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.