Chapter I: Front Matter (1)

_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

_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

COMPRISING

Lectures on Philosophy in the Nineteenth Century,
Philosophy of Religion, Sciences of the
Ideal, Problems of Metaphysics,
The Theory of Science,
and Logic

UNIVERSITY ALLIANCE
LONDON NEW YORK

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.

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.

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:--

NEW YORK, January 19, 1903.

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.
_j_ Therapeutics.
_k_ Dentistry.

18. Practical Economic Sciences:
_a_ Extractive Productions of Wealth.
_b_ Transportation.
_c_ Commerce.
_d_ Postal Service.
_e_ Money and Banking.

19. Technological Sciences:
_a_ Mechanical Technology.
_b_ Electrical Technology.
_c_ Chemical Technology.
_d_ Optical Technology.
_e_ Surveying.
_f_ Metallurgy.
_g_ Agronomy.
_h_ Veterinary Medicine.

F. REGULATIVE SCIENCES

20. Practical Political Sciences:
_a_ Internal Practical Politics.
_b_ National Practical Politics.
_c_ Tariff.
_d_ Taxation.
_e_ Municipal Practical Politics.
_f_ Colonial Practical Politics.

21. Practical Legal Sciences:
_a_ International Law.
_b_ Constitutional Law.
_c_ Criminal Law.
_d_ Civil Law.

22. Practical Social Sciences:
_a_ Treatment of the Poor.
_b_ Treatment of the Defective.
_c_ Treatment of the Dependent.
_d_ Treatment of Vice and Crime.
_e_ Problems of Labor.
_f_ Problems of the Family.

G. CULTURAL SCIENCES

23. Practical Educational Sciences:
_a_ Kindergarten and Home.
_b_ Primary Education.
_c_ Universities and Research--Secondary.
_d_ Moral Education.
_e_ Æsthetic Education.
_f_ Manual Training.
_g_ University.
_h_ Libraries.
_i_ Museums.
_j_ Publications.

24. Practical Æsthetic Sciences:
_a_ Architecture.
_b_ Fine Arts.
_c_ Music.
_d_ Landscape Architecture.

25. Practical Religious Sciences:
_a_ Religious Education.
_b_ Training for Religious Service.
_c_ Missions.
_d_ Religious Influence.

The programme was again thoroughly revised at the meeting of the Organizing Committee on April 9, 1903, at Hotel Manhattan, and as thus amended was submitted to the Administrative Board at a meeting held in New York on April 11. A careful consideration of the programme at this meeting, and a final revision made at the meeting of the Administrative Board at the St. Louis Club April 30, 1903, brought it practically into its final shape, with such minor changes as were found necessary in the latter days of the Congress due to the unexpected declinations of foreign speakers at the last moment. The continuous and exacting work done in perfecting the programme by each member of the Organizing Committee and by the Chairman of the Administrative Board deserves special mention, and was productive of the best results by its logical appeal to the scientific world. The programme as finally worked out in orderly detail, shortened in many departments by various exigencies, may be found on pages 47 to 49 of this volume.

PARTICIPATION AND SUPPORT

The general plan of the Congress having been determined and the programme practically perfected by May 1, 1903, two most important questions demanded the attention of the Administrative Board: first, the participation in the Congress, both foreign and domestic; second, the support of the scientific public. At a meeting of the Board held in New York City April 11, 1903, these points were given full consideration. It was determined that the list of speakers both foreign and domestic should be made up on the advice of men of letters and of scientific thought in this country, and accordingly there was sent to the officers of the various scientific societies in the United States, to heads of university departments and to every prominent exponent of science and art in this country, a printed announcement and tentative programme of the Congress, and a letter asking advice as to the scientists best fitted in view of the object of the Congress to prepare an address. From the hundreds of replies received in response to this appeal were made up the original lists of invited speakers, and only those were placed thereon who were the choice of a fair majority of the representatives of the particular science under selection. The Administrative Board reserved to itself the full right to reject any of these names or to change them so as to promote the best interests of the Congress, but in nearly every instance it would be safe to say that the person selected was highly satisfactory to the great majority of his fellow scientists in this country. Many changes were unavoidably made at the last moment to meet the situation caused by withdrawals and declinations, but the list of second choices was so complete, and in many cases there was such a delicate balance between the first and second choice, that there was no difficulty in keeping the standard of the programme to its original high plane.

It was early determined that the seven Division speakers and the forty-eight Department speakers, which occupied the first two days of the programme, should be Americans, and that these Division and Department addresses should be a contribution of American scholarship to the general scientific thought of the world. This decision commended itself to the scientific public both at home and abroad, and it was so carried out. It was further determined that the Division and Department speakers and the foreign speakers should be selected during the summer of 1903, and that the American participation in the Section addresses should be determined after it was definitely known what the foreign participation would be. In view of the importance of the Congress, it was deemed inadvisable to attempt to interest foreign scientific circles by correspondence, and it was further decided to pay a special compliment to each invited speaker by sending an invitation at the hands of special delegates. Arrangements were therefore made for Dr. Newcomb and Professors Münsterberg and Small to proceed to Europe during the summer of 1903, and to present in person to the scientific circles of Europe and to the scientists specially desired to deliver addresses the complete plan and scope of the Congress and an invitation to participate.

INVITATIONS TO FOREIGN SPEAKERS

The members of the Organizing Committee, armed with very strong credentials from the State Department to the diplomatic service abroad, sailed in the early summer of 1903 to present the invitation of the Exposition to the selected scientists. Dr. Newcomb sailed May 6, Professor Münsterberg May 30, and Professor Small June 6. A general interest in the project had at this time become aroused, and there was assured a respectful hearing. Both the President of the United States and the Emperor of Germany expressed their warm interest in the plan, and the State Department at Washington gave to the Congress both on this occasion and on succeeding occasions its effective aid. The Director of Congresses wishes to express his obligations both to the late Secretary Hay and to Assistant-Secretary Loomis for their valuable suggestions and courteous coöperation in all matters relating to the foreign participation. Strong support was also given the Committee and the plan of the Congress by Commissioner-General Lewald of Germany, and Commissioner-General Lagrave of France. Throughout the entire Congress period, both of these energetic Commissioners-General placed themselves actively at the disposition of the Department in promoting the attendance of scientists from their respective countries.

Geographically the division between the three members of the Organizing Committee gave to Dr. Newcomb, France; to Professor Münsterberg, Germany, Austria, and Switzerland; and to Professor Small, England, Russia, Italy, and a part of Austria. It was also agreed that Dr. Newcomb should have special oversight of the departments of Mathematics, Physics, Astronomy, Biology, and Technology; Professor Münsterberg, special charge of Philosophy, Philology, Art, Education, Psychology, and Medicine; and that Professor Small should look after Politics, Law, Economics, Theology, Sociology, and Religion. The Committee worked independently of each other, but met once during the summer at Munich to compare results and to determine their closing movements.

The public and even the Exposition authorities have probably never realized the delicacy and the extremely careful adjustment exercised by the Organizing Committee in their summer's campaign. Scientists are as a class sensitive, jealous of their reputations, and loath to undertake long journeys to a distant country for congress purposes. The amount of labor devolving upon the Committee to find the scientists scattered over all Europe; the careful and painstaking presentation to each of the plan of the Congress; the appeal to their scientific pride; the hearing of a thousand objections, and the answering of each; the disappointments incurred; the substitutions made necessary at the last moment;--all sum up a task of the greatest difficulty and of enormous labor. The remarkable success with which the mission was crowned stands out the more prominently in view of these conditions. When the Committee returned in the latter part of September, they had visited every important country of Europe, delivered more than one hundred fifty personal invitations, and for the one hundred twenty-eight sections had secured one hundred seventeen acceptances.

At a meeting of the Administrative Board, which met with the Organizing Committee on October 13, 1903, a full report of the European trip was received and ways and means considered for insuring the attendance from abroad. A list of the foreign acceptances was ordered printed at once for general distribution, and the Chairman of the Administrative Board was requested to address a letter to each of the foreign scientists confirming the action of the special delegates and giving additional information as to the length of addresses, and rules and details governing the administration of the Congress.

DEATH OF FREDERICK W. HOLLS

The number of the Administrative Board was decreased during the summer by the sudden death of the Hon. Frederick W. Holls, on July 23, 1903. Mr. Holls had been intensely interested in the development of the Congress from its earliest days, and was very instrumental in determining the form in which it was finally promoted. His great influence abroad as a member of the Hague Conference, and his high standing in legal and literary circles in this country, rendered him one of the most prominent members of the Board. A resolution of regret at his untimely death was spread upon the minutes of the Administrative Board at the meeting in October, and it was decided that his place upon the Board should remain unfilled.

DOMESTIC PARTICIPATION

At this same meeting of October 13, active measures were taken to forward the American participation in the Congress. The necessity was now very evident that our strongest men of science must be induced to take part, in order to compare favorably with the leading minds which Europe was sending. The Organizing Committee were instructed to consult the American scientific societies and associations regarding the selection of American speakers, and also in reference to presiding officials for each section. Six weeks was considered sufficient for this task, and the Committee were asked to submit to the Administrative Board at a meeting in New York, on December 3 and 4, their recommendations for American speakers.

An immense amount of detailed labor, in the way of correspondence, now devolved upon the Organizing Committee as well as upon the Director of Congresses, and a branch office was established in Washington equipped with clerks and stenographers under the charge of Dr. Newcomb, who devoted the greater portion of his time for the next six months to the many details connected with the selection of foreign and American speakers and chairmen. The meeting of the Administrative Board in New York in December, and a similar meeting with the Organizing Committee held at the St. Louis Club on December 28, were given over entirely to perfecting the personnel of the programme. Great care was exerted in selecting the chairmen of the departments and sections, inasmuch as they must be men of international reputation and conceded strength. For the secretaryships younger men of promise and ability were selected, chiefly from university circles. Both the chairmen and secretaries served without compensation.

The work of the late winter was a continuance of the perfecting of details, and at a meeting of the Administrative Board held in New York in February, 1904, a final approval was given to the programme and the speakers. The imminent approach of the Exposition and the work of the college commencement season made it impossible for further general meetings, and on June 1 the Organizing Committee was constituted a committee with power to fill vacancies in the programme or to amend the programme as circumstances might demand. All suggestions with reference to details were to be made directly to the Director of Congresses, upon whom devolved from this time forward the entire executive control of the Congress.

ASSEMBLY HALLS