I have since heard that is has been held that these resolutions had been irregularly so communicated; that is, that the communication was made in a semi-official manner.  I beg to express an entire disclaimer of anything of that sort.  It was merely my individual action, and I desired to give notice of certain resolutions, with the sole view of having them fully understood before we met and to save time.  I hope, therefore, that this excuse and explanation will be understood and accepted.

These resolutions are founded, as far as may be, upon those adopted at Rome.  They differ from them only in two points.  In the counting of longitude the Conference at Rome proposed that it should take place around the globe in one direction.  This counting was to be in the direction from west to east.

Very singularly, I find in the report of the proceedings of the Roman Conference no discussion on that subject.  No questions were asked, nor were any reasons given, why it should be so counted, and yet it was an entire divergence from the usage of the world at that time.  The wording of the resolution of the Conference at Rome is substantially this:  That the counting of longitude should take place from the meridian of Greenwich in the single direction of west to east.

It being my desire to avail myself, as far as possible, of the work of the Conference at Rome, I consulted with my colleagues here, and found that there was a great diversity of opinion.  In the first place, some said we have always counted longitude both ways, east to west and west to east.  Shall we cease to do that?  Those who claimed that it was a more scientific way to count all around the globe immediately differed on the direction in which the longitude should be counted.  Without going into any argument as to which of these methods would be the best or most convenient, I propose, by the second resolution, that we should go on in the old way, and count longitude from the initial meridian in each direction.

One of the objects of the third resolution is to make the new universal day coincide with the civil day rather than with the astronomical day.  In the Conference at Rome the universal day was made to coincide with the astronomical day.  It seems to me that the inconvenience of that system would be so great that we ought to hesitate before adopting it.  For us in America, perhaps the inconvenience would not be so very great, but for such countries as France and England, and those lying about the initial meridian, the inconvenience would be very great, for the morning hours would be one day, and the afternoon hours would be another day.  That seems to me to be a very great objection.

It was simply, therefore, to obviate this difficulty that this resolution was offered.  I hope, notwithstanding, that some day, not far distant, all these conflicting days, the local, the universal, the nautical, and the astronomical, may start from some one point.  This hope I have the greater reason to cherish since I have communicated with the distinguished gentlemen who are here present, and it was with that hope before me that I framed the resolution so that the beginning of the day should be the midnight at the initial meridian, and not the mid-day.  With this explanation, I now again move the adoption of the first resolution, which is as follows: