PHILOSOPHICAL INSTITUTE.

Globe, Volume II, Issue 180, 6 January 1875, Page 3

PHILOSOPHICAL INSTITUTE.

A special meeting of the institute was held last evening at the Public Library. Present—Dr Haast (president), Rev C. Fraser, His Honor the Superintendent, Professor Bickerton, Drs Coward, Powell, and Turnbull, H. J, Tancred, J. Inglis, R. W. Fereday, W. D. Carruthers, H. B. Johnstone, W, M. Maskell, G. Hall, 0, M. Wakefield (hon sec), and Lewis. This meeting had been called to consider resolutions received from the Board of Governors of the Nt w Zealand institute, in reply resolution of the Canterbury institute complaining of the paper made public by Mr Alexander Mackay—who had been employed by Dr Haast in making excavations ah the Moa.-point cave, Sumner—giving the result of thos; excavations, and asking that the Board would prevent the paper being published in the year’s Transactions of the New Zealand Institute.

The hon secretary read a letter of date 22nd December from Dr Hector, in reply, forwarding by direction of the Board of Governors a copy of resolutions passed at a meeting of the Board, also copies of documents referred to in the resolutions. A second letter from Dr Hector was also read of same date, acknowledging receipt of letter enclosing Dr Haast’s paper on the Sumner cave, and remarks concerning its publication, and stating that it would be observed these had been dealt with iu tho resolutions forwarded under cover of that day’s date. A copy of a protest from Dr Haast to the Board of Governors against Mr Mackay’s paper being allowed to be published in the Transactions of the Institute was also read.

The following are the resolutions referred to passed by the Board of Governors “ 1. That the paper by Mr Mackay having been forwarded in due coarse to the , Board by,one of the affiliated societies for publication in the transactions, the Board can only Consider the question., of its publication on the same footing as that of papers generally submitted by affiliated societies, the Board having no power to deal with the question raised by the Canterbury Philosophical Society in the manner suggested in the communication ,made by the hon secretary of that society under date of 6th October last. “ 2. That moreover as it appears from the report of Dr Hector that the views in the paper hre different from those held by Dr Haatt on a subject of general interest which has already been, frequently discussed by inembers of the Institute, as appears from the transactions already published, tne Board Is of opinion thnt it ia desirable that both papers should appear in the transactions ror the current year. • , . ; ! “3. That the several documents submitted to the Board in connection with the question faised by the Philosophical' Institute of Canterbury should be published in the profcSedirigs.' - —• , stimoh \iiu.l) { “4.-That' a copy of 1 these resolutions be forwarded to the Philosophical-Institute of Canterbury, .together with a copy of the memorandum of .Mr Mackayi ; Attached to these resolutions was a memo from Dr Hector,, stating that Mr M ick ay Jiad read his paper before the Wellington 'Philosophical Institute (of which he is a member), and which institute had forwarded tit for publication; and had he (Dr Hector) advised its suppression, he would considei ‘ hat jhfi was presuming on his official relations dth -Mr Mackay. .< \ A memo from Mr Mackay appended gave hjhistory.of bis employment by Dr Haast in jmakiug excavations at Sumner, and concluded as follows:— li When I gave, you the paper for publication I had no intention of attempting to forestall Dr Haast, or to do anything but make known what 1 knew about the cave, firmly believing, ns I did, that Dr Haast'had no intention of publishing jaiijrfhing on the subject.” ! A protest was here handed in by Dr Haast, protesting against the mode in which the 'Board of Governors of the New Zealand Institute glossed over the breach of faith committed by his (Dr Haust’s) subordinate in 'publishing discoveries made by him (Dr Haast). .. ■ After some discussion, a resolution moved by the Rev Mr Fraser, was withdrawn, in ifavor of the following, moved by his Honor 'the Superintendent, ‘‘Tv That this Institute does not wish to pursue farther the consideration of the course taken by the Board of Governors in respect to Mr Mackay’s paper, but [ 1 desires to obtain an authoritative opinion upon the general question of how far scientific matter, collected by a person employed to collect the same is the property of the person who employes the collector. 2. That the Council be requested to prepare an accurate statement of a case, the-decision of which would determine the principle which should guide the present and similar cases. 3. That the case so stated should after being ■laid before the Institute be submitted to such independent authority as may be deemed tit.” Mr G. Hall seconded the resolution.

The Rev Mr Fraser moved the following addition to the resolution, between the words “bub” and “desire” “As the Board of Governors does not appear to have ■xpressed an opinion upon the general principle urged by this. Institute.” This was seconded by Mr Tancrcl, and being put both amendment and resolution were carried. The secretary read a letter from Dr tendering his resignation as President of the Institute, in consequence of the resolutions irrivcd at by the Board of Governors of the Mew Zealand Institnte.

Several members expressed their regrei that Dr Haast should have adopted th:s ;ourse, and made the matter a personal one, md hoped he would withdraw his resignation.

Dr Haast consented, and on the motion oi Dr Coward, seconded by Mr -Hall, the with irawal was accepted. Professor Brown was elected a member o: the institute. The meeting then adjourned.