Dr. CLARK, of Toronto; Dr. JOHN A STEVENSON, of London, Ontario, Canada; Dr. ROSEBRUGH, of Hamilton, Canada; Dr. DILLON, of Dublin; Dr. DRYSDALE, of London; Dr. EMILIO L. DE MOLA, of Lima, Peru; Prof. G. B. ERCOLANI, of Bologna, Italy.

The Permanent Secretary called the roll of States, and the following was announced as constituting the Committee on Nominations

Alabama, Wм. O. BALDWIN; Arkansas, E. R. DUVAL; California, G. A. SHURTLEFF; Colorado, CHARLES DENISON; Connecticut, M. STORRS; Delaware, Wм. MARSHALL; District of Columbia, JOHNSON ELIOT; Florida, A. J. WAKEFIELD; Georgia, J. G. THOMAS; Illinois, G. W. NESBIT; Indiana, MARSHALL SEXTON; Iowa, H. B. RANSOM; Kentucky, J. A. OCTERLONY; Kansas, W. S. TREMAINE; Louisiana, T. G. RICHARDSON; Missouri, P. G. ROBINSON; Michigan, J. B. Book; Minnesota, C. POWELL ADAMS; Maryland, JUDSON GILMAN; Maine, W. R. OAKS; Mississippi, R. E. HOWARD; Massachusetts, JOSEPH H. WARREN; New York, E. M. MOORE; New Jersey, II. A. HOPPER; North Carolina, J. L. STATEN; New Hampshire, G. P. CONN; Ohio, A. E. HEIGHWAY; Oregon, H. R. HOLMES; Pennsylvania, S. D. GROSS; Rhode Island, ARIEL BALLOU; South Carolina, S. BARUCH; Tennessee, DUNCAN EVE; Texas. J. H. POPE; Vermont, A. J. WOODWARD; Virginia, F. D. CUNNINGHAM; West Virginia, M. CAMPBELL ; Wisconsin, WALTER KEMPSTER; United States Army, J. S. BILLINGS; United States Navy, J. R. TRYON.

Dr. ALBERT L. GIHON, of the Medical Department United States Navy, brought up the question of the non-registration of their delegates.

After much discussion, Dr. F. PRATT, of Michigan, a member of the Judicial Council, having declared that no authenticated charges bad been presented to that body, on motion of Dr. S. D. GROSS it was agreed that they should be admitted until such charges should be authenticated.

The Permanent Secretary read a report from the Judicial Council.

Report of Judicial Council relating to Allen County Medical Society of Indiana.

That all questions arising in or growing out of the communication from the Allen County Medical Society of Indiana be, and they are hereby referred, for action thereon, to the State

Medical Society of Indiana, for the reason that the matters in controversy, partly personal and partly of a society nature, involve questions which must be settled in accordance with its law, and which it has not decided.

Also

That the Secretary be, and he is hereby instructed to forward the papers relating to this case and now in his hands, to the Secretary of the aforesaid State Medical Society. S. N. BENHAM,

Secretary of Judicial Council.

Dr. WM. BRODIE presented the following:

To the President and Members of the American Medical Association. The undersigned, who were appointed at the last meeting of this Association as representatives to the Canada Medical Association, to be held in the city of London, Ont., on the 10th and 11th of September, 1879, respectfully report that they attended that meeting, and were received with cordiality and attention. The meeting was well attended, and valuable papers were read and discussed in which we were invited to take part. They also showed that our brethren of the Dominion of Canada felt a pride and interest in their Association and its success. The Association was hospitably entertained by the profession of London, to which your representatives were invited. To the toast of "The Medical Profession of the United States," a high tribute was paid to American physicians and surgeons and to this Association. We congratulate our Canadian brethren on the growth and progress of their National Association, and recommend that the amenities so pleasantly begun be continued, and that the interchange of representatives and proceedings be indefinitely prolonged.

Dr. R. P. Howard, of Montreal, was elected President, and Dr. A. II. David, of Montreal, General Secretary. The Association adjourned to meet in the city of Ottawa, the seat of their general government, the first Wednesday in September, 1880.

It was received and ordered to be entered in the minutes. Dr. FOSTER PRATT, of Michigan, presented the following from the committee on the propositions offered at last session by Dr. S. E. CHAILLE, of Louisiana.

Mr. President and Gentlemen :

One year ago, Dr. S. E. Chaillé, of New Orleans, read before this Association a very interesting and elaborate paper advocating a "more efficient organization of this Association and its branches" with "greater uniformity, as well as greater strength of organization of the State medical societies and their auxiliaries," to the end, mainly, that State and local societies may exercise in their respective States and localities a greater and better influence on State medicine. Resolutions were also offered, by

the same gentleman, and adopted by the Association, directing the appointment of a committee of five to report at this meeting upon nine distinct propositions, or parts of a plan, suggested by the mover of the resolutions as the basis or beginning of a more uniform and a stronger organization of the medical profession in the United States.

These nine propositions are as follows:—

1. The compilation of a model code of detailed regulations for the government of State and county medical societies.

2. The requirement, from every State medical society, of an annual report to contain certain data to be specified and necessary to show the condition and progress of each of these State societies and of their auxiliary branches; to also contain a brief summary of the peculiarities of its organization, and of the measures being used by it to promote medical organization; and still further, to contain a brief summary of the laws of the State in reference to State medicine, and of the efforts being made to promote the practice of State medicine. Such reports should be published in the annual transactions of such societies.

3. The publication in the annual Transactions of this Association of a consolidated report of the above reports from each State, together with special notice of the meritorious work done by any of the branches of this Association.

4. The substitution of a periodical medical journal for the present annual volume of Transactions.

5. The non-recognition by this Association of State societies. which make no provisions encouraging the organization of auxiliary societies in counties, etc.

6. The advisability of electing no person, either a permanent member or a member by invitation, unless such person be a member of a State medical society; provided, that there be such a society recognized by this Association in his State.

7. The advisability of refusing to admit to this Association delegates from societies auxiliary to a State society, unless the certificates of delegation be endorsed by an authorized officer of the State society..

8. The advisability of refusing to admit any delegates except those selected from and elected only by voting members who have paid all fees due to their respective county and State societies, and of establishing the principle that only such members of branch societies who are entitled to vote and have paid all fees due will be entitled to delegates.

9. The advisability of urging every medical college to have not less than one lecture delivered to every graduating class on the importance to the profession and to the people of medical organization.

Your committee having given these propositions the careful consideration to which they are entitled by their authorship,

by the importance of their subject matter, and by the action of this Association, now beg leave to report:

The fifth of these propositions (for convenience and logical order) is first considered. It proposes that this Association refuse to recognize all State societies which make no provision encouraging the organization of auxiliaries in counties, etc.

The constituent elements of this Association are State and local societies and the medical departments of the army and navy; and its voting power is lodged in delegates from these constituent bodies; if, for good cause or manifest necessity, this voting power sees fit to change the constituent elements of this body or their mode of representation, it may very properly do 80. But this is not a proposition to change these elements, or the system or the basis of their representation; it is a proposition to compel a constituent State society, under penalty of exclusion or expulsion from this body, to do, not here, but at home, a thing which, in appearance at least, relates mainly if not wholly to the internal affairs and local interests of the constituent itself. This, if adopted, involves a change of our constitution requiring a three-fourths vote of this Association, and your committee are of opinion that the proposition cannot be carried.

But, even if its adoption were practicable, your committee cannot believe it wise to make a change so radical in the organic attitude or spirit of this Association towards its constituents. Hitherto, the organic law of this Association has demanded unity only on its ethical code, and by manifest design permits or expects diversity in the details of State and local organization. It is a noticeable fact that the organic law of this body is so framed as to be in general harmony with the political institutions and habits of our people. The change proposed, if adopted, disturbs this harmony. For the republican idea, and a local control of local affairs, it would substitute, in effect, the monarchie idea and a central control; State societies, instead of being, as they now are, constituent bodies, with freedom of action in their domestic affairs, would soon become subordinate bodies subject to a central control in all things.

To confidently predict injury to our organic interests from such a change, it is not, by any means, necessary to assume that this Association, even if clothed with supreme or dictatorial power, would use it to oppress its constituents, or damage the profession. Discontent and division would, probably, spring, not so much from the thing done, as from the mode of doing it. But, it may be said, that this proposed amendment of our organic law does not, if adopted, confer supreme power on this Association. True, in all things it does not; but it is, in fact, an autocratic step, and, if taken, it will be a precedent for other similar steps; and, if the ultimate step of such a series be dangerous, why take the first? Obsta principiis!

It may also be said, and truly, that all who dislike our ways, if out, can stay out; or, if in, can go out; but, in a body like this, such conditions are too much like those of a State, which repel the immigrant and expatriate the citizen.

Your committee are of the opinion, that such an attempt by this body to exercise dictatorial power in such matters on its constituent organizations would tend, invariably, to weaken the medical organization we have, and to correspondingly weaken its influence for good everywhere.

Observation seems to teach that scientific and other voluntary bodies, among an intelligent people, are conspicuously successful only when they copy, as nearly as may be, the forms and methods of their surrounding political institutions.

The medical and other scientific bodies of England, France, and Germany exercise a central and controlling power; they dictate forms of organization; they parcel out the powers and impose the duties of their subordinate bodies; they exercise, and are expected to exercise, supreme authority over all the purposes and interests of the general organization. There this is successfully and harmoniously done, because it is in accordance with the habits of a people educated and moulded by the autocratic method of their political institutions.

But in these United States scientific organizations of a national scope differ in form and method from all similar institutions in other parts of the world, just as and because our republican idea and plan of government differ from the monarchical and imperial idea and plan.

Each form has its advantages and its disadvantages; but, as before remarked, the rule seems to be that the success of such bodies depends on the degree to which they conform the voluntary to the political form of government. Especially is this true of scientific bodies, composed of people attached, as well as accustomed, to their political forms and methods; and the degree of that attachment accurately measures the danger of a neglect or violation of the prevalent susceptibilities.

Again, literature, art, and science, whether organized or unorganized, are, in a sense, republics; the influence and renown of each guild is due to the individual genius, the individual talent, the individual investigation, and the individual achievements of its members; republican by nature, they find a congenial home under republican institutions; and when so located, they will be and they should be doubly reluctant to adopt the forms and methods of autocracy or of imperialism, even though the end to be reached thereby seem to be desirable and proper.

Descending now from general to particular considerations, your committee calls attention to the fact that the proposition under consideration suggests that we refuse to recognize any State medical society that makes no provision "encouraging the organization" of county and local societies. Differences of