THE STATE ACADEMIES OF SCIENCE AFFILIATED WITH THE AMER

ICAN ASSOCIATION1

SINCE the New Hampshire Academy of Science is now affiliated with the American Association for the Advancement of Science and is advancing shoulder to shoulder with twenty other affiliated state academies, it seems worth while to learn what these other organizations have accomplished and in what activities they are at present engaged. This address presents some of the results of a study of those questions.

Brief statements concerning the organization and work of sixteen of the affiliated academies were published in the last volume of "Summarized Proceedings of the American Association" (1921-1925), which appeared in December, 1925. Since that time five additional academies have become affiliated with the association.2 In preparation for the study here reported, a questionnaire of eighteen specific questions was sent to the secretaries of all the academies in this group, excepting our own, and all but two of the twenty secretaries responded, some of them sending additional information about their academies. That the secretaries were keenly interested in the study is shown by the receipt of many publications from fourteen academies. Several of the secretaries expressed a desire to receive the results of the detailed study of the material collected.

2

Academies affiliated with the American Association exist in the following states: Alabama, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Michigan, Nebraska, New Hampshire, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wisconsin. Reference to the map shows that these states form a group extending from the Atlantic Ocean to the Mississippi River, with an arm extending from Iowa through Nebraska and Kansas to Oklahoma. The region south and west of the last named states has no affiliated academies at present, partly because it is covered by the Pacific Division and the Southwestern Division of the American Asso

1 From the address of the retiring president of the New Hampshire Academy of Science, delivered at Waterville, N. H., June 4, 1927.

2 A sixth additional academy (of South Carolina) became affiliated October 17, 1927. There are twenty-two in all.

ciation. Some of the states in the regions of these two divisions have unaffiliated academies, as is also true with several other states outside of the regions of the divisions.

Of the twenty-one academies to be studied, sixteen have as their titles the name of the state followed by the words Academy of Science. These apparently take science to cover most of the field of classified knowledge and orderly thinking. Three use the phrase Academy of Sciences, thinking apparently of the cooperation and coordination of the separate fields into which science is too often or too definitely split up; these three academies are those of Maryland, Nebraska, and Louisiana, the last-named of which takes the name of the New Orleans Academy of Sciences. The two remaining academies add two other fields of intellectual effort. They are the Michgan Academy of Science, Arts and Letters, and the Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts and Letters.

The New Orleans Academy is the oldest of the twenty-one present organizations, having been formed in 1853, and the Alabama Academy is the youngest, formed in 1924. There seem to have been three active periods of academy formation; three academies were formed in 1866-1870, five in 1885-1894, and eleven in 1902-1924. There seem to have been

obvious though slightly less well defined active periods of academy formation in the years following the civil war and directly after the world war. Historians

may see some significance in this last observation. The Iowa Academy of Science was organized in 1887, though it succeeded the Iowa Academy of Sciences which lived from 1875-1880. The Maryland Academy of Sciences was reorganized in 1866, as the successor of the Maryland Academy of Science and Literature, which was itself a reorganization in 1819 of the Academic Society, formed in 1797. To the Maryland Academy belongs the credit of being the pioneer in this field.

In this connection it should be mentioned that the formation of the New Hampshire Academy of Science in 1919 occurred at the suggestion of Dr. J. McKeen Cattell, editor of SCIENCE, the initial steps in the actual organization having been taken by a committee consisting of Professor John H. Gerould,

Professor Norman E. Gilbert, and Dr. John M. Gile, of Hanover, with the cooperation of Professor W. C.

8 The Pacific Division now includes all members of the association residing in Alaska, British Columbia, Washington, Oregon, California, Idaho, Nevada, Utah, Mexico (excepting Sonora and Chihuahua), the Hawaiian and the Philippine Islands and other islands of the Pacific. The Southwestern Division now includes all members residing in Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado, Sonora, Chihuahua and Texas west of the Pecos River.

O'Kane, Dr. Charles James, and Mr. H. L. Howes, of Durham. This was the outcome of a plan of the American Association to cooperate with the state academies of science and to encourage their foundation in states where they did not already exist. Dr. Cattell was one of the leaders in bringing about the arrangements for the official affiliation of state academies with the American Association, arrangements that began to operate in 1918.1

The number of members enrolled varies from fifty for New Orleans to about eight hundred for Maryland and for Indiana. The small size of the firstnamed academy is doubtless due to its being largely local and limited to research workers. The number of members apparently bears no relation to the age of an academy; it may depend on the population of the state, on entrance requirements or some other factor. It should be noticed, however, that the three academies having the largest enrolment include nonresident members.

The classification of members seems to be governed by no general principle; in fact, there is much confusion here. There are three academies (Alabama, Georgia, and New Orleans) with only one kind of members (active members), and there is one (Maryland) with six kinds (corresponding, associate and corporate members, fellows, patrons and founders). Examination of the complete list reveals these additional kinds: local, national, life, non-resident, annual, honorary and regular members, honorary fellows and life fellows. New Hampshire stands alone in having only two kinds, active and honorary members, with Michigan a close second, adding life members to the two kinds we have. Four academies have national members, meaning persons who are also members of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. All the academies have members with the standing of our own active members, though they are sometimes designated by different names. Thirteen have less than five kinds of members. Two have six kinds. Confusion is greatest in those cases where a member may belong to two different classifications; e.g., the Oklahoma Academy has active members and fellows, and each of these may be either local or national; it also has honorary members. Seven of the academies list non-resident members, usually former active members who have moved from the state. Twelve academies have honorary members, or members of similar standing. The limitations to this honor are interesting. For New Hampshire the number is limited to ten, with a total enrolment of

、

4 For a list of the first academies to be affiliated and the dates of their affiliation, see SCIENCE for June 17, 1921.

H: 131; for Kentucky the number is twenty, with an enrolment of 170, and for Ohio it is only twenty-five, with a total of 475. The other academies have, according to their constitutions, placed no limits on the number of honorary members. It is surprising that two (Kentucky and Ohio) confer this honor only a on non-resident members; formerly the Nebraska Academy had a similar rule but rescinded the nonresident condition in 1920. Two academies (Michigan and Wisconsin) confer honorary membership for distinguished or conspicuous service in science, arts or letters, while one (Tennessee) confers this honor on "any white person who has attained prominence in any department of science."

The classification of members has apparently been established to meet local needs in each case. The multiplicity of names seems unfortunate, particularly as different names are sometimes used by different academies to designate the same kind of members. Simplification of nomenclature seems desirable and should make easier that correspondence between affiliated academies which is appearing so promisingly on the horizon, in connection with official affiliation with the American Association. It is suggested that the affiliated academies might, in cooperation with the American Association, bring classification of membership and the nomenclature thereof into closer kt agreement.

丁丝

The payment of $20 in one academy (Illinois), $25 in two (Michigan and Nebraska) and $50 in one (Virginia) entitles a person to life membership. The payment of $100 in four academies (Indiana, Nebraska, North Carolina and Ohio) entitles a person to the standing of patron; the Virginia Academy, however, requires $1,000 for this form of membership. Qualifications for membership may be covered generally by the statement that in fourteen of the academies any one "interested in science," "interested in the progress of science," or "interested in scientific work," to quote from the constitutions, may become an active member. The New Hampshire Academy is the only one that attaches an age limit (twenty-five years). Unless the committees on mem*bership scrutinize applications very carefully, it seems to be rather easy to get into most of the academies. A few have more definite requirements; e.g., Georgia requires five years of recognized scientific work or five years of productive work in a college faculty, or some noteworthy contribution to science; Illinois demands interest in science in the state and in the nation; for Indiana the candidate must be engaged in original research or some other phase of scientific work; New Hampshire wants proficiency in some branch of recognized science; North Carolina wants active interest in the promotion of science, while for

Oklahoma, Pennsylvania and Tennessee the candidate should preferably be engaged in scientific work. Maryland again stands out in requiring, in addition to an interest in science, a desire for self-improvement and a desire to help others; this may be related to the fact that the Maryland Academy is "principally a popular academy in which any intelligent person of good character may participate." Curiously, two academies (New Orleans and Wisconsin) report that no qualifications are required for active membership. On the whole, qualifications seem to be framed broadly enough so that acquaintance with scientific workers in other fields than one's own may be obtained in a social and appreciative way without too much detailed machinery of enrolling. The experience of some academies in regard to membership qualification may well be useful to other academies and it might be very valuable if these qualifications might receive special attention from the Committee on Academy Relations, recently established by the American Association (SCIENCE for May 20, 1927, page 508, paragraph 14).

Annual dues are very moderate in all these academies, one dollar in eight academies and two dollars in four. Four academies require an initiation fee of one dollar, four require a two-dollar fee, and one a three-dollar fee. Annual dues of one or two dollars seem much more desirable than higher dues. Academy publications might better be financed in other ways than by means of annual dues, as will appear later in this paper.

In order to evaluate the objects or purposes of the state academies, each secretary was asked if the main object of his academy was "(1) to promote scientific research among purely scientific investigators of your state, or (2) to increase the fellowship among persons having scientific interests though not necessarily engaged in research." Dr. A. M. Peter, secretary of the Kentucky Academy, sent this reply: "The constitution of the Kentucky Academy declares that the object of the academy is 'to encourage scientific research, to promote the diffusion of useful scientific knowledge, and to unify the scientific interests of the State.' I think, however, that most good comes from bringing together those who are interested in scientific matters in the state, whether they are actually doing research work or not-that is, I think the most important duty of the academy is that described in your second item." This expresses very happily exactly what I think we all feel our own New Hamp shire Academy stands for. It also expresses substantially what the majority of the secretaries express in varying ways. Two academies (Kansas and New Orleans) rate fostering research as more important than increasing fellowship; two others (Pennsylvania

and Tennessee) rate the two objects in the reverse order, and one (Iowa) rates the two about equally. Other comments of the secretaries are: The Indiana Academy maintains a research committee to receive requests for solutions of definite problems for the people of the state, and to assign them to proper experts for solution. The Maryland Academy seeks to be a popular center for all interested in natural science. The Michigan and Wisconsin Academies include also arts and letters. The New Orleans Academy emphasizes pure research almost exclusively. The North Carolina Academy finds that most of the actual work of the academy is done by the investigators. The secretary of the Virginia Academy, Dr. E. C. L. Miller, says: "Ours is a young society and the work so far has been mostly to build up the society and to promote fellowship among the scientists and good will toward science in the state. Now we have a permanent committee on research and are raising an endowment fund for this committee."

An examination of the academy constitutions gives additional support to the statement that Dr. Peter's reply, quoted above, is of general application. Indiana adds this object: "to assist by investigation and discussion in developing and making known the material, educational and other resources and riches of the state; to arrange and prepare for publication such reports of investigations and discussions as may further the aims and objects of the academy." Tennessee includes exactly these words and Oklahoma includes an abridged form of the same statement. North Carolina hopes "to furnish, so far as practicable, a means of publication of such articles as may be claimed worthy." Wisconsin says: "Among the special objects shall be the publication of the results of investigation and the formation of a library." Maryland supports a museum and maintains meeting rooms. Virginia lists as her fourth and fifth purposes: "to cooperate with other scientific bodies having similar aims and to render public service in scientific matters."

If the worth-whileness of any state academy of science is ever questioned, this enumeration of objects and purposes should certainly justify the existence of the organization. It should encourage us in renewed loyalty to and support of our own New Hampshire Academy and should make us proud that we are affiliated with such forward-looking scientific organizations. One secretary writes: "If your research discloses a very good reason for the existence of state academies of science I want to know it in order that we may get into the right line." He considers that the reading of scientific papers does not seem to him very important, but may be only a good excuse for

getting the members together and giving them a chance to find out that the others are interested in what each one is doing. He then adds this significant suggestion: "I think the academy should have some hobby but I do not know what it ought to be."

As to the number of meetings per year, the acad-d emies are in close accord. Fifteen have but one meeting a year while three have two meetings. Two academies (Georgia and Oklahoma) specify that there may be extra meetings at the call of the council. Eighteen academies meet for the reading of papers and most of these mention transaction of business as one of the features. In the case of those that do not specifically mention business it is not clear just how it is transacted. Business may be delegated to a council or similar body. In several cases, including our own New Hampshire Academy, the council is instructed to transact business that arises between t the annual meetings.

000

It is of interest that three secretaries specifically mention discussion as a regular part of the program; perhaps it should be inferred that other academies It include this helpful and attractive feature without mentioning it. It may be that some academies are losing out to some extent by not stressing this feature. Four include regularly a lecture by a person of note, usually from another state. Opportunity for social intercourse is mentioned several times; luncheons, banquets, social gatherings, etc., occur in the programs. It appears that in most of the academies much is made of the encouragement of better acquaintance among the members. On the whole then the character of the meetings is pretty uniform.

Marked variations are: in one academy (Virginia) the program is stated to be made up of "papers mostly," and in two others (New Orleans and Wisconsin) of "papers only." Nebraska lists "Demonstrations" as part of the program. Experimental demonstrations or exhibitions of material might enliven considerably papers that would otherwise be less interesting and they might well be used much more than seems to be the case. Experience at various chemistry meetings has shown the markedly increased "selling value" of a paper that is thus accompanied by exhibit or experiment. An Ohio program lists nine exhibits relating to botany and zoology, and speaks of their not being as numerous as in the preceding year.

Eleven academies make field meetings part of the regular program. Two (Indiana and Oklahoma) devote the spring meeting entirely to inspecting industrial plants, visiting regions of geological or biological interest, etc., the reading of papers being reserved for the winter meeting. Most of the others combine field trips, as do we, with the regular pro

a

0

P

S

gram of papers at the annual meeting. The Illinois Academy specifies that its field trips are designed "o stimulate interest in local flora, fauna, geology and si industries."

It now becomes my sad duty to report that eight of the academies go on record as having no field trips, and examination of the literature received does not indicate that they employ such trips even "only pincidentally," as one of the eleven mentioned above d puts it. To those of us who have so keenly enjoyed our own field trips it must seem that those eight academies are omitting one of the most effective agenthecies to increase mutual acquaintance and to learn to not see things through the other fellow's eyes.

In my enthusiasm for the field trips I almost forgot to say that the Maryland Academy of Sciences Jmeets "every night," according to the blank returned from Baltimore. Probably this means every night but Sunday. The subjects taken up are varied. The members are "taken to the field under competent indestructors for the purpose of investigation or study."

F

The membership of the Georgia Academy is divided into eleven groups according to the subject in which each member is most interested. Similarly, Nebraska has eight groups. Programs are correspondingly divided. In an organization the size of ours here in New Hampshire such subdivision of the program would be entirely out of place and would defeat the main purpose of our coming together. In larger organizations, with large numbers in attendance, such subdivision may be advisable or even necessary.

As to the papers and addresses themselves, our own New Hampshire Academy may serve as an example. In the past seven years 106 papers have been presented, of which 15 were presidential addresses or formal lectures. This makes an average of 15 papers per meeting. The smallest number was eight, in our first year, and the largest was twenty-one, in 1923. When we remember that between supper Friday night and bed-time Saturday night there are available two evening sessions and two half-day sessions, we see how the number of papers may vary from year to year. One year there was no presidential address or formal lecture and the next year there were four papers of that kind. When Saturday afternoon was devoted to an inspection trip through an industrial plant or a college the number of papers was naturally smaller.

A hasty skimming of such programs, abstracts of papers and reports of meetings as are at hand indicates that the papers presented before other state

academies do not differ markedly in number or character from those given at the New Hampshire meetings. In a few cases the papers have more direct bearing on the problems and progress of the state in which the academy is located. In some cases the papers seem generally to be the result of considerable scientific investigation, the kind of papers published in the special scientific journals. Such more technical papers may be more appropriate for some of the larger academies than for the smaller ones. For us, however, this might be taken as suggesting a possible bettering of our own programs, or at least as a hint that we should not neglect our service to our state in the midst of our personal scientific enjoyment.

Of great interest to those making up academy programs and those presiding at the meetings is that several of the programs examined show a time limit after the title of each paper. This device has proved so satisfactory in other organizations that it might perhaps be more generally adopted by the state academies. The most extreme case noted was a program that limited all papers to ten minutes each.

It may be of interest to list here a few titles of presidential addresses selected from the academy reports at hand. Some presidents deal with the special subjects in which they are directly interested, while others deal with broader and more general aspects of science. Of course the president should try to feel the pulse of his academy and to point the way to a larger vision. The titles selected are as follows:

Bacteriology and its practical significance (C. A. Belvrem, Indiana).

Flora of Indiana: On the distribution of the ferns, fern allies and flowering plants (C. C. Dean, Indiana).

The unselfish service of science (W. M. Blandard, Indiana).

Biological laws and social progress (H. L. Bruner, Indiana).

The earth's framework (E. R. Cumings, Indiana). The social responsibility of science (O. H. Smith, Iowa).

Geology of some proposed Kentucky State parks (W. R. Jillson, Kentucky).

The effect of the teaching of evolution upon the religious convictions of undergraduate students, as evidenced by theses upon this subject (A. R. Middleton, Kentucky).

Science and letters (C. Bamer, Michigan).
American botany during the colonial period (H. H.
Bartlett, Michigan).

Recent research in atomic structure (J. C. Jensen,
Nebraska).

Accumulation of energy by plants (E. N. Transeau,

Ohio).

Research in industry (J. H. Cloud, Oklahoma).

Research as a state policy (H. L. Dodge, Oklahoma).