The Status of Engineering Societies.
Page 1
Page 2
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
There has, of late years, been a growing dissatisfaction amongst engineers with the methods by which the affairs of some more-or-leas scientific societies are conducted. and, as not all of these institutions have met with success, financial or otherwise, their respective councils should see that the affairs of their societies are placed in order without delay. The status of the engineering profession suffers greatly, as a result of the slipshod methods of election to membership of the societies we have in mind, the lack of dignity which characterizes their meetings, the, toadying of the secretaries to the members of council, and the almost-complete monopolization of discussion by those members of council who seek self-advertisement on such occasions—no matter whether they have experience of the subject under discussion, or lack all knowledge of it. Members have, only too often, sat and listened to the same men laying down the law on a range of subjects varying from body building to the consideration of some abstruse problem in thermodynamics, from time stoking of a steam wagon to an expression of opinion on the best system of springing for a racing motorcar, from water softeners to the design of modern machine tools, and from the building of brickmaking machines to the microscopic analysis of high-grade steels. The private member, who may be an expert in one particular subjec, has frequently sat and groaned, while a member of the council has been displaying his colossal ignorance of that subject in a speech lasting well over half an hour. The time-limit rule, of course, is conveniently forgotten. That private member could give some valuable information on the subject, and his views would be appreciated by his fellow members, but, when he rises to speak, he is asked to communicate his remarks to the secretary, as there is no more time available for discussion. After he has been treated once in this manner, a private member rarely offers the results of his special experiences on any subsequent occasion. In theory, every corporate member has an equal right to participate in a discussion, providing he has anything of value to impart, but-. in practice, the secretary, during the reading of the paper by the author, tiptoes round the lecture hall from one ccuncillor to another—probably winding up with a few of the more well-known members—each of whom is invited to speak. The list of names thus secured—in some instituitions, the same list might be made to serve for all its n.eetings—is handed to the president, who must either call on the persons who answer to those names, or declare war on the secretary for his undignified procedure. Some members of council, unfortunately, appear to forget that they were elected to represent the corporate members; they regard their positions as affording excellent opportunities for self-aggrandisement. They also seem to ignore the fact that the financial position of the society to which they belong depends largely, if not wholly, on the suhscriptions of corporate members, who are practically disfranchised by the tactics adopted.
We do not attack any particular society or institution : several are in urgent need of reform. Membership is not valued, unless the dignity which should be inseparable from a society devoted to scientific research is jealously guarded. and unless the constitution and by-laws are so framed as to insure that the proceedings will be of benefit to the majority of the members, as well as to the profession of engineering, or branelies of it. We are prompted, in fact, to make this criticism, after having read the memorandum and articles of association and the new bylaws of the Society of Engineers (Incorporated), which institution is the outcome of the amalgamation in January last of the Society of Engineers and the Civil and Mechanical Engineers' Society. The former society was founded in 1834, whilst the latter was instituted five years later, and, although originally they had slightly-different ol-jects in view, their work has been practically identical for some years past. Several of this reconstituted objects in view, their work has been practically identical tions. We find, among them, that-" mob" voting for the election of members is to give place to a system under which a member may vote only for those candidates of whom he has personal knowledge. Then, again, should any debatable question affecting the society or the engineering profession arise, a ballot by post may be taken, if desired by two per cent. of all the corporate members. Comparing this method with the more-usual one of calling a special general meeting. at which probably not more
than one-fortieth of all members is present to decide the fate of some fundamental point affecting the interests of the 3vho1e of the members, it is clearly -the superior. Discussions on papers would be more useful and valuable to members, we feel certain, if the verbatim reports of the proceedings were available before the expiration of fnun three to six months, or, in some cases, more than twelve months after the date of the meeting. The proceedings of the reconstituted Society of Engineers will be issued it, twelve monthly parts, each containing a paper, current announcements, editorial notes, and verbatim reports ot discussions. We commend these and other reforms to the serious consideration of other societies.