr. JUAN VALERA, Mr. EMILO RUIZ DEL ARBOL, Mr.
JUAN PASTORIN.
Sweden: Count CARL LEWENHAUPT.
Switzerland: Col. EMILE FREY.
Turkey: RUSTEM EFFENDI.
United States: Rear-Admiral C. R. P. RODGERS, Mr. LEWIS
M. RUTHERFURD, Mr. W. F. ALLEN, Commander W. T.
SAMPSON, Professor CLEVELAND ABBE.
Venezuela: Dr. A. M. SOTELDO.

Absent:

Denmark: Mr. C. S. A. DE BILLE.
Hawaii: Hon. LUTHER AHOLO.
Salvador: Mr. ANTONIO BATRES.

The PRESIDENT. Some days ago a Committee was appointed to report on
communications addressed to the Conference through the Chair. All
communications that have been received from time to time, and they
have been numerous, have been referred to this committee, of which the
Delegate from England, Prof. ADAMS, is the chairman. He now informs
the Chair that he is prepared to make a report.

The Delegate of England, Prof. ADAMS, then read the following report:

_Letter from the President of the Conference._

INTERNATIONAL MERIDIAN CONFERENCE,
DEPARTMENT OF STATE, WASHINGTON, _Oct. 14, 1884_.

SIR: I have the honor to submit to the Committee of which
you are the Chairman the following communications:

No. 1. Letters from Mr. Roumanet du Cailland, through Mr.
Hunter, Ass't Sec. of State.

No. 2. Letter and communication from Mr. C. M.
Raffensparger.

No. 3. Letter from Mr. A. S. de Chancourtois, accompanying
books from Paris.

No. 4. Letter from Mr. A. W. Spofford, enclosing letter of
Mr. J. W. Stolting, of Dobbs' Ferry.

No. 5. Letter from Mr. B. Aycrigg, Passaic, N. J.

No. 6. Letter from J. T. Field, St. Louis, Mo.

No. 7. Letter and two enclosures from Mr. Theodor Paesche.

No. 8. Description of the Universal Time-Piece of Dr. A. M.
Cory.

No. 9. Letter and enclosure from Mr. E. R. Knorr.

No. 10. Letter from Mr. J. E. Hilgard, of the U. S. Coast
Survey and Geodetic Survey.

No. 11. Arguments by Committee of New York and New Jersey
branch, and other papers relating to weights and measures.

No. 12. Letter from Lt. C. A. S. Totten, U.S.A., in relation
to a Standard Meridian.

No. 13. Letter from Mr. J. P. Merritt, in relation to the
Metric System.

No. 14. Postal card from W. H. Yates, in relation to the
Mercator Projection.

No. 15. A New System of Mensuration, by Lawrence S. Benson.

No. 16. Letter of T. C. Octman, of Hope Mills, N. C.,
calling attention to the fact that the meridian of Greenwich
passes through Havre.

No. 17. Letter from Dr. H. K. Whitner, explaining his
notation of 24 hours.

I am, sir, with great respect, your obedient servant,

C. R. P. RODGERS,
_President International Meridian Conference_.

Prof. J. C. ADAMS.

_Report of the Committee._

The Committee on communications respectfully reports as
follows:

We have carefully examined all of the communications
referred to us, as enumerated in the letter of President
Rodgers, with the following results:

No. 1 recommends that the meridian of Bethlehem be adopted
as the initial meridian. This question has been already
disposed of by the Conference; therefore further
consideration of the proposition is unnecessary.

No. 2 refers to an invention, the author of which states
that "a patent has been applied for," consequently your
Committee does not feel called upon to express any opinion
upon it.

No. 3 is a letter from M. de Chancourtois, accompanying a
work by him which contains an elaborate program of a system
of geography based on decimal measures, both of time and of
angles, and on the adoption of an international meridian.

The work also contains copious historical notices on the
metric system and on the initial meridian.

A copy of this work was presented to each of the Delegates
prior to the discussions of the Conference with regard to
the choice of an initial meridian, and therefore no special
report of the author's views on this subject appears to your
committee to be necessary. These views are nearly identical
with those which were so ably laid before the Conference by
Professor Janssen, but which failed to meet with their
approval.

The author further proposes to supersede the present mode of
measuring both angles and time by a system in which the
entire circumference and the length of the day should each
be first divided into four equal parts, and then each of
these parts should be subdivided decimally.

However deserving of consideration these proposals may be,
in the abstract, your Committee are clearly of the opinion
that they do not fall within the limits indicated by the
instructions which we have received from our respective
governments, and that, therefore, any discussion of them
would only be of a purely academical character, and could
lead to no practical result. Such a discussion would be sure
to elicit great differences of opinion, and would,
therefore, occupy a considerable time.

Hence, your Committee think that it would be very
undesirable for the Conference to enter upon it.

No. 4 is a letter from Mr. Spofford, Librarian of Congress,
including a communication of Mr. J. W. Stolting, Dobbs'
Ferry, N. Y. The author recommends the adoption of the
meridian 162 deg. W. from Greenwich as the prime meridian; he
proposes further, not to say east or west, but first or
second half, and also recommends the adoption of a universal
time, not to interfere with local or other standard time,
and to reckon from "1 to 24." He expresses no opinion as to
whether the day should begin at noon or midnight. There
seems to be nothing in the communication to influence the
decisions of the Conference.

No. 5. See report as to letter No. 1.

No. 6 suggests that the prime meridian should be 180 deg. from
Greenwich, and that longitude should be reckoned from 0 deg. to
360 deg.. This proposition has been already considered and
rejected by the Conference.

No. 7. This communication proposes "to adopt as the prime
meridian the frontier line between Russia and the United
States, as defined in the treaty of March 30, 1867." As the
initial meridian has already been agreed to by the
Conference, this proposition needs no further notice.

No. 8. This communication refers to an invention which has
no bearing on the question before the Conference. The
committee therefore abstain from expressing an opinion as to
its merits.

No. 9. Two letters from Mr. E. R. Knorr, of Washington,
D.C., advocating the advisability of reckoning longitude
"westward from 0 deg. to 359 deg.," and marking them on charts by
time instead of by degrees. The Conference has already taken
action on the question involved.

No. 10. A letter from Prof. Hilgard, enclosing a pamphlet by
Lt. C. A. S. Totten on the metrology of the great pyramid, a
subject which does not fall within the scope of the subjects
presented for the consideration of this Conference. In the
enclosing letter Prof. Hilgard says: "I am purely and
squarely for Greenwich midnight as the beginning of the
universal day, and an east and west count of longitude; that
is, 180 deg. each way."

No. 11 advocates the preservation of the Anglo-Saxon system
of weights and measures. This subject being foreign to the
questions under consideration by this Conference, the
Committee deems further comment unnecessary.

No. 12. A letter from Lieut. C. A. S. Totten, U.S.A.,
advocating a prime meridian through the great pyramid. The
proposition involved has already been decided by the
Conference.

No. 13 recommends redistribution of time according to the
decimal system. As already remarked under No. 3, this
proposition is clearly not within the limits indicated by
the instructions which we have received from our respective
governments.

No. 14 states that the author has a plan by which
"chronometers will record the longitude equably." This
proposition is foreign to the subjects under consideration
by the Conference.

No. 15 proposes a new system of mensuration; and, therefore,
this does not fall within the subjects for consideration by
the Conference.

No. 16. This communication suggests that as the prime
meridian passes through Havre, it should be allowable to
call it by that name. This Committee recommends that the
prime meridian be not named after the localities through
which it passes, but be called simply "The Prime Meridian."

No. 17 is the subject of a patent. The Committee does not
feel called upon to express an opinion respecting it.

This report is respectfully submitted to the Conference.

J. C. ADAMS,
_Chairman Committee on Communications._

WASHINGTON, _Oct. 18th, 1884_.

The PRESIDENT. The report of the Committee is before the Conference.

Mr. RUTHERFURD, the Delegate of the United States. I move that the
report be accepted, and its conclusions adopted.

There being no objection, the report was adopted.

The PRESIDENT. In the regular order of business to-day, the first
subject before the Conference is the resolution offered on Saturday by
the Delegate of the United States, Mr. RUTHERFURD, with the amendment
offered by the Delegate of Sweden, Count LEWENHAUPT.

Pages:
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17