摘要:

THE Institute of Chemistry OF Great Britain & Ireland. FOUNDED, 1877. INCORPORATED BY ROYAL CHARTER, 1885. PRESIDENT PROFESSORRAPHAEL MELDOLA, D.SC., F.R.S. Conference of Professors of Chemistry, held at 30, Bloomsbury Square,. London, W.C., on Friday, 17th October, i913. NOVEMBER, 1913. CONTENTS. I’AGE AGENDA 3 .REPORTOF THE CONFERENCE . 26 NOTESRECEIVEDAFTERTHE CONFEREXCE. -77 STATEMENT BY 3PRELIMINARY SUBMITTEDTHE PRESIDEKT OFNOTESFROM I’V~EMBERS THE CONFERENCE. -9 INDEXTO NAMES . * 84 3 Conference of Professors of Chemistry. Friday, 1 7th October, 19 13. AGENDA. To consider-I. The relation of the qualifications of the Institute to those of other educational institutions ; 11. The general question of the training of professional chemists :-(a) General Training ; (b) Special Training: (i.) for private practice or Government service ; (ii.) for works practice ; (iii.) for teaching practice; and (c) The place of research in training and practice.111. The work of the Institute in matters of professional interest in all branches. Preliminary Statement submitted by the President as a basis for discussion. I. The object of the Conference is to provide an opportunity for the interchange of opinion among those who are responsible for the training of students preparing for the practice of chemistry in its various branches. It is clear that we have a common object which we regard from different points of view, and I have been asked to formulate a statement, introducing several.matters of imme- diate interest, which may form a basis for discussion on this occasion. 2. The Institute of Chemistry is one of many similar organisations founded in the nineteenth century to meet the necessity for hall-marking the competent in various callings which have come into existence as distinct professions with the advance of civilisation. 4 THEPRESIDENI'. The objects of the Institute are briefly- (i.) To promote the better education of persons desirous of becoming professional consulting and technolo- gical chemists ; (ii.) to examine candidates and to register such as have been found to be competent ; (iii.) to elevate the profession of consulting and analytical chemistry by setting up a high standard of scientific and practical proficiency, and by insisting on the observance of strict rules in regard to professional conduct ; and we may add (iv.) generally to promote the welfare of the profession of chemistry.3. Taking these objects in order we rnay consider how far the Institute has fulfilled its functions. The management of the Institute is vested in a Council of chemists drawn from various parts of the country and repre- senting various departments of work. Successive Councils have framed their views on the question of the training of professional chemists, and the result has been to bring together a consensus of opinion which is to be found in our printed Regulations.At the time of the foundation of the Institute-nearly forty years ago-very few institutions gave such a training as we now demand. The advance of higher chemical training has been concurrent with the progress of the Institute, and it will be admitted that the Institute has exercised considerable influence in the encouragement of the training of chemists in duly recog- nised institutions. Its examinations, in which a very high standard has been maintained, provide the machinery for testing the products of the recognised institutions, by an impartial Board of Examiners of acknowledged repute in various branches of work-not only teachers, but men experienced in the more directly practical applications of their science. Further, the Institute has maintained for the community a register of chemists who have passed the necessary tests, and has endeavoured to promote and maintain among its Fellows and Associates a high sense of professional integrity.It is to the interest of all competent chemists that they should be bound together with the object of promoting the welfare of 5 THEPRESIDENT. the profession as a whole; that such a brotherhood should en- gender mutual respect among its members in their professional relations one with another; and that there should be a representa-tive body to which the Government, the public, and the Fellows and Associates themselves should look for advice and assistance. 4. The Universities were originally intended to preserve our inheritance of knowledge and for the extension of the bounds of knowledge.The experience of our time has shown how greatly the extension of knowledge has been directed to the more utilitarian development of intellectual activity, and in- cidentally we must not fail to acknowledge the enormous influence in this respect which has been exercised in so many directions by workers outside the immediate academic sphere. The professor and the professional worker look to one another for mutual help, and an organised body embracing teaching and practice must conduce to the better fulfilment of such objects as the Institute has in view. 5. The Council have aimed at the enrolment of competent chemists, and we may proceed to consider the ~nisorzd’itve of the tests of competency at present applied.The Intermediate Exam- ination is intended to test the general knowledge of chemistry possessed by the candidates, and the Final, their capacity to apply that knowledge well in at least one department of our science. To avoid unnecessary multiplication of examinations, the possession of a 1st or and Class Honours Degree in Chem- istry entitles the holder to apply for exemption from the Inter- mediate, but even in such cases the Examiners frequently find a want of grasp of general principles ; and it would appear from this evidence that our teaching is lacking in co-ordination, probably resulting from the tendency of teachers to specialise. Such a tendency is but natural in such a vast subject as that with which we are concerned, but the view of the Institute is that we must aim at supp!ying chemists in the general sense who should be sufficiently widely acquainted with their science to apply it, if necessary, to any special department to which they may become attached when they enter on the business of life.6 THEPRESIDENT. In the great manufacturing centres specialisation has been encouraged by the needs of local industries, and there is no doubt that employers have reaped great benefit from the researches of special technological departments and from the services of young specialists; but the danger which we have to meet is the resulting tendency to premature specialisation. We are asked to acknowledge the claims of Bachelors of Science who have taken degrees in various technological departments, and I may say that the Council are anxious to encourage them to join the Institute.We shal! be glad, there- fore, to consider the views of Professors who are interested in this part of our subject. I feel little doubt that they can show that the general training of such candidates will warrant their being placed on the same footing as those who have taken Degrees in ‘‘ pure ” science. It has been contended from time to time that the ohject of the Institute is mainly to provide the comniiinity with public analysts and consultants in general practice ; but I may state at once that the Institute embraces and wishes to attract com- petent men engaged in all ,branches of the profession of chemistry.It must be conceded that we could approve of no lower standard of efficiency among teachers or among technolo- gical chemists than among those who engage in public practice. There is no doubt that this view is accepted by teachers in various departments of chemical technology, as well as by those engaged in other branches of chemical education. In other words, the general principle from which we must all set out is the recognition of the necessity for basing specialised knowledge upon a broad and sound training in the general principles of the science and cognate auxiliary subjects. We have inclined to the belief that the broader the basis of scientific education afforded the student the better he is able to determine his special bent and to build up his subsequent career.6. With the advance of science teaching in schools we are met with a problem of another kind. It is not uncommon for students to come to the Universities having already passed the Intermediate Science Examination of London University. In cases where such students have passed that examination in 7 THEPRESTDEKT. Physics we are asked to exempt them from further training in that science in order that they may concentrate their attention on their main subject--Chemistry. Under the Regulations of the Institute, candidates are required to have been trained up to the B.Sc. standard in Physics, and the Council feel that the subject is of such importance-particularly to those who are to become industrial chemists-that they are anxious to have the question fully discussed on the present occasion. 7.Again, with the growth of technical colleges giving instruc- tion in sciences, the Council of the Institute have been met with the difficulty of deciding which should be recognised as affording a satisfactory training for Candidates for the Exami- nations of the Institute. The problem has been simplified to a certain extent by the regulations under which day classes only are accepted, unless the Candidate has taken the degree of B.Sc. The claims of an institution to be recognised by the Council cannot be decided merely on the acadetnic qualifications and reputation of the teachers for the time being.In considering such applications the Council ask to be fully informed as to the general status of the institutions, the constitution of the teaching staffs, the syllabus of courses, as to the equipment of the chemical and physical laboratories, the general character of the work done by the students, and on other matters which directly concern the prospects of students who seek for proper preparation for their profession. The institution must have acquired a recognised position, though this cannot be strictly defined. The Regulations of the Institute provide that any Candidate who has passed the Final Examination for the Degree of B.Sc. in Chemistry, in an approved University, can apply for admis-sion to the Intermediate Examination of the Institute, and that any Candidate who has graduated with first or second class Honours in Chemistry can apply for admission to the Final (A.I.C.) Examination, provided, in each case, that he can satisfy the Council as to training in Physics and Mathe- matics.By recognising University degrees in this way the Institute has encouraged many Candidates to take full University courses. This, no doubt, has largely contributed 8 THEPRESIDENT. to the fact that over 40 per cent. of the Fellows and Associates are graduates of recognised Universities. The number of Candidates who are successful in University Examinations provides some means of judging the efficiency of the staffs of the institutions seeking formal recognition, and from those which maintain a good recordof such successes the Council of the Institute will in time be able to add to the list of institutions recognised.There are many Candidates, how- ever, who do not wish to acquire an academic qualification, and the institutions seek recognition mainly in their behalf. It it is to be hoped, however, that when such institutions have been added to the recognised list the students will not be deterred from taking the University Examination. The Council deem it to be the duty of the Institute to direct the students to the best possible institutions, even though the number of Candidates for the Associateship may be limited by limiting the number of institutions which are formally recognised. The Council require the authorities of institu-tions applying for recognition to produce evidence that a full and definite course of training for the Associateship cnn be pro- vided ;that its teachers are competent to give such instruction, and that it possesses adequately equipped laboratories.At the same time it is essential that such institutions shall be freely open to inspection if the Council desire to send representatives to visit them. 8. One of the requirements of the Institute at its examinations is the production of records of work done at college and else- where. The records of practical work should be made at the time, and should be as exact as possible, omitting no essential details, and the results and conclusions should be summarised in a concise statement. The Board of Examiners has frequently commented on the fact that these records are too often not the actual working notes of the Candidates, but written up specially for the occasion, so that the Examiners are, therefore, less able to gauge them at their true value.It will be generally agreed that the formulation of concise reports on practical work should form part of the chemist’s curriculum. 9 Notes from Members of the Conference. DR.JAMES BRUCE,Technical College, Huddersfield. The policy of the Institute with regard to the number of recognised Institutions has been hitherto a conservative one, and recognition is at present restricted practically to the Universities. There are, however, many other Institutions which provide a training of degree standard, and at which students are frequently found, who, while either not desiring to take, or debarred by circumstances from obtaining, a University degree, yet require for technical purposes a training similar in scope to that which is necessary for a degree.Many such students would gladly avail themselves of increased facilities for acquiring the Diploma of the Institute, and it appears to me that, without in any way lowering the standard of the examinations, an extension of recognition to the more important technical institutions providing a three or four years’ course in Chemistry would be advantageous, not only to the public, but to the Institute itself. Mr. A. CHASTON Examiner for the Intermediate CHAPMAN, Examination and in General Chemistry.I. It is clear that it is only by friendly and full co-operation between professorial chemists and professional chemists that the best educational results can be obtained. 2. Trailzing foy pyofessional pynctice.-I t will be readily con- ceded that there are men who will do well, no matter in what educational surroundings they may find themselves ; but the Institute has to consider the average man. Three years is too short a period for satisfactory preparation for professional practice; that period should be devoted solely to general scientific training-including chemistry, physics and mathe-matics-and the acquisition of a useful acquaintance with French and German.The chemical teaching should be directed to giving the student a sound grasp of general principles and making him an accurate and careful worker. It is better that, save in the case of the exceptional man, little or no research should be done during this period. 10 11.1 ri . CHAPMAN. Students at the end of their three years’ course, in many cases, have not obtained a thorough grip of the fundamentals of the science, and are incapable of performing simple analytical operations in a cleanly and accurate manner, although in not a few cases they appear to have done research work. If the student is to cover his curriculum well, four years devoted to geiwal studies will not be too long. 3. Many parents regard Chemistry as a profession for which their sons can qualify themselves with the minimum expendi- ture.It would be well to impress upon them that they should be prepared to face an educational period of four or five years, and perhaps to contribute to their sons’ support for some time after the completion of college training, 4. Assuming that the student has devoted four years to general training, has obtained a thorough grounding in chemistry, a good general knowledge of physics and mathe- matics, and a useful knowledge of French and German, and has perhaps devoted himself during the last six months to research work, he will not in many cases be thoroughly quali- fied to take a position in a technical laboratory. During his academic course, the student is very rightly taught that accuracy is of prime importance, but the factor time, which means so much in the technical or works’ laboratory, is usually neglected.He has been taught to work without reference to the disturbing influence of mass, and to think in terms of C.C. and grammes, instead of in thousands of gallons and tons. Finally, he has not, as a rule, been taught how to approach a practical problem calling for solution ; nor will he, as a rule, have acquired any knowledge of chemical engineering or of the interpretation of drawings of plant. 5. The student should therefore devote a fifth year to remedying these defects,and to bridging over the gap between his academic studies and work in the factory. This would be best secured if his work were arranged and supervised by a Board consisting partly of technical experts who are thoroughly con- versant with the requirements of industries.Not that he should devote himself to any one special branch of chemical technology, except as an “example,” but that he should be trained for a period under conditions approximating more to 11 hfR. CHXPMXN. those of the technical or works’ laboratory than to those of the academic laboratory. 6. It is admitted that many who have not had this kind of training have made themselves almost immediately useful to their employers, but that is rather the exception than the rule. On leaving college he will have to acquire his actual practical experience at the expense of his employer; and this position must be fully understood by both.‘The young chemist must realise that he has much to learn before he can be of real use, and the employer must understand that the young chemist at first must be largely a learner, and he must not immediately expect from him the services of a highly trained and experienced technical chemist. A. \V. CROSSLEY,PROFESSOR DSC., F.R.S., School of the Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain ; Examiner for the Intermediate Examination and in General Chemistry, will speak on- I. The aim and object of the Institute Examinations, and whether these are attained under the present system. 2. The age and experience of Candidates. DR. C. H. DESCH,Department of Metallurgical Chemistry, University of Glasgow.I would suggest that the branches of Inorganic and Metal- lurgical Chemistry differ considerably from those of Organic and Physical Chemistry as at present treated by the Institute. In the two latter branches there appears to be no essential difference between the Institute examinations and the degree examinations of most Universities, and a separate examination would be unnecessary if some agreement as to a standard were reached. On the other hand, as far as my experience goes, the standard of manipulative skill (as distinct from knowledge of method) required by the Institute in Mineral Chemistry is higher than that for a University degree, and demands a fairly good acquaintance with accurate technical, as dis-tinguished from academic, methods.The same is true, but perhaps in a lesser degree, of Metallurgical Chemistry. It Is, 12 DR. T>ESCH. I think, essential that the present standard of the Institute should be maintained in these subjects, and whilst exemption from the Intermediate examination might with advantage be granted more frequently to graduates, I am not in favour of abolishing the separate final practical examination in those branches, or of exempting Honours graduates as a matter of course, although in their case the written examination might be dispensed with. I am not in favour of allowing research to replace examina- tion in these branches (Mineral and Metallurgical Chemistry). It is not uncommon to find students who have carried out a piece of research in some restricted branch, who are without the manipulative skill and resource in the wider field of practical chemistry which are requisite for a professional qualification such as the A.I.C.MR. W. W. FISHER,M.A., Aldrichian Demonstrator, Univer- sity of Oxford. I agree generally with those who wish for fuller acceptance of University Honours Exaiiiinations as qualifying for the Institute Final Examinations. DR.GILBERT (Manchester), Examiner in Biological J. FOWLER Chemistry. I. Dr. Gilbert Fowler wishes to emphasise that the examina- tions of the Institute fulfil a distinct purpose and supplement University qualifications. The Universities ensure scientific grounding, the importance of which cannot be over-estimated.The Universities cannot, however, give experience, without which no chemist is really qualified to advise the public. 2. As an examiner to the Institute Dr. Fowler looks for a different liintl of knowledge from what could be expected from purely University trained men. The qualification of F.I.C. should be equivalent to that of M.1nst.C.E. in the engineering profession, which is only granted after a large amount of independent work has been carried out by the candidate. In this way also the public is educated to understand that a chemist, properly so called, is something more than a mere analyst. 13 PROFESSOR D.Sc., Ph.D., University of Bristol.F. FRANCIS, I venture to express my opinions with regard to those candi- dates for the Associateship who are graduates with Honours in Chemistry of one of the British or Colonial Universit es.For such candidates I suggest a special avenue leading to the Associateship of the Institute. (I) I consider it undesirable for the Institute to differentiate between the Honours course in different Universities, and hence suggest that they should discontinue to use the word ‘‘recognise ” as applied to Universities, since it appears to postulate some form of differentiation. (2) I also consider it undesirable for the Institute to demand that the candidate shall have followed certain curricula, since this may interfere with those which each University considers most suitable for Honours candidates, or most suitable for an individual candidate.(3) I venture to give my views in the form of an outline recommendation : “That any candidate who has studied for at least three years in the Honours School of Chemistry (i.e. three years after passing the Intermediate Sc. Examination) in a British or Colonial University and has obtained a degree in that School shall be eligible for the Asso-ciateship without further examination.” YRomssori PERCY Ph.D.,F. FRANKLAND, LL.D., F.R.S., University of Birmingham, will speak on- Requirements in Physics for Associates. PROFESSORA. G. GREEN, M.Sc., Professor of Dyeing and Tinctorial Chemistry, The University, Leeds. I. The conditions of admission to the Associateship and Fellowship are too PZ~YYOW,being more suited for the training of the analytical chemist than for that of the manufacturing and technical chemist.For this reason many excellent young chemists who have received their chemical education upon different though equally good lines are excluded or have great difficulties placed in their way. 14 PROF. GREEN. 2. Whilst there were but few recognised chemical diplomas when the Institute was first inaugurated, there are now many Universities (and other Institutions) giving a sound scientific chemical education capped by an Honours degree. These degrees are known and valued by the chemical industry. 3. There is therefore little inducement to a man who has obtained such a degree to go to the expense and trouble of obtaining the Institute’s qualification in addition, unless the latter carries greater weight in obtaining him employment than the University degree which he already possesses.It cannot now be said that an Honours degree in Chemistry obtained at the IJniversity is a purely academic distinction and no guaran- tee of practical proficiency as a chemist. Though doubtless this was once true, it certainly is not so in regard to the modern Universities, the examinations of which are a severe test of manipulative ability and practical chemical knowledge. 4. As long as manufacturers find that some of the best men are not Fellows of the Institute they will not have the same respect for the Institute’s qualifications, and, mutotis wutnndis, there will be little inducement for students to take the Institute’s examinations. 5.The following are the remedies I would suggest. They may be considered rather drastic and revolutionary, but I submit that the chemists of this country can only be consolidated into one great profession by a radical change of our present pro- cedure. I take it for granted that all the members of this Con- ference are desirous of seeing all proficient and properly educated Lhenzists brought under the aegis of the Institute, irrespective of whether they are engaged in analytical, technical, or teaching practice. 6. In the first place, 1 claim that any course laid down by a recognised University as qualifying for the B.Sc. degree with Honours in Chemistry should be accepted, if the examinations are passed with first or second class Honours, as qualifying a candidate to proceed directly to the Final examination of the Institute, irrespective of whether or not part of the chemical cozwse am? subects of examination are of a specialised character.Always provided that the Institute’s examiners are given all facilities by the University for satisfying themselves that the degree exami- nations are a proper test of laboratory proficiency, and, further, 15 PROF.GREES. that the course of training extends over a period of not less than four years from the matriculation standard. 7. The requirements of the Institute as to the course to be pursued and the subjects of study and examination should be so widened that whilst a sound theoretical training in the prin- ciples of chemical science is fully assured, there may be much greater latitude for variations in the course.Thus in the Final examination a candidate should be allowed to select special branches of pure or applied chemistry in which to be examined, both by paper and practical work, in addition to any more general paper on chemical theory which might be set. In other words the principle of sub-division, which is at present admitted, should be carried much further. 8. Lastly, T would supplement the above recommendations by a far more radical one, namely, that candidates should be admitted to the Associateship withozct exawination if they hold a first or second class Honours degree in Chemistry of a University recognised by the Institute, provided such degree has been conferred after a four years’ course of Chemical study since matriculation, and that the Institute’s examiners have been given facilities for satisfying themselves as to the efficiency of the Final practical examination upon which the degree was awarded.The Institute’s examiners might in fact be co-opted as esternal examiners or assessors at the University Degree Examinations whenever candidates for the Institute were being examined. G. G. HENDERSON,PROFESSOR hI.A., D.Sc., LL.D., Royal Technical College, University of Glasgow. I. I am of opinion that science degrees in technological departments (e.g., Applied Chemistry or Metallurgy) should receive the same recognition as degrees in '' pure " science, provided always that the degree courses include training in Mathematics, Physics and Practical Physics, and Chemistry and Practical Chemistry, at least equivalent in standard and in amount to that required for the Intermediate Examination of the Institute. 2.(a) and (b). As regards the training of chemists, I think that ail students should have the same course during their fir:t year : that during the second and third years, while the courses 16 PROF.HENDERSON. in chemistry remain the same for all, the other subjects to be taken by the students should be varied according as private practice, works practice, or teaching practice is selected as the branch to be followed; and that in the fourth (and subsequent years) the chemical training should be modified accordingly. In this connection I suggest that the Conference might con- sider the advisability of including Gerzevnl Clzemictrl Technology (Chemical Engineering in a broad sense) as an option for the Final Examination.(c) It is, in my opinion, most desirable that students should be encouraged to do some research work before leaving College. I should like to see a little research work included as an essential part of any course of training. 3. I hope that the Institute will continue to attract young technological chemists even more notably than it has done in the past. It is partly for this reason that I put forward the claim of Chemical ’Technology for recognition as a ‘‘ Final ” subject.R4r. GEORGET. HOLLOWAY,A.K.C.Sc., Examiner in Metal- lurgical Chemistry, IVill deal with the question of the training and examination of candidates whose aim is to practise in technical and com-mercial analytical work, including assaying and general testing of ores, mineral and metallurgical products, alloys, etc. I. Tmisiing.--The fundamental importance of systematic training in qualitative analysis as the basis of quantitative commercial work. The “mixtures” commonly given to students for analysis are too often such as are never found in practice ; materials and products should be selected which may reason- ably be expected to occur in actual practice. There is no time for specialisation during training ; students who have devoted a year or two in a research laboratory are generally less useful and “trainable” than the raw student who has only been taught general principles. 2.Insfitutiom--The Regulations with regard to the recog- nition of institutions should be relaxed in the interests of students who have not the means to attend day courses for three years. 3. Exnminatiows.-Too much prominence cannot be given to 17 MR. HOLIAWAY-. the oral examination and to the personal observation of the candidates’ work and methods. 4. Candidates’ College Records.-Greater care and attention should be given to the training of Candidates in recording their work and observations. No Candidate should be allowed to, take the Examinations until his notebooks have been inspected by an Examiner or by a Committee appointed by the Council.PROFESSOR DSc., The University, St. Andrews,J. C. IRVINE, Writes to the effect that he favours the views expressed by Professor F. S. Kipping and Dr. J. K. TVood. HERBERTPROFESSOR JACKSON, King’s College, London, Exa- miner in Mineral Chemistry. There seems to be no doubt that it would be convenient to many Universities if examinations for the Institute diploma could be conducted within their walls. I consider that such examinations should be arranged in consultation with the Boaid of Examiners of the Institute, and should be conducted by the Professors in the Universities with members of the Board of Examiners. The Institute has consistently endeavoured to give effect.to the views of practising chemists in the ordering and character of its examinations, and it is difficult to see how any one University can obtain the considered opinions of representatives of the various branches of practice and keep abreast of modern developments in practice so readily as an Institute which brings prominent members of the whole profession of Chemistry together on its Councils and various.Boards. F. STANLEYPROFESSOR KIPPING,D.Sc., F.R.S., University College, Nottingham. The suggestions I should make are as follows :-I. That the F.I.C. be only awarded after the candidate has. done research work. 2. That the A.1.C be obtainable by research work. 3. That the entry form for the examinations be altered in I.C. B 18 PROF.KIPPING.such a way that a Professor is not asked to qualify the candidate’s work. NOTE.-At present the Professor is asked to state whether the candidate has passed the Class Examinations ‘ ‘ satisfactorily, I‘creditably, or very creditably,” or to give other expression of opinion. ’ ’ 4. That the last five lines on p. 14of Regulations (1913) be modified. NoTE.-The lines referred to are those in italics at the end of the following paragraph :-Obligatovy conditions as to Tmiiiing. Except in the case of candidates referred to under Clause z of Section 4 (p. zz), and Clause z of Section 5 (p. 2-51, the Council will not accept any course of lectures or other instruction in the required subjects as part of the curriculum for the Associateship which is not given in the doytiiize by the appointed teachers in a university, college or school recognised by the Council (pp. 44, 45), or, in the case of laboratory work, by duly appointed assistants ; aid atteiidaszce t1poiz siiclz courses of instructioit will izot be sicficient, tiitless satisfactoiy evidence is afovded by the Caiididnte that the whole of his time has been giveit to them, either itt n vecogiiised college, ov, iit the case of n pupil of n Fellow of the Iiistitiite (U, jq5.21, 22), $hrt!y in a recogiiised iiistitiitioit aid paift!y uitdev the directioii of sitcli Fellow. PROFESSOR D.Sc., F.R.S., TJniversity of ARTHURLAPWORTH, Manchester. I cannot help feeling that at the present time the Regula- tions of the Institute of Chemistry are antagonistic to the progress of research. This is doubtless not the intention of the Council, though many Fellows are certainly opposed to the idea of research as a necessary part of the chemist’s training for ‘‘ professional ” work.At present, the regulations tend to hamper the Universities in their highest work, for many .post-graduate Honours students, who should properly be devoting themselves to research work and developing the habit of inquiry, are naturally desirous of becorning Fellows of the Institute, but discover that the courses they have already followed were not of the scope demanded as qualifying for admission to the Final Examination, the result being that research work 19 PROF.LAPWORTH. is scamped or abandoned in order that the student may LL qualify,” or the Institute loses a man who might have done it honour. In either event the result is deplorable from the point of view of the profession of Chemistry in its broadest sense. I cannot believe that the Universities would welcome any complicated supervision of their Honours examinations, nor do I see any reason why the Institute should not insist on its own confirmatory Final examination on practical work in the special subject which each candidate may select. The case seems to be one which calls for a suitable compromise, and I am confident that the Institute would gain in reputation and in the number of its members by admitting to its Final examination, without further restriction, all those First and Second class Honours Chemistry graduates who have taken their degrees in the Universities it now recognises, and, if possible, examining the students in their own University laboratories.PROFESSORARTHUR ShwrHELLs, B.Sc., F.R.S., The University, Leeds. There are two chief contentions that I should have wished to urge upon the Conference. I. It is impossible to make Chemistry a closed profession like medicine and law. It is only over a limited range that the protection of the public can reasonably be demanded by the exaction of a definite qualification. The qualifications of the Institute of Chemistry have rightly become of great importance in relation to professional analysts.It is hardly conceivable that they will acquire equal importance in relation to teachers or industrial chemists. Manufacturers will always desire a free choice of employ&. 2. In paragraph 4 of his Preliminary Statement, the President says ‘‘The Universities were originally intended to preserve our inheritance of knowledge and for the extension of I he bounds of knowledge.” Zf this statement refers to the earliest Universities it seems to me to need supplementing-namely, that the earliest Universities (Salerno, Bologna, Paris, for example) were originally intended ta train people for the practical avocations B2 20 PROF. SMITHEI, Ls. of life in law, theology and medicine, which were the only learned “trades ” of the time.A later vicious development, or want of development, made Universities into secluded intellectual conservatoires and professors too often into pedants. The modern University movement has been, in the main, an attempt to restore Universities to their primitive purpose, and to supply the highest class of professional knowledge for avocations which have now become as “learned,” in their needs at least, as law, theology and medicine. The suggestion that Iiniversities should go outside them- selves for a hall-mark of scientific training, whether in pure or applied science, is not to be entertained. It seems to me to be a suggestion of suicide. There may be some University institutions which have no interest or belief in teaching anything but what is called “ pure ” chemistry.It is urged, no doubt with much truth, that a capital of pure chemistry can always be directed by an intelligent person to any desired end. People so trained are apt, at the outset of their professional life, to appear very incompletely prepared from the point of view of the chemist in practice. Hence arises the bye-word of ‘(University Chemist,” and the desire of the practising men to super-add something to the University training and qualification. For a long time, some very futile efforts were made in this country to teach ‘‘ applied chemistry.” Some demonstrator would be told off to lecture on some branch of the subject. But things have now changed.In this University, for example, we have professors and large departments specially concerned with the teaching of chemistry in relation to Dyeing and Colours, Leather Manufacture, Fuel. The heads of these departments are skilled chemists of works’ experience. It is hardly to be expected that we shall submit to students going outside to undergo an external examination for their pro-fessional qualification. It should be remembered that the modern University movement is, in part, a rebellion against the educational evils of external examinations. So long as, but only so long as, Universities do not give the training necessary to produce competent professional analysts, is it fitting that an outside authority should give the qualifica- tion.1 think it open toconsideration whether, for this particular 21 PROF.SMITHELLS. branch of the profession, a period of apprenticeship with a member of it should not be compulsory. In the Paper read at the Universities’ Congress last year, to which the President referred in his annual address last March, I alluded to the possibility of the Institute of Chemistry co- operating with the Universities. In conclusion I will explain briefly the idea that has been in my mind. I am warmly in favour of an Institute of Chemistry, to which admission shall be gained, not by an Institute Exami- nation, but by examinations approved by the Institute. I regard Institute Examinations set up by professions as educationally bad, and as particularly hostile to the right development of Universities, because they tend to perpetuate a mischievous antagonism between practical men and University teachers, and between useful and ‘‘ useless ” knowledge.But I am in favour of an Institute with strict conditions of admission, because it helps the profession in many ways, and should gather together a body of men whose opinion on chemical questions of all kinds would be the most authori- tative possible. Their influence on chemical education might be of the utmost value, but not by their setting up their own examinations. That is not their business; they are not, collectively speaking, ‘(practical” men in education. University professors should know far better than these do how to teach, and in a large degree what to teach.But the co-operation of men in practice with University teachers would be most valuable, and, I believe, most welcome. That co-operation would be secured by the recognition of qualifying examina- tions for admission to the Institute. In giving recognition they would be compelled to look closely into University curricula, to visit Universities, and to give advice and criticism, which would be translated into action by those whose business it is to teach. They might well be represented on the Advisory Committees which are in some Universities associated with the department of applied science. No one is more anxious than I to give professional or practical men their influence on education, and to bring education into contact with realities,-indeed, a large part of my energies has been devoted to an attempt to realise this,-but am resolutely opposed to subjecting University students to 22 PRoF. S31ITHELLs.outside examinations, or to subordinating University teachers to any control but that of their own Universities. PROFESSOR TURNER,THOMAS M.Sc., A.R.S.M., The University, Birmingham. I am not in favour of a suggestion that the Examinations of the Institute should be abolished and replaced by University tests. Nor do I think that an examination is necessary for properly qualified University graduates. In this respect 1find myself in sympathy with Professor Smithells. The Institute examinations should be retained for the benefit of those who qualify by working in the laboratory of a Fellow, by evening classes, or private tuition.But students who follow approved courses, in suitable Universities, should be exempted from the A.I.C. examination. The minimum course of study at a University should be four years, and the degree either the B.Sc. with Honours in Chemistry or Metallurgy (for Metal- 1urgis t s). My view is that in this University (Birmingham) a candidate who desired to be qualified as a metallurgical chemist, and to be excused the A.I.C. examination might be expected to have taken either- (I) The course for Metallurgical Chemists, leading to the B.Sc. in three years, and also a subsequent year for Honours in Metallurgy or M.Sc. if a good piece of research is conducted.(2) The four years’ course in Chemistry, with pass in the Honours division, such course to include the Metallurgy required for the pass B.Sc. in Metallurgy. In my opinion more men would enter for the Fellowship of the Institute if this cocrse were adopted, while the successful Candidates would be fully qualified by study and practice for the A.I.C. status. DR. J. K. WOOD,University College, Dundee. I. In the case of the English Universities and the University of Wales, exemption from the Intermediate Examination is secured by the B.Sc. degree with 1st or 2nd Class Honours in Chemistry, whereas for the Scottish Universities special 23 DR. J. K. WOOD. distinction in Chemistry is required. To put matters on an equality, I contend that when a student of a Scottish University has taken the B.Sc.Degree and has passed in Chemistry on the Higher Stmdnrd he should also be exempted from the Intermediate Institute Examinational To pass with distinction in Chemistry is equivalent to obtaining 1st Class Honours, and in the case of St. Aizdrezws Uiziuersity (of which University College, Dundee, forms a part) about 80p of the total marks must be obtained. A student who passes in Chemistry on the Higher Standard requires about 60% of the total marks, the examination and training being identical with that for dis- tinction. This is surely equal to 2nd Class Honours in the case of the English Universities. I trust this matter may receive due attention. 2.Intermediate Practical Examination. It has often seemed to me that there is a very considerable difference between the Institute examination and University examinations of about equal difficulty. Much more has to be accomplished in a given time at the Institute as compared with the University. It is, of course, desirable that a candidate should be able to have two exercises in progress at the same time, but I have often thought that when quantitative exercises have been involved, the amount of work to be covered in a day is scarcely compatible with the attainment of that degree of accuracy required for success in University examinations. For many technical purposes a very high degree of accuracy is un-necessary, whereas in University examinations the margin of error allowed is very small, and all determinations are supposed to be done in duplicate.If the standard required by the Institute is of the former order, more attention should be paid in the University laboratories to rapid methods of analysis, such as would be employed in an average technical laboratory, but if the standard of the Institute approximates to that of the Universities, I am of the opinion that a reduction should be made in the amount of work allocated to each day of the Institute examination. 3. In the Agenda, 11. (G), the question of research is referred 1 Provided, of course, he satisfies the requirements in Physics and: Mathematics. 24 DR. J. K. \VOOD. to. Research is necessary in our Universities for the attain- ment of the D.Sc.degree, but I am not aware of any Uni- versity where research is obligatory for the B.Sc., although many students probably do a little original work previous to graduation. The Intermediate examination of the Institute is evidently meant to be of about equal difficulty to the Final BSc. examination. It is meant to be a test of general chemical knowledge. For the Final Institute examination specialised knowledge in some branch of chemistry is required. I should like to raise the question, “Why cannot research be the test of this specialised knowledge just as it is at the Universities ? ” It is true that the regulations of the Institute permit of the presentation of a thesis, but this does not, as far as I can gather, exempt the candidate from any part of the Final examination.Examinations are not the best means of testing a person’s knowledge or power of applying principles ; a much better test of one’s powers is the carrying out of an original piece of work. I would suggest, therefore, that if a candidate submitted several Papers, say three or four,ldescribing investigations in some branch of chemistry which had been carried out iizdependeiztly by him, these Papers should, if reported on favourably by the Institute examiner or some other referee, be accepted in lieu of the Final examination, and qualify the candidate for the A.I.C. PROFESSOR PALMERW. IJYNNE,D.Sc., F.R.S., The University, Sheffield. If I were able to be present at the Conference of Professors of Chemistry to be held at the Institute on Friday next, I should associate myself with the expression of opinion com- municated by Professor Smithells in the last three paragraphs printed on pages 13 and 14of the Notes from Members of the Conference recently circulated.The Institute’s examinations are necessarily external examinations, and, although being spread over the greater part of a week, they give the oppor- 1 It is difficult to specify any particular number of Papers. for a singlePaper in one case might easily show more merit and represent far more work than several Papers from another candidate. I do not think, however, that a single Paper of average merit should qualify a candidate for the A.I.C.25 PROF.WYNNE. tunity to the Examiners of becoming better acquainted with Candidates than can be found in most examinations, they are nevertheless open to many of the objections urged against the External examinations of the University of London, the old R.U.I., and kindred bodies, against which the Internal side of the University of London and the Civic Universities are a protest. The Institute employs as examiners men who are Professors in Universities. If it can trust these men to examine its Candidates, it is a question very well north asking why the Institute cannot trust these Professors both to teach and examine Candidates for the Intermediate or for the Associateship in subjects other than Food and Drugs, for which technical training in an Afialyst’s Laboratory might be not unreasonably required.It is well known that, in Univer- sity examinations, an External Examiner is associated with the teacher; with this safeguard to protect its interests, think the Institute should be invited to consider whether the time has not come when it might, with much advantage, allow men who have been awarded First or Second Class Honours in Inorganic, Metallurgical, Physical or Organic Chemistry to be admitted to the Associateship without further examination. I admit that many Universities do not carry specialisation at the Honours stage so far as this at present, but some pro- gress in that direction may be expected when three years from the Intermediate comes to be recognised as the normal Honours course. It would probably be hastened if the Institute could bring itself to admit that the multiplication of examinations- especially those of the “external ’’ type-is an educational evil of the first magnitude, and, admitting this, could see its way-under guarantees acceptable to the University Senates or Academic bodies -to abandon its policy of re-examining Honours graduates for certain branches of the Associateship.Although external control of University curricula or examinations is out of the question, I imagine that opportunities for consultation with the Institute’s representatives would be welcomed by Heads of Chemistry Departments, and, on the other hand, the Institute might be expected to benefit numerically by Honours men seeking admission, whereas now they are discouraged by reason of the further examination test. By the co-operation of the Institute with the Universities in some such way as 26 PROF.WYNNE.suggested, I have long thought that not only would the position of the Institute be strengthened, but that Chemistry as a profession would attain a more commanding position in public estimation than it at present holds. So long as the present type of examination in Physical and in Organic Chemistry is continued by the Institute, it may be said to be purely academic in character, differing partly, in this respect, from the type of examination in Inorganic and in Metallurgical Chemistry, and wholly from that in Food and Drugs.If the Institute, after consideration of the views developed in the Conference, decides that from its point of view the balance of advantage lies in the retention of its own examinations for admission to the Associateship, I think the question might be referred to the Examinations Board whether examinations in Physical and in Organic Chemistry of purely University type, conducted by University Professors or Teachers, should not be replaced by others in which practical matters, such as Electro-technology and applied Organic Chemistry find a place. The case against a second examination for the Fellowship in these subjects, under the present schedules, is one especially deserving of attention, as in them nothing more is demanded than the Universities give in the ordinary course of training to Honours students.Report of the Conference. The Conference opened on Friday, October 17th, 1913,at 11 a.m. The following attended :-J. 0. Arnold, D.Met. J. B. Coleman, A.R.C.S.I. H. Brereton Baker, M.A., Cecil €3. Cribb, B.Sc. D.Sc., F.R.S. Arthur TV. Crossley, D.Sc.% Henry Bassett, D,Sc. Ph.D., F.R.S. P. P. Bedson, M.A., D.Sc. T/V. S. Curphey. Bertram Blount. Harold B. Dixon, M.A., A. G. Bloxam. F.R.S. Francis H. Carr. F. G. Donnan, M.A., Ph.D. A, Chaston Chapman. W. P. Dreaper. 27 Bernard Dyer, D.Sc. Alexander Findlay, M.A., D.Sc. XI. 0. Forster, D.Sc., Ph.D., F.R.S. Gilbert J. Fowler, D.Sc. Percy F. Frankland, LL.D., F.R.S. Walter M.Gardner, MSc. A. G. Green, M.Sc. Charles E. Groves, F.R.S. Arthur Harden, DSc., F.R.S. Otto Hehner. G. G. Henderson, M.A., D.Sc., LL.D. Edward Hinks, B.Sc. G. T. Holloway, A.R.C.S. David Howard. Julius Hiibner, M.Sc. Herbert Jackson. Charles A. Keane, Ph.D., DSc. Sir Alfred Keogh, K.C.B. F. Stanley Kipping, DSc., F.R.S. E. Knecht, Ph.D., M.Sc. Alexander Lauder, D.Sc. Wm. bfacnab. George McGowan, Ph. D. Raphael Meldola, D.Sc., LL.D., F.R.S. W. H. Merrett, A.R.S.M. G. W. Monier-IVilliams, M.A., Ph.D. G. T. Morgan, D.Sc., A.R.C.S. K. J. P. Orton, M.A., Ph.D. Sir Alexander Fedler, C.I.E., F.R.S. W. J. Pope, M.A., F.R.S. T. Slater Price, D.Sc. Sir William Ramsay, K.C.H., LL.D., F.R.S.P. A. Ellis Richards. Alfred Gordon Salamon, A.R .S.M. Alexander Scott, M.A., D.Sc., F.R.S. J. Millar Thomson, LL.D., F.R.S. Sir Wm. A. Tilden, D.Sc., LL.D., F.R.S. E. W. Voelcker, A.R.S.M. J. A. Voelcker, M.A., Ph.D. A. Jamieson Walker, Ph.D. Julius IVertheimer, D.Sc. Edmund White, BSc. John K. Wood, D.Sc. Letters regretting inability to attend were received from :-E. C. C. Baly, F.R.S. G. T. Beilby, LL.D., F.R.S. C. H. Desch, D.Sc. Sir James Dewar, LL.D., D.Sc., F.R.S. H. J. H. Fenton, MA, D.Sc., F.R.S. W. W. Fisher, M.A. F. Francis, D.Sc., Ph.D. Sir Richard Garton. John Gibson, Ph.D. William Gowland, A. R.S.M,, F.K.S. J. T. Hewitt, D.Sc., Ph.D., F.R.S. J. C. Irvine, D.Sc., Ph.D. J. R.Japp, LL.D., Yh.D., F.R.S. 28 A. Lapworth, D.Sc., F.R.S. Arthur Smit hells, B.Sc., E. -4. Letts, D.Sc., Ph.D. F.R.S. A. McKenzie, M.A., D.Sc., ‘J. E. Stead, D.Met., F.R.S. Ph.D. Thomas Turner, A.R.S.M., Thomas Purdie, LL.D., M.Sc. Ph.D. John Watts, M.A., D.Sc. Sir Boverton Redwood, Bart., W. Palmer Wynne, D.Sc., D.Sc. F.R.S. I\’. J. Sell, M.A., D.Sc., Sydney Young, D.Sc., F.R.S. F.R.S. THEPRESIDENT: In the first place it is my pleasing duty to extend our cordial welcome to all who have come here to attend this Conference and to express that gratification which is, I am sure, felt by our Council at having brought together a body of such well-known and distinguished representatives of the teaching profession from practically every educational centre in the Kingdom.Judging from the sympathetic replies which we have received, I cannot but think that the Professors have been glad of this opportunity of exchanging views among themselves. The preliminary statenient which I circulated as a basis for discussion has been in your hands for some time and may be “ taken as read.” I should like now to add that the underlying idea which prompted this appeal to the teachers of Chemistry is embodied in the address which I had the honour of delivering at the last annual general meeting of the Institute. How far, and in what direction caa the work of the Institute be de- veloped so as to make it thoroughly representative of the Chemical profession as a whole ? Are our existing Regulations adequate, or is any modification or development required ? The main divisions of our subject can be labelled respectively : teaching, private practice, public appointments, chemical industry.IVhat step, if any, is it desirable to take in order that our Associateship and Fellowship shall continue to be regarded as a real qualification for everyone of these branches ? In discussing these points it must be borne in mind that this conference is not a formal gathering convened for the purpose of passing resolutions or framing rules. We have no executive power, but we do want a free interchange of opinions with a 29 THEPRESIDENT. view to possible legislation by the Council, if the outcome of our deliberations should appear to render necessary a revision of the Regulations.Above all, let our discussion take a con- structive turn-it is unfortunately only too easy to criticise destructively, and our own profession has, perhaps, suffered more than any other for want of coherence among the different branches, It is hardly necessary to remind you that this Institute has been invested by the Privy Council with powers as a qualifying professional body; we hold a responsible position towards the public, and any movement in the direction of consolidating the profession and safeguarding the interests of the public in all matters where chemical science is concerned should naturally devolve upon us. From this point of view it is evident that our standard of qualification cannot be lightly dealt with.It is for you to consider what that standard should be, or if any modification is necessary. TiVe have among us many of our examiners, present and past, and their views on the general question will, I am sure, be most helpful. The policy of the Institute has always been-and in this you will no doubt all concur-to ensure that the professional chemist as a practitioner in any one department shall have his special knowledge based on a broad and I may say deep foundation of general scientific training. It must be taken into consideration therefore that any movement which would result in the widening of our sphere of activity-and such widening appears to many of our Fellows imperatively called for at the present time- must be regulated by the condition that there can be no lowering of our present standard without grave injustice to the existing body of our Members who have submitted to the requisite tests.Out of this last consideration there arises another point which will, I hope, be kept in view. It is most desirable that the discussion should be conducted upon bvoad lines because any modification in the Regulations which may be suggested must have more than a local bearing if the work of the Institute is to be carried out effectively. To be more explicit I mean to say that every speaker should realise that any particular modi- fication which he might advocate as the result of experience in his own centre must necessarily affect procedure in every othsr centre.It would be a matter of very great difficulty for any 30 THE PRESIDEXT. Committee to deal with if it were proposed to have different codes of Regulations for different centres. It is most important that we should hear the arguments both for and against such proposals. And in speaking of this Conference as a means for interchanging opinions, I had in mind the desirability of hearing not only the views of individuals, but their criticisms of the views of others. All such criticism will be valuable if we bear in mind the fundamental notion of making the Institute an organisation of the greatest possible use to our profession in its entirety-not only the profession as it is now, but the profession as it will be in the future.In other words, we must cater for that rising generation of chemists which we hope will in due course come to regard our membership as the one real professional qualification. The general questions of the standard of qualification and the means by which that standard shall be enforced are before you for consideration. We have already received several <expressions of opinion of great weight, and some of these have been circulated. It will be seen, even at this stage, where divergence of opinion is most likely to occur. So far as I am concerned personally, I wish it to be understood that, with the one underlying principle-the welfare of the Institute and the profession--I approach the subject with- out bias and with an open mind.I propose only to put a few leading questions and to offer one or two suggestions which may be of use. It might, for example, be well, in discussing the question of qualifications, to take note of what other great professional organisations-such as those of the Engineers and Medical Men-have done for their pro- fessions. Also with respect to the imposition of tests of qualification, you will see that a fundamental question is raised by those who, like Prof. Smithells (whom I regret very much is not with us, as he is in India), hold the view that profes- sional organisations should not themselves act as examining bodies, but should accept certain recognised degrees as sufficient evidence of qualification, and in such cases impose no further test.A crowd of questions centre round this principle. In granting our Associateship what are we, as an Institute, vouching for to the public who engage the services of trained chernists? Do we declare our Members' qualifications as 31 THEPRESIDEKT. actual practitioners, or do we simply label them as having received a training sufficient to enable them to learn how to become competent practitioners ? By practitioner, of course, I do not mean to restrict the term to analysts and consultants ; from our present point of view every chemist who practises his profession, whether as teacher, analyst or technologist, is a practitioner. And if the examination test is still considered necessary, how do we stand as regards the existing examina- tions held by the Universities? Are we entrenching upon the province of the Universities and duplicating their work in any direction, or do we or can we impose a standard which we, as a professional body, consider a higher or more specialised criterion of competency? These are just a few of the questions which we should like you to deal with.On such points the views of past and present examiners would be particularly helpful, and I am glad that Prof. Crossley will make a statement bearing on this aspect of the subject. We have also among us representatives of some of the technical institutions of later growth which are carrying on educational work of a different order, and it is desirable that their side of the case should also be presented.I may remind you, as a point of historical interest and as a justification for holding the present Conference, that the existing Regulations have been in use, with occasional modification, for over twenty years. It was under the Presidency of Professor, now Sir William, Tilden (whom we are glad to see amongst us) that the last conference of this kind was held on May 16th, 1892, and as the outcome of that con- ference the present code was prepared by him and adopted by the Council and made operativeon October Ist, 1893. Since that time there have been enormous developments in education and especially in chemical education. Provincial colleges have developed into Universities, and these newer Universities have developed Departments of Applied Science in which our sub- ject is largely or wholly predominant. Multitudes of technical schools and colleges have also sprung into existence all over the country.In brief, the aspect of the educational world is now very different from that which it wore twenty years ago. How or in what direction it may be necessary to develop the work of the Institute to meet these changed conditions will, I 32 TIE PRESIDENT. am sure, be considerably influenced by your present delibera- tions. (Applause.) With regard to the procedure, we might adopt a good old English custom of hospitality to strangers, and as many of the representatives present come from long distances to represent the views of their centres, and as more especially what might be called the newer developments in chemical education in connection with the newer Universities and Technical Schools is a subject which we have not had an opportunity of con-sidering up to the present time in any great detail, it might be desirable in the first place to let us hear the case on behalf of some of the newer Universities which have developed de- partments of Applied Chemistry ; and with which we have not come, perhaps, into such intimate association as we should like.(Hear, hear.) We have a large number of speakers ; and time is limited; and we do not feel justified in extending the time of this Conference; so that I would ask all speakers to be as brief as possible. I should personally have liked to have heard Professor Smithells, as he represents what might be called one of the extreme schools of thought, but in his absence Professor Green, who has taken a good deal of trouble to look into the matter is here representing the University of Leeds, and-with the consent of the meeting-we might ask Professor Green to let us hear his views.PROFESSORGREEN: We are all here, I take it, with the same object in view,-the advancement of the Institute,--and I do not think there is anything to be gained by not looking the facts in the face. It seems to me that the Institute has not taken and is not taking that position in regard to the entire chemical profession which it ought to take and might take. It has undoubtedly been of enormous value to the consulting chemist and the public analyst, but it has never occupied a particularly important position in regard to the Works Chemist and the Technical Chemist.It has done, so far as I can see, practically nothing to promote the better education of the industrial chemist or to improve his position. Judging from my own personal observation-mainly in the North of England-the qualifications of the Institute are almost com-pletely disregarded by large chemical manufacturers. You may not all admit this, but I can only speak from my own experience, and in expressing this view I am supported by that of my colleagues at Leeds, who agree with me that it is the case. I quite recently asked the Managing Director of one of the largest firms of chemical manufacturers in the North of England what was his view in the matter.I said, “ If you were appointing a Chemist, would you be influenced to any great extent by the fact as to whether a candidate had or hadnot the qualifications of the Institute of Chemistry ? ” He said, “Not at all.” ‘‘ Well, then, would you be influenced by the question as to whether he had an Honours Degree of a University? ” He said, “ Well, I should take first of all the recommendation from the Professor under whom he studied, but next to that I should certainly give preference, everything being equal, to a man who had an Honours Degree.” “Which would you con- sider the more important qualification if you had two men before you, one who had the Associateship of the Institute of Chemistry, and the other who had an Honours Degree of a University ? ” ‘‘Without doubt, I should prefer the man with the University Degree.I should not consider the Institute of Chemistry qualification of any importance in the appointment of a Chemist in a Works; I only look upon it as important in connection with Analytical Chemistry.” That view is certainly prevalent amongst manufacturers in the North of England. Now, what is the reason of this con- dition of affairs? So far as I can see the chief reasons are these. First of all, the conditions of admission to the Associate- ship and Fellowship of the Institute are too narrow and circumscribed. The training laid down is more suited to that of the Analytical Chemist, and it does not allow sufficient elasticity for the very varying needs of the Works Chemist.For this reason many excellent young chemists who have received their chemical education upon different though equally good lines are excluded from the Institute or have great difficulties placed in their way. Our President has pointed out that whilst there were very few recognised chemical diplomas when the Institute was first inaugurated, there are now many Universities giving a sound scientific chemical education capped by an Honours Degree. Those degrees are now known and valued by the chemical I.C. C 34 PROF.GREEK. manufacturer-at least, by the more advanced firms. There is, therefore, little inducement to a man who has obtained such a degree to go to the expense and trouble of acquiring the Institute’s qualification in addition, unless the latter carries greater weight in obtaining employment than the University Degree alone.It cannot now be said that an Honours Degree in Chemistry is solely an academic distinction, and afTords no guarantee of practical proficiency as a chemist. Though, doubtless, this was true at one time, it certainly is not so now, especially in regard to the newer Universities, the examinations of which are a severe test of manipulative ability and practical chemical knowledge. As long as manufacturers find that some of the best men are not Fellows of the Institute, they will not have the same respect for the Institute’s qualifications, and irzzctatis mutandis, there will be little inducement for students to take the Institute’s examinations.I have often been puzzled what to say to students who have taken their B.Sc. Honours Degree and enquired whether I would recommend them to go in for the Institute’s examina- tion. I have said, ‘‘Yes.” They say, “ What would be the advantage of doing so ? ” It is very difficult to know what to reply. I can only remark, ‘‘ It might be of advantage to you later,” but I cannot say that it would afford the student a better chance of obtaining employment than the degree already affords him. It seems to me, therefore, that it is of paramount importance that the Institute should do its utmost to bring into its fold the whole of the chemists who have received a sound chemical education, irrespective of what branch of Chemistry they are practising.The following are the remedies I would suggest. They may be considered rather drastic and revolutionary, but I submit that the chemists of this country can only be consolidated into one great profession by a radical chasge of our present procedure. How far the Institute is fulfilling its natural and proper functions may be seen by the recent formation of another Association which, if it prospers, must have a disintegrating efTect on the profession. I take it for granted that all the Members of this Con-ference are desirous of seeing all proficient and properly educated chemists brought under the aegis of the Institute, 35 PROF.GREEN.irrespective of whether they are engaged in analytical, technical, or teaching practice. So long as the Institute holds only a small percentage of the total profession, it cannot exert the influence it might for the improvement of the status of the profession. In the first place, I claim that any course laid down by a recognised University as qualifying for the B.Sc. Degree with Honours in Chemistry should be accepted, if the examinations are passed with first or second class Honours, as qualifying a candidate to proceed directly to the Final Examination of the Institute, irrespective of whether or not part of the chemical course and subjects of examination are of a specialised character. This point arose through correspondence which I had with the Registrar in June last.Until then, I had been under the impression that any Honours Course would be accepted as qualifying a student directly for the Final Examination, and I was anxious to put into the Prospectus of my Depart-ment a little paragraph simply stating that the course which was laid down for the Honours Degree in Colour Chemistry qualified students to proceed straight to the Final Examination. (Professor Green then read extracts from correspondence which had passed between him and the Institute with reference to his suggestions that the Institute should establish a Final Examination in Tinctorial Chemistry, and that the Institute should recognise the degree of B.Sc.(Leeds), with Honours in Tinctorial Chemistry as exempting from the Intermediate Examination of the Institute. He complained that neither of these suggestions had been adopted.) I now come to my last recommendation, to which I attach the greatest importance, namely, that candidates should be admitted to the Associateship without examination if they hold a first or second class Honours Degree in Chemistry of a University recognised by the Institute, provided such degree has been conferred after a four years’ course of chemical study since Matriculation, and that the Institute’s Examiners have been given all facilities for satisfying themselves as to the efficiency of the Final practical examination upon which the degree was awarded. Where the Institute can be satisfied as c2 36 PROF.GREEN.to the efficiency of the examinations, I think the Institute should accept those examinations in lieu of their own examination as admitting direct to the Associateship. I have not the least desire that admission to the Institute should be gained upon a lower test, but I want to see a broader path. PROFESSORGARDNER:I wish first of all to corroborate Professor Green in a good many matters, as the result of my own experience and inquiries. I do not find, and I have taken considerable trouble to investigate the matter, that at present the Institute’s qualifications are in demand in the Industrial North. They are fully recognised, of course, with regard to the positions of Public Analysts and Consulting Chemists, but in no case have I come across a demand on the part of a head of an industrial firm for the qualification of the Institute.On the other hand, there is no doubt that there are many highly qualified chemists who are proceeding to such Works, and my only fear in touching this side of the question is that it may seem to the Conference that I am in a certain sense weakening Professor Green’s position by carrying it further. I should like to safeguard that point, because that is not my intention at all. Speaking for the larger technical institutions there are a number of cases where there is a very complete chemical course offered. In my own College we have a four years’ chemistry course, and I may say incidentally that a considerable number of the students stay for a fifth year, and all we are at present able to offer them at the end of their Course is a diploma.Our students afterwards go into Works in not unimportant positions, so that I think they are men of whom the Instituteshouldtake some cognisance. I do not argue that the Institute should accept our examinations, since we are not at present of University rank; but I do argue that we are doing work of a high order, and certainly that work should be allowed to count for the Institute’s qualifications. At present we are entirely cut out, and our students cannot in any sense count this four or five years’ course as qualifying them in any degree to attend even the first examination of the Institute.Not only are our students losing something on account of this, but I submit that the Institute itself is losing something. 37 PROF.GARDNER. I do not propose to enter into the details of our Course, but I think it must go without saying that if we have a large chemical staff, the qualifications of which are high, if we have an excellent equipment for teaching Chemistry, Physics and Mathematics, and if we keep our students for four or five years and they afterwards do good work and take high positions, we are doing work which the Institute should recognise. (PRESIDENT: I think Professor Gardner is now raising the question of the recognition of the Institutions.) I am speaking on the general question of the position of the higher non-University Institutions.It may be said, of course, that in Technical Institutions there is a good deal of specialisation; but I think that the word “ specialisation ” has come to be considered rather as a bugbear, and that very often there is very little behind it. Surely the main thing is for the student to get a good sound, broad training, and that is obtainable if by ‘‘ specialisation ” you mean that we keep in view during the whole period the line of work the students will subsequently take up. That is what I mean by “ specialisation,” and I think the expression ((too early specialisation ” is made too much of. I should like, therefore, to put before the Conference the main contention that it is the business of the Institute to adopt machinery whereby it can recognise chemical training of sufficiently high standard wherever that particular training has been acquired.PROFESSORARNOLD (after referring to the case of a Demonstrator who had the Degrees of B.Met. and B.Sc. and had been refused exemption from the Intermediate Examination of the Institute) : I have read very carefully Professor Smithell’s remarks, and it seems to me he goes a little further than the case seems to demand. I am afraid any alteration made in the policy of the Institute will have to be more or less elastic, because a hard and fast rule may shut out one University and let in another. It seems to me that cases of specialisation carried out in Sheffield University might receive some consideration from 38 PROF.ARNOLD.the Council. We have the Degree Course in Metallurgy, which involves the ordinary Matriculation, and the taking of at least three pure sciences; and I may point out that in the Course itself each man must have done a very large amount of practical Physics before he can get his degree. Then we have also another Course, which Professor Smithells does not approve of, that is, our Associateship Course, which is a more specialised Course than the Degree Course, and we have had the curious paradox of a man coming up for both examinations. He has taken his B.Met. in the first division, and has failed in the Associateship, and has had to come up for a specialised examination for his fourth year in the Associateship as well as the degree.I would earnestly ask the Council to take into consideration whether that Course should not be recognised in some way. It seems to me that the condition of things I have sketched with reference to my Demonstrator is one the Institute will naturally take into consideration, and if any reasonable compromise could be arrived at by which the very complete specialised course in Sheffield University could make way to the Associateship of the Institute, we would gladly meet the Institute, and encourage our students to proceed to the A.I.C. PROFESSOR :DIXON I have something like thirty men being turned out each year at the end of their course. Taking the last ten years, we are dealing with about 300 men.Of these, I see that just over 200 have gone into chemical industries of one kind or another; about sixty have become schoolmasters ; and about ten in the ten years take up higher teaching, and are on the way to become or have become Pro- fessors ; and thirty are rather nondescripts-they have drifted into the Colonies, or changed their profession. Roughly speaking there are over 60 per cent. of our students who go into Works. Now, out of these I find only a few have become Fellows of the Institute, and if it is important-mind, I am speaking from the outside-if it is important that the Institute should have the bulk of those men, then I think some widening process should be put into operation. Not for a moment do I want to lower the standard for admission, and I do not think any recommendation I might urge would have that tendency.39 PROF.DIXON. There are a good many people in the room, including Sir IVilliam Rarnsay, Professor Kipping and Dr. Crossley, who have examined at hlanchester, and I should like them to tell the Con- ference quite frankly whether our standard of Honours is not high enough for the Associateship of the Institute. I am not speaking now of the Final Examination. We have a great num- ber of people who might come in, and I think it would be desir- able on both sides if they would. We have a great number of people coming to 11s asking for students, especially the old Owens College men. Now, I say to them, “What kind of maa do you want?” and more and more they are saying, “ TVe want a man who has researched with YOU.” They want not only a tester but a researcher.1 think you must take that into consideration. I have not heard much about research yet. I have been reading some of the preliminary remarks, and have seen it stated that industries do not want researchers. I must contradict that. They do (Hear, hear) ; and more and more are we bound to turn out that kind of man. The future of our industries depends on the researchers. I want to impress that upon you. If this is so, what is the best thing to do? IVhat is the normal course for the young industrial chemist? Macy of our students are quite up to the Inter- mediate University standard when they come, Then, they have a three years’ course including Mathematics and Physics, and languages as a rule.They take their Honours generally in three years; I do not encourage them to take four years. Three years, I think, is best for them. Examinations are, I believe, a necessity, but a necessary evil, and the more we can diminish the rigour of the regulations and the exact con- ditions that have to be followed, the better all round. Now, I say to the students who have taken the B.Sc. with Honours, “Your training is not completed, and this fourth year (free from examinations) is the best year of your life if you will tackle a piece of research. You may have your choice of subject, and whom you will work under.” We also ask the graduate, “What are you going to be? ” He says, “I am not quite certain; but I should like to try my hand at research.” He takes some specialised line, and as a ruie writes a thesis on his research work, and the research is now necessary for our M.Sc.degree. 40 PROF.DIXON. I should like to put it to this Conference that four years, including specialised work after graduation, might admit to the A.I.C.,and if that were the view of the Institute, I believe a great many more students would come in: I think it is the theory paper that keeps them off. I have asked a great many of my students, ‘‘ What is it that keeps you out of it ? ” They say, “1 do not want to have another examination paper.” They do not object to a practical examination. I am really so ignorant about your procedure as to be doubtful whether an F.I.C.really denotes any particular qualification at all. Does it mean that a man is able to be an Analyst or Consultant in a particular subject ? Are they labelled? (THEPRESIDENT: They are not labelled.) We in the North of England are, I fear, lamentably ignorant of what the letters F.I.C. connote. I have only once been asked, and that was last week, for a chemist who had or would take the qualification of the Institute of Chemistry. Now they ask if a man was trained under Professor so and so, and if he has done research work. That is usually the first thing a manufacturer asks nie. Often, if asked, they say they would rather prefer a man with our B.Sc. Honours Degree than one with the F.I.C.That is my experience. The reason is, no doubt, local and personal. Our school, like other schools of chemistry, has established a tradition, and to our Lancashire client& our Honours B.Sc. means a well-known practical training, while the F.I.C. connotes a less-known examinational standard. I suggest, therefore, that it might be of great advantage both to the Institute and to our own men if there was some arrange- ment by which they would not have to face another examina- tion to become Associates of the Institute. PROFESSORPOPE:I came here this morning to hear what the projects on the part of the newer Universities were, and I do not think that I can really present you with very much that is useful from my own point of view.I think that what 41 PROF.POPE. Professors Green and Gardner have said has a very great deal of truth in it. I do believe that the Institute will have to widen its doors in some way so as to include people who have specialised. But, at the same time you must take measures, if possible, to keep up the high standard of general chemical training.. (Hear, hear.) I really believe there is some danger nowadays of the standard of education in general inorganic, physical, and orgar,ic chemistry being lowered by too early specialisation in specific technological subjects. It seems to me that Professor Dixon’s point is an extremely important one. I think many people who have been connected with the Institute have had the belief for a long time that we must if possible recognise research work in some way or other.I do not think much importance need be attached to the idea that manufacturers question Professors Df Chemistry as to the examination successes of their students. The manu- facturers come to you not for a knowledge as to a man’s degrees, but for personal information as to the potentialities of the individual ; I believe that all the positions we secure for our men are obtained wholly on personal recommendations. What we ought to do is to keep up the standard of general chemical education, and in some way or another to recognise research. It has always, I think, been a slur on this Institute that it has done nothing for research-nothing to encourage it and ncthing to subsidise it.HENDERSONPROFESSOR : Professor Pope has anticipated much of what I wanted to say. I think the Institute must widen its doors, because it is inevitable that the Universities in future will establish more degrees in technology, and whatever may have been the case in the past, the majority of the students will in the future be technological students. The danger exists or will exist that those technological degrees may be too narrow-may not include the broad training in general chemistry which is essential. Therefore while I think that Technology ought to be recognised: should make it indispensable that the degree courses include at least as much training in Chemistry, Physics and Mathematics as is required for the degree in pure 42 PROF.HEXDERSON.science, at least up to the Intermediate standard of the Institute. It seems to me that is the irreducible minimum as regards training in general chemistry. Indeed, I think the Institute’s requirements, from the point of view of practical work, are modest in the extreme. A point raised by Professor Gardner necessarily appeals to many of us. There are still, I am sure, many students being trained in Institutions where the course is excellent, and because these Institutions are not recognised by the Council of the Institute, the students are debarred from qualifying for the Associateship, except by the back door, the back door of a great many being the external degree of London University. Surely, such institutions deserve recognition.It seems to me that if the Council can make up its mind to reduce the number of examinations instead of increasing them, it would be a good thing; and I think with Professor Dixon that the higher degrees in science, or the ordinary B.Sc PZzis training in higher work, should admit to the X.I.C. without examina-tion. If possible we should make some research work an absolute condition. Professor Green spoke of a degree as being proof of practical proficiency. Is a degree proof of practical proficiency? No: it is a certificate that a student has gone through a satisfactory course of training, and the Associateship of the Institute of Chemistry is exactly the same. Should we not improve on it by making the Fellowship something better? I think that is a point which deserves consideration.I also advocate the inclusion of Chemical Technology among the options for the Final A.I.C. Examination. I think that degrees in technology should be recognised, provided the degree course includes at least as much training in pure chemistry as the present curriculum of the Institute’s examination, and that higher degrees in science should exempt from the Final for the Associates hip. PROFESSORMORGAN:It seems to me there is a general. consensus of opinion that while the Institute should widen its doors, it should at the same time keep up its standard, and I venture to think that it will be conceded unanimously that after all there is one branch of chemical practicewhich under- 43 PROF.MORGAN.lies and is fundamental to all the higher developments, and that is the ability to carry out chemical analyses with accuracy and with economy of time and material. I believe that the best work the Institute can do-so far as its practical examina- tions for the Associateship are concerned-is to see that this standard is maintained. A good deal has been said, and more has been written, with regard to the research qualification. I think, as other speakers have already mentioned, there is a danger that this qualifica- tion, if taken too generally, may be accepted in the case of individuals who have not had the training which should be recognised as preparatory to obtaining the diploma of the Associateship.I think it is fairly well known that very imperfectly-trained workers can be utilised in the routine part of a chemical research. They can be trained to make routine analyses, and even fairly complicated organic and inorganic preparations. The question arises, ‘‘ Is this the kind of person who is to be exempted from the Examinations of the Institute ? ” I find sometimes it is the less competent student who is the keenest about commencing research. My advice to such is generally ‘‘ No, you had better work for your Institute Examination; this will require the study of general inorganic chemistry, and will involve doing a large amount of analytical work.” I am sure these students will become better all-round chemists than if they had gone in for research at that stage in their careers.Regarding the question as to whether an Honours Degree is an indication that an individual has a practical knowledge, I was told some years ago that for the Honours Degree in a University not far from here, the students were given as an exercise the determination of chlorine by the Carius method. I was also credibly informed that scarcely a candidate could do it properly. Is this the type of student who should be exempted from the Institute Examination ? With regard to the analytical aspect of our examinations in the various branches, I think this should be still maintained as general as possible. There is a tendency on the part of some examiners to give freak exercises, which not even well- trained college students could be possibly expected to carry out -exercises which have occurred to examiners in the course 44 PROF.MORGAN-. oftheir highly specialised practice.I contend that the examina- tion should be conducted on lines as general as possible, so that a well-trained college student would be able to do the work provided he had a fundamental knowledge of the principles, and a fair amount of manipulative skill. I am afraid I cannot agree with previous speakers in regard to the question of chemical technology. I think it inadvisable that the Institute should grant a special distinction in chemical technology. DR. J. K. ~VOOD:There are one or two things I should like to say as representative of the oldest Scottish University, that of St.Andrews, I think it is the additional examinations which scare away candidates from the Institute. I was speaking only last week to Professor Irvine, and he said that amongst his men there were several who would proceed to the A.I.C. were it not for the fact that they had another examination paper to do. In connection with St. Andrews we give what is equivalent to the Honours Course at any of the English Universities. Changes have been made with regard to the teaching of chemistry in the Scotch Universities, and in St. Andrews, at any rate, our present Course is really an Honours Course, and the students who have passed through that Course are quite fit to be excused the Intermediate Examination.Then with regard to the Final Examination for the A.I.C., I certainly think it should be unnecessary if some research has been done. (PRESIDENT: Would you make research compulsory ?) I would make it optional. I think if a man has done some research, not necessarily under the immediate supervision of a Professor, it shows he is able to apply the general principles of some particular branch of Chemistry, and a man who has carried on independent research should be excused further examination, and allowed to proceed at once to the A.I.C. PROFESSOR I do not think we have very many FINDLAY: candidates from Iliales. Since going there I have endea-voured so far as I can to advise students to go in for the 45 PROF.FIXDLXY.Institute examinations, chiefly on the ground that the Insti- tute should become the central organisation for all chemists in the country. That raises the question as to the widening of the doors to various institutions, and I should like to support very strongly the claims which are being made on behalf of the more technically-trained students. I should like to do that on the condition that the entrance to the Institute is not made easier, but is made rather more difficult than the obtaining of the Honours Degree. To my mind the ,4.I.C. should represent more than the Honours standard at the Universities-something higher and more on the lines Professor Dixon had in view when he indicated the MSc. Degree as being accepted in lieu of the examination for A.I.C., so that one would require for the Institute’s Associateship not merely the minimum of three years at present required by most Universities, but at least four to five years’ work in Chemistry before the Institute’s qualification could be obtained.One reason I have for supporting the claims of the more industrial aspects of chemical training is this : I feel that, owing to the increasing prevalence of the idea that Universities should exist, as Professor Smithells states, chiefly for the purpose of turning out men who are going to be industrial chemists, the introduction of that spirit is going to have a very harmful effect on the quality of our future University teachers of pure chemistry. There is a distinction between a University and a Technical College.One exists for the preservation and the extension of knowledge, or perhaps as I would put it, for the cultivation of knowledge for the sake of or gain to knowledge itself, and not for the immedi- ate advantage which the individual may derive out of it him- self; the other-the Technical College-exists chiefly for the benefit of the individual applying that knowledge. We should probablygain something by keeping that view in our mind. should like, therefore, to support the application of the technical chemist for freer admission to the Institute, because I think the Institute qualification should become the hall-mark for the good industrial chemist. It should be regarded as the degree which the technical chemist should have, and the University degree might be regarded more especially as the hall-mark of the pure chemist : for a University degree should connote not only a wider scientific training but also a higher standard of general 46 PROF.FINDLAY.education than could perhaps fairly be demanded as necessary for the industrial chemist. I should like to support the claims of the practical chemist, and the widening of the doors of the Institute for those who are trained in Technical Colleges. PROFESSOR : I always used to regard the Institute DONNAN of Chemistry as a necessary examination for those who weregoing to be analysts, and afterwards, perhaps, consulting analysts, and public analysts; but I did not think at one time that the examination was a desirable one for men who were going into industrial chemistry.There seem to be three points under consideration: the claims of men who have the Honours Degree to be excused the Institute Associateship Examination seems to be a very reasonable one. It seems to me a plain matter of fact, because, if you do not do that, you will not get students from the Universities. The other points I know very little about-as regards the bringing in of certain Technical Schools, and the admission of various specialised degrees, such as the B.Met., etc. All I can say is that I am very much in sympathy with the work of this Institute ; I am sorry I know very little about it, and I really came here this morning for the purpose of learning as much as I could.PROFESSORORTOK:I range myself very fully on the side of Professor Dixon and Professor Pope. I understand Pro-fessor Dixon to state that he would regard the M.Sc. which is given to Honours students, and is given only after research, as excusing candidates from the Associateship Examination. I should certainly feel that that is an excellent move for the Institute to take. WEKTHEIMER:PROFESSOR I do not think I should have spoken at all were it not that I am, perhaps, the only Professor of Chemistry in the country who is Dean of a Faculty of Engineering. Owing to that, I have been brought very closely in connection with engineering work, and it has always struck me that the engineering professional bodies, such as the Institution of Civil Engineers, have dealt with 47 PROF.WERTHEIMER.the question of examinations better than this Institute has hitherto done. They have very freely recognised University degrees, but as there is a real danger that the specialised degrees which are now being given may be made too specialised, the Institution of Civil Engineers requires to be fully acquainted with the conditions under which a degree is given before they will accept it ; and, if that degree is too specialised they will not accept it. 1think they are quite right in so acting. The Civil Engineers will not give their Associateship simply on a University degree. They say that, after the University degree has been obtained, a man must have had a reasonable amount of practice in his profession.They say that until he has spent at least two years in the practice of his profession, the candidate shall not 'nave the Associateship. I believe a similar condition would raise very considerably the value of the Associateship of this Institute, and would lead to a larger number of persons ultimately applying for it. There are several technical institutions which might be recognised in some way for the purpose of training, and this might lead ultimately to the necessity for the Institute's examinations altogether disappearing. I think it is unfortunate that we should have these special examina- tions, and that it is a great pity to try to superimpose our examinations upon others who are doing their work properly.DR.GILBERT J. FOWLER:1 find myself in agreement with a great deal that has been said, and my own thoughts have been running on similar lines to those of the last speaker. It has been my good fortune to work freely with the engineering pro- fession, a profession which I greatly admire, and I have often wished that more chemists would take as much pride in their profession as engineers seem to do. I have read very carefully the opinions which have been circulated amongst us, and I think the whole difficulty is met by a greater differentiation between the Associateship of the Institute and the Fellowship. It is almost imperative that the Institute should open its doors somewhat more widely if it is to include the large body of chemists in the country.It is most desirable that it should 48 DR. FOWLER. do, and therefore I would suggest that the admission to th2 Associateship be made fairly easy-that it should not imply more than that the student has had a thoroughly sound training, and possibly a certain amount of research. I should feel inclined to allow anyone with a University degree, especi- ally with an M.Sc. Degree, to proceed to the Associateship without examination. That would not necessarily preclude the holding of examinations; because there are a number of very good chemists who are not able to obtain degrees, but if a man be thoroughly quaiified in a University, he should not have to go through another examination, always under the assumption that his full course is open to supervision by the Institute.But when we come to the Fellowship, it seems to me that we meet with a different state of affairs, and in the few remarks I have already sent in, I have indicated that as an examiner to the Institute for the Final Examination, I look for a totally different kind of qualification from what should be expected from a candidate solely trained in a University. It is impossible even in a fully equipped technical school to give students the responsible experience, which is necessary for them to acquire what I may call technical sense, and which is neces- sary if they are to advise the public for the public good. It is quite impossible, in my judgment, for a University training, or even a School of Technology training, to give what can only be acquired by experience and responsibility, and it is that responsibility which it seems to me the Institute should safe- guard.If the Fellowship were made something more analogous to the Membership of the Institution of Civil Engineers, it would be a qualification which would be really worth having, and further than that, and perhaps even more important, it would enhance the standing of the chemical profession in the eye of the public. It is too much the case, and I am afraid the chemists are themselves to blame, that the general public looks upon the chemist as an Analyst-a person who can analyse things. Of course, a chemist ought to be able to analyse ; whether he can or not is a different thing; but he ought to be something very much mxe than that, and I think it is with that higher qualification of the chemist so-called that the Institute should strive to concern itself.PROFESSOR : One aspect of the Institute appears FORSTER to have been ignored, and it is, perhaps, because it has been ignored in the minds of so many chemists that this inquest is being held If more attention had been directed to the work of the Institute as a professional body, we should not have the spectacle that we have to-day of distinguished chemists who are not members of our body. I feel that most strongly, and I wish to emphasise that point because nobody has touched upon it so far, and Professor Green, in his opening remarks, led me to that train of thought.He was going to be frank, and I will be frank with him. It is because he and so many others have been weak-kneed with their students in respect to their recommendation of the Institute that we find so many men who should now be members of the Institute not on our list. It is owing to that vicious spirit of leading men to think that the Institute is of no use to them that we find ourselves in this position. If we could remind our brother chemists that it is not merely an educational body-although it is striving to become an educational body-it is not merely a standardising body, but a professional body, and one therefore to which eyery- body who calls himself a chemist should belong, because even if he does not derive any personal advantage from it, his Fellowship and the influence which he can bring to bear on other people should encourage them to belong in the hope that they may derive some benefit from it.I should like to see as one result of this Conference the enrolment of several distinguished chemists as members of the Institute of Chemistry. PROFESSORH. JACKSON : I have already sent in a synopsis of what I should have dealt with at greater length if time had permitted. I think it is perfectly clear that since 1892 the great changes which have occurred in the introduction of the technical departments in the Universities force upon us the necessity of meeting new requirements.It is no use arguing the question as to whether a University is to be defined in one way or another. What I am particularly anxious to deal with at this moment is this: Dr. Forster has put before the meeting the importance of the big work that the Institute is doing for the profession of chemists, and I want to say that, I.C. I) 50 PROF.JACKSON. instead of setting the Institute against the Universities, we should strive to do something whereby it would be possible to profit by the advantage of that mass of information, knowledge, and general experience which the institute has at its disposal. The Institute can bring together such a knowledge of the practice of chemistry as no single University can bring together. The Universities in many cases have Advisory Committees, which consist of technical men, men in practice, and men in the industries, and the Institute will have to recognise the possibility of exercising the function, in some way, of an advisory body to the Universities, if the Universities will accept it.PROFESSOR : So much has been said on this F. S. KIPPING subject, that there is very little left to say. As regards the Fellowship, I suggest that it be awarded only after the candidate has done research work. To avoid any misunder- standing on this point, I should like to add that under the heading c‘Research Work ” I should include every branch of independent investigation, whether commercial or of a purely scientific nature; it should also be made to include what Dr.Fowler puts under the head of (( Responsibility.” Briefly, the Fellowship should have an additional meaning to distinguish it from the Associateship. As regards the other proposition, that the A.I.C. should be obtainable by research work, I should suggest that this does not in any way take away the necessity for a course of training such as the Council insists on at present ; nor does it dispense with the necessity for examinations of some sort. My propo- sition is really the same as that put forward by Professor Dixon :when a candidate has taken an Honours Degree, and has also done some research work (provided that this research work is submitted to and approved by the Institute of Chemistry), he should have exemption from the examinations for the A.I.C.It might be that the research would not be approved by the Institute, in which case the Institute would have the power of saying, “No, this research is not good enough. You must come up for an examination.” If the candidate were then given two or three months’ notice, I think that would be a satisfactory solution of the difficulty. If this 51 PROF.KIPPING. plan were adopted it would have one great advantage : when a student came up for the Associateship by presenting a thesis, the Institute would submit his researches to referees well qualified to form an opinion. In this way the difficulty of examining in special subjects would be to a very great extent overcome. Of course, the Institute now allows the presenta- tion of research, but practically, so far as I know, that is a dead letter.On one occasion one of my students presented a thesis, which 1 considered a very good piece of work; but he had to take the examination in the ordinary way. The only result was that I was debarred from putting my name to the paper when it was published in the Journal of the Chemical Society. There is no encouragement at present to get students to present theses. As regards the other two matters, they are rather trivial. No. 3 is that the Professor should not be asked to express an opinion as to the candidates’ qualifications. I suggest it would be advisable for several reasons to omit those expressions of opinion. which are required from the Professors, because when sending up several candidates for the same examination it is invidious to make a distinction between them.The candidates see what you say about them, and it is rather unfair to the weaker ones. The last point concerns the regulations, and raises this question : Is a candidate who cannot come to a College or a University for the whole of his time to be debarred from taking the Institute of Chemistry examinations ? It seems to me that, instead of insisting on three years’ continuous work, the Council might allow an equivalent of five or six years of partial attendance ; and this training might be as good as, or even better than, that of the person who went to College for three years continuously. A candidate may be the son of a chemical manufacturer, and his father may be unable to spare him for more than three days a week because he is employed in the works.Such a candidate, however, might be able to attend a College or University whilst also carrying on his practical work, and I suggest that the regulations should be modified so as to allow admission of candidates of that type. (The Conference adjourned for luncheon, and resumed at 2. I5 p.m.) D2 52 MR. HUBNER: I feel very strongly that the scope of the Institute should be widened. At the same time, I think the Institute must carefully safeguard the teaching of pure chemistry, whilst I naturally fully agree that Technology should be taken into consideration as far as the examinations are concerned.The question has been asked, “Why do we not send more students to sit for the Institute’s examinations ? ” Personally, I have felt that they should take these examinations some time after their College training has been completed. Only a few, however, will go in for the examinations at a later time. We have so many examinations that one is afraid to introduce additional ones. I should very much like to see if there could be a possibility of holding joint examinations. do not know whether the view expressed by Professor Dixon, that the M.Sc. degree should be accepted in place of the examinations of the Institute, will find favour with the Institute. If not, I would suggest that joint theoretical and practical examinations be held.Tt would be quite possible to hold these examinations at the same time as the degree examinations. That part of the examination which had been set by the Institute could be supervised by external examiners appointed by the Institute. I think in this way the difficulty might be met, and we would feel justified in advising practically every one of our students to enter for the Institute’s .examinations. PROFESSORE. KNECHT:I am sorry that I was not able to be present at the opening of the meeting, and have, therefore, not had the advantage of hearing the first speakers. I have heard all the rest of the speakers, and there is a great deal in what they have said with which I cordially agree. There were one or two points brought up this morning to which I should like to add a few remarks. Professor Henderson, in discussing the question, pointed out that any candidate in technology should show the same amount of general training as general chemists, and in addition to that should possess his special knowledge of the technological subject.The point I would make is this, that if that suggestion were adopted, it would be absolutely necessary to have a four years’ course for a technological student. (Hear, hear.) Although I agree with 53 PROF.KNEcm. this in principle, I dare say it has been the experience of all present that to keep students for four years for an ordinary degree would be a very difficult thing. GARDNER:(PROFESSOR We have a four years’ course in Bradford.) Another point was raised by Professor Morgan in which stress was laid upon the importance in the teaching of analy-tical chemistry, and in that I cordially concur.I think that of all branches of chemistry, it is the one which should be stimulated more than any other by the Institute. A good deal has been said with regard to research, and with that generally I uin in agreetnent, although Professor Morgan, I think, rather tended to deprecate research, and said that it might degenerate into something unworthy of a degree. think that might be possible, but it surely should be within the power of the Professor to prevent anything of the kind. The whole discussion might well be confined to narrower limits if we had soine definite propositions before us, So far we have had none.have had no proposer or seconder of any resolution. (PRESIDENT: This is a cmference--a deliberative assembly, lye want to thresh out ideas and compare notes with a possible view to legislation hereafter. We are not in a position to pu~forward any definite propositions. It would not be prac-ticable at this stage. There is a great divergence of opinion, and it would be impossible to formulate any definite lin? of policy. Ih7hat we want to do is to hear the views of this assembly.) %he main point which appears to have been discussed by nearly every speaker is this : whether students lvho have obtained a University degree of B.Sc. or h4.S~. should be re2ognised by the Institute and admitted to the degree of IL..I.C.without examination. Personally I should ~iotbe inclined to admit a student to the Associateship of this Iiistitute merely on his having passed through a three years’ course and obtained a degree. The question of a four years’ course would be open to discussion. Under existing conditions 54 PROF.KNECHT. I think a man who has passed in Honours in the B.Sc. examination, and has done a research subsequent to that, which is regarded by the examiners or authorities of the Institute as being worthy, should be allowed to get the Associateship of the Institute without further examination. Mr. Hubner raised ;1. point regarding a kind OF compromise in that the Associateship examination should be held con-temporaneously with the B.Sc.examination. I dare say a good deal of time and trouble would be saved in this manner, but I imagine that the majority of those present would scarcely agree to the interference of another body in the University proceedings. We already have outside examiners who guarantee the ‘‘ bona fides ” of the examinations, but for a third body to come in would, I am afraid, render the machinery too complicated. DR.KEANE: In the first place I should like to draw atten- tion to the point raised by Professor Henderson and subse- quently by Professor Kipping, with regard to the differentia- tion of the Associateship and the Fellowship, because therein appears to lie a solution of the problem before us. If I may be permitted to refer to the President’s opening statement, I think that what is there expressed so admirably in a few words is fundamental from this consideration : “ Do we declare our Members’ qualifications as actual practitioners ; or do we simply label them as having received a training sufficient to enable them to learn how to become competent practitioners ? ” Two conditions are described, which seem to my mind to correspond with what niight be the qualifications for the Associateship and the Fellowship respectively.The Associate- ship should be that label which characterises a student as being ready to learn how to become a competent practitioner. If something of that kind could be adopted, the difficulty of qualifying examinations would be very largely removed.If the final seal put on by the Institute is the seal of professional qualification, then the open door to the Associateship which has been advocated as a qualification coming from a University degree would, I think, really meet the requirements. The difficulty that seems to exist is that the final seal of the 55 DR. KEANE. Associateship has to be compared with some different kind of qualification, and if we look ‘into the examinations a little, there is some differentiation there, In the Final Examinations for the Associateship in the branches of Mineral Chemistry, Physical Chemistry, and Organic Chemistry, we have some-thing of the type of the University Examination; but when we come to the Final Examinations in the Chemistry of Foods and Drugs, Biological Chemistry, and Metallurgy, there is something of the professional qualification.I think it is important that Fellows should realise there is this difference : that whereas the University degree might be accepted as the equivalent of the one, it cannot be accepted as the equivalent of the other. In this connection, there has been much discussion in this Institute with regard to the examination in Technological Chemistry, and we are all aware that the number of candidates for this examination has been very small. One reason why we have had so few candidates is that there is no associated award; but this examination appears to me as the type of professional examination which should qualify for the Fellowship. May I be permitted to refer to another point which Professor Kipping has touched upon : the desirability of opening the door to another type of man, such as the son of a practising chemist, who has not had the time to go through a full curriculum of study, and for whom Professor Kipping suggests the modification of one of our regulations.There are a number of men engaged in chemical work who would like to join the Institute if they could do so, and there is but one back door for them, which is the B.Sc. degree of the London University as an external student. I‘hose men are in many cases well qualified, and there is a minor regulation which is hitting them pretty hard at present, viz., that they must not be allowed to let more than five years elapse from the day of their registration.In a recent issue of the Proceedings it is stated that the Council have decided to 4‘ enforce more strictly this regulation.” This appears to me to be undesirable; because supposing a man leaves his school, and having done so goes to a chemical works, he has to pass the Matriculation and gain a University degree; he would then be ready to present himself for the Intermediate examination for the Associateship ; but for a part-time man it 56 DR. KEANE. is a difficult thing to achieve in five years. I see no reason why special stringencies should be exercised in such instances, because it is quite a normal thing for a man to spend more than five years from the date of his registration before coming up for the examination, and I suggest that this is a point requiring consideration. For such part-time students, I think we should open the door more widely, provided they are men engaged in chemical work, and who have passed suitable qualifying examinations in general subjects, and that in addition they are studying at some Institute recognised for that specific purpose. Something of the type of recognition that the London University has accorded to institutions which are not schools of the University might be advantageously adopted in this connection.~IR.J. B.CoLEniAN : I should like to call attention to the suggestion made that by taking a degree at certain Universities the man automatically becomes a Fellow.As far as my experience goes, the practical examinations of the Institute are far more severe than those of the Honours B.Sc. Degree. That being so, it seems to me that it would require careful con- sideration before both of the practical examinations should be excused. If a satisfactory test of practical knowledge can be imposed, I think that the admission of a student with an Honours Degree, at any rate, to the Associateship would be advisable. I should like to say a few words about those institutions which are outside the pale of the Institute. represent such a one at Chelsea. Perhaps I may give my experience in the matter. Some years ago, when I was first appointed, I planned out courses for the Institute and applied for recognition.I sent in the particulars of my courses as requested by the Institute. The Council asked me to modify them, which I did, and after the lapse of three or four years I applied again. I had a, letter to the effect, ‘‘ You are going on very well indeed, but we cannot admit you at present.” It appeared to me that there must be an objection to the type of Imtitution which I am representing. I will ask the Institute to consider such anomalies as that. I believe there are other institutions in the same position as my own, and if you really mean to widen the scope of the Institute, and to include chemists who may not have been through a University course, then I think very careful and deliberate consideration must be given to the claims of those Colleges which are not now recognised. DR.T.SLATER :PRICE I simply wish to refer to one point only, and that is in connection with the recognition of technical institutions. Dr. Keane referred specially to the type of student who cannot, for some reason or other, complete his University training; he is engaged in the chemical industry, and could satisfy the requirements of the Institute at all events so far as preparation for examinations is concerned by attendance at these technical institutions. At present such institutions are not recognised, as pointed out by Mr. Coleman. Perhaps the anomaly of the case may be shown by my own particular esperience. The Institute at one titne honoured me by making me one of their Examiners.Students immediately came to my institution and said they would like to work for the Institute. Seeing that I was an Examiner, and that the examinations in Physiczl Chemistry were held in my own lab3ratories, they thought there would be na difficulty at all in obtaining recogni- tion of their training ; but I had to tell them that although I was considered to be a fit Examiner, I was not considered fit to take courses for the Institute, as my institution was not recognised. I think that the time has coine when the Institute must take into account the various technical institutions which are giving a training sufficient to qualify for the Institute of Chemistry. One of the objects of the Institute is to encourage technical chemists, and yet we find that the regulations allow an intending candidate to be excused the Intermediate Examination only if he has passed examinations of a University character, and not necessarily of a technical character. I do not wish to say any- thing about the examinations as they are at present, and the recognition of certain Universi~ies, but I wish simply to eniphasise the point that the time has come for the Institute to recognise other institutions than those which are at present in their programme.PROFESSORA. W. CROSSLEY:I am afraid that the title of niy remarks as it appears in the printed notes is much too 58 PROF.CROSSLEY. comprehensive, and I will try to confine what I have to say to an attempt to answer some of the questions which the President has set.The first is : “DO we simply label our members as having received a training sufficient to enable them to learn how to become competent practitioners ? ” That is precisely the present practice of this Institute. “ How do we stand as regards the existing examina- tions held by the Universities ? Are we entrenching upon the province of the Universities and duplicating their work in any direction ? ” We are most unhesitatingly duplicating work. “DOwe or can we impose a standard (or I would rather say test) which we as a professional body consider a higher or more specialised criterion of competency ? ” I am of opinion that we can. In making my remarks, I shall try to remember what the President has said of letting the discussion take a constructive turn.In the first place look at the subjects in which the Associateship of this Institute is granted : hlineral Chemistry, Metallurgical Chemistry, Physical Chemistry, Organic Chemistry, the Chemistry of Food and Drugs, and Biological Chemistry. I will take simply three : Physical, Organic, Food and Drugs. Physical Chemistry is, I consider, a subject in which we are duplicating the work of the Universities. It is not a subject in which the Institute should give a diploma, as a separate subject ; but it should be dealt with in its applications in other branches of Chemistry. In what respect is an Associate of the Institute any better qualified as a Physical Chemist than a man who has just taken his Honours B.Sc.? Then, Crganic Chemistry is to my mind in precisely the same position, We are duplicating University examinations. I can give you many instances of men who have come straight up for the examinations of the Institute in Organic Chemistry immediately after passing their Honours B.Sc. Let us now take the subject in which I am sure we all agree that the Institute is the one institution in this country for 59 PROF.CROSSLEY. granting a qualification, and that is in the Chemistry of Food and Drugs. Are we giving the A.I.C. or the F.I.C. to the sort of men to whom you wish to give this hall-mark of efficiency ? I would instance my own students from the institution across the way.There are many of them who go through the minor and major examinations of the Pharmaceutical Society, at the end of which time they are competent general chemists, and they have a very special knowledge of Drugs. A good man who has been through those courses can in a few months get up a sufficient amount of food analysis to pass your examination. This has not been done once; it has been done many times. have nothing to say against these men. They are per-fectly competent to comply with the tests which are set them, and I have nothing to say against the examinations or the examiners ; but these men in three years’ time become Fellows of the Institute of Chemistry. In these three intervening years they needl not have done one single analysis in either food or drugs.I maintain that to send such men into the world as F.I.C. and as competent Analysts of Food and Drugs is at all events misleading. An analyst must have experience, which is exactly what these men have not. My belief is that we are giving our qualifications to men inexperienced, and too young to have the necessary experience. I maintain that some very radical alterations must be made in the conduct of the Institute’s examinations. I am in sym- pathy with many remarks which have been made, but I do not know that all chemists desire to come under the zgis of the Institute. I think there are many chemists who would prefer to be under the qis of their old Universities if any zgis is necessary. To my mind there is a distinct difference between the University and what this Institute ought to be.A University is an institution for education, and a B.Sc. degree is the stamp that a man has been educated. The Institute can commence where the University leaves off, in the great majority of cases. It can demand experience for its qualifications, and to my mind this is one of the main reasons for its existence. If it does not demand experience, wherein do its examinations differ from those of a University ? This means reorganisation, and I should like to make a few suggestions. The first thing I have to propose is that the holder of any 60 PROF.CROSSLEY. first or second class University Degree with Honours in Chemistry should be exempt from any examination previous to the Associateship.This exemption would have to include those holding the diplomas of a number of technical institutions. (PRESIDENT: That would abolish our Intermediate Examinations.) Yes, sir, largely, but not entirely. Such an Institute as the School of Technology in Man-Chester, of which I have had practical experience,is one which gives a training quite on a par with that given for any Honours Degree. The reading which is done for an Honours B.Sc. is of course far in advance of what is required for the Intermediate, and certainly the practical work that should have been done for an Honours Degree at all events covers the ground of the Intermediate. But we demand something at the Intermediate which is not demanded by the Universities, and that is, experience.I Cali illustrate this best by referring to sotiie remarks of Dr. IVood. Dr. TVood says in reference to the Intermediate Examina- tions : ‘‘ It has often seemed to me that there is a very consider- able difference between the Institute’s esaniinations and the University examinations of about equal difficulty.” There is, or there is intended to be, at least by the Institute Examiners. ‘6 Much more has to be accomplished in a given time at the Institute as compared with the University.” Quite true, and therein lies the test of experience. “ It is, of course, desirable that a candidate should be able to have two exercises in progress at the same time, but I have often thought that when quantitative exercises have been involved, the amount of work to be covered in a day is scarcely compatible with the attainment of that degree of accuracy required for success in University examinations.’’ I say most emphatically that the standard of accuracy is 61 PROF.CROSSLEY. greater than that required in University examinations.It is certainiy not less. “For many technical purposes a very high degree of accuracy is unnecessary. Whereas in University examinations the margin of error allowed is very small, and all determinations are supposed to be done in duplicate.” I have had a fair experience of University examinations, and I say at once that if the margin allowed had been very small, there would have been a much larger percentage of failures than there has been in the past.‘6 If the standard required by the Institute is of the former order, more attention should be paid in the University laboratories to rapid methods of analysis, such as would be employed in an average technical laboratory, but if the standard of the Institute approximates to that of the Tj’niversities, I am of opinion that a reduction should be made in the amount of work Lzllocated to each day of the Institute’s examination.” Now that is a point where the Institute differs from the Unil-ersity. The Institute demands experience ; demands a knowledge of the value of the word “time” in the process of carrying out quantitative analyses : two demands with which a University student can seldom comply.I would exempt very few indeed from the Associateship examinations, because I consider them special tests of experience, and one of the most important points is the oral examination, which is purely a test of experience. We are all acquainted with the University graduate. To my mind he is a most phenomenal creature, in that he manages to get through the amount of work he does. The only way in which he can do it is by paying more and more attention to the work which he is doing at the moment, and letting an amount of that which he has done slip out of his memory. We see that instanced at the oral examinations here. We get candidates who come to us very soon after having taken their University Examination ; they are splendidly prepared in their special subjects ; but they have no knowledge of general chemistry, nor can they be expected to have, because they have not had experience.LVe know perfectly well that at the end of the degree course a 62 PROF.CROSSLEY. man is not worth much as a chemist. His University does not mean to say that he is. He then proceeds to some vocation in life, and begins to sift those facts which, as a chemist, he must have at his fingers’ ends from those which he can find in any text-book. It is not until that sifting process has been carried out by the man that he ought to be given the qualifi- cations of the Institute. Then he is really of some use in the world, and has had the all-important experience.Sup-posing then that he had passed the Final Examination for the Associateship, I would make independent work--research, if you like to call it so-an absolute necessity for the Fellowship. A young analyst might say to this suggestion : ‘‘That has done for me; I can never hope to have time to do any research at all.” This is not so, however, for the analyst’s work is nearly all the solving of problems, i.e., research work. I would take as research in such a case a thesis written, not necessarily for publication; a thesis in which some particular method or methods of analysis are treated in a critical manner and from actual personal experience. I feel sure that on such lines as these, the examinations can be remodelled, so as to make the Institute of great future value to this country.MR. A. CHASTON CHAPMAN: I think, perhaps, the most striking and satisfactory feature of the Conference has been the vigour and frankness which have characterised the speeches. Times change, and we must go with them. I think something will have to be done. In the first place there can be no doubt that some greater differentiation should be made between the Associateship and the Fellowship, and I have long felt it ought not to be merely a matter of automatic progression. One thing is quite certain, that whatever changes are made, we ought to be very chary indeed of losing what control we at present possess over candidates who apply for admission to our Body. A great deal has been said about the advisability of granting further exemptions to men with certain degree qualifications.Well, there is a great deal to be said for that, but there is one thing we ought never to forget. We, after all, are a professional Body. We do offer a guarantee to the public that the persons we label are persons on whom they can 63 RIR. CHAPMAN. rely. I am not going to enter into the question of the value of that guarantee ; but our Local Government Board consider that a candidate who has passed in one of our branches is pro- ficient in the things they expect him to know. Other public bodies regard our qualifications as a guarantee of special know- ledge, and I think that it is not only right, but that it is our clear duty, to see that we do not part with any power we possess at present of controlling the candidates who come up for admission to our Body, and we should have the right to say that their train- ing has not only been in the direction in which we want it to have been, but that it has gone to the extent to which it should have gone before admitting them to the Intermediate or Final Examinations.I would like to lay great stress upon the Inter- mediate Examination, for we have heard a great deal more about the Final than the Intermediate to-day. Now it is quite obvious that we cannot build a really solid superstructure on an unsound foundation, and I think Professor Crossley will agree with me that men who present t!iemselves claiming exemption from the Intermediate Examination in virtue of the B.Sc.Honours Degree are not always men who have the requisite grasp of fundamental chemical principles. This has been my experience on more than one occasion as an Esaminer for the Institute, and for that reason I am very strongly of opinion that we ought to be exceedingly careful how we proceed in the matter of grant- ing absolute and unqualified esemptions. As an Institute we ought to ensure, as far as we can, that every man who goes out of this building with our qualification is a thoroughly well- trained man, that he has a proper grasp of the principles of his science, and that he is consequently a man who will in all probability do us credit. Xot only do we owe a duty to the public, we owe a duty to ourselves.TVe ought to ensure as far as possible that a man who goes into the world with the qualification of this Institute dl not do foolish things or things likely to bring discredit upon us. Jl-ith regard to the Final Examination, I have already said that I think the time has come when some alteration should be made. I feel that the Fellowship should not be granted merely through lapse cf time, but should indicate that a man has gained some solid practical experience, or has done some independent investi- gation which is really meritorious. The Fellowship should, 64 MR. CIIAPMsN. in fact, mean something different and something more than it does at present. There are two further points. In the first place, the question of research has been mentioned a good many times.Now, I yield to no one in my love of chemical investigation or in the esteem in which I hold it. Properly carried out, it is, I think, one of the finest mental trainings a Inan can have, but we ought to be clear as to what is really meant when the word “research” is used. It may obviously mean a number of different things. It may mean that a man has ideas and the capacity to work them out to a satisfactory conclusion, or it may mean that his Professor requires a piece of work to be clone, gives him the idea, and tells him what to do. More than this, I have heard of cases where laboratory attendants have actually been called upon to make the necessary analyses. \Ire certainly ought to attach greater importance to original investigation than we have done in the past, but we ought to be clear that we are recognising only the right kind. I remember that a few years ago a mail came to me with R recommendation from a friend.He said, ‘(I am a graduate of such and such a Uni-versity-it was a well-known German Cniversity-this is my thesis.” It bristled with analyFes of all kinds, 2nd was certainly a very imposing piece of work, !)tit what he wanted to do was a little quantitative chemical analysis. As a matter of fact I was anxious to oblige my friend, but I found that the applicant’s knowledge of analytical chemistry was of a most elementary description. I do not suggest that this represents the usual state of affairs, but I say that theses of this sort are produced and riiay be presented to us, and I think we ought to proceed with extreme caution regarding this important question. (PRESIDENT:That would amount to exercising a rigid supervision over the character of the research work that may be presented.) Yes, for the research might mean a very great deal or it might mean nothing.There are a great many men who go to a University College and stay there for three years. They come away with knowledge 65 MR. CHAPMAN. which is often only superficial, and which must be only partly digested. They go into works and are a source of disappoint- ment to themselves and to their employers, and that, of course, reacts badly on the chemical profession. I think the time has come when the chemical heads of the Colleges in this country should point out to parents that Chemistry is not a profession to be taken up because their sons are “fond of it,” or because it is thought to be cheap.Chemistry should not be a less expensive profession than law or medicine, and there can be no doubt that the idea that it is does re-act injuriously on the profession in many ways. There are too many chemists of a kind we do not want. They are really not the men who will promote the honour and dignity of the profession, and I think something should be done to check the supply-There is another point. Let us assume that a man has devoted four years to the study of Chemistry. The first three years have been spent in the acquisition of a knowledge of general Chemistry and other subjects.At the end of the fourth year,and during the fifth, I would strongly urge that his train- ing should be carried out on different lines. I am speaking, of course, of industrial chemists. These men require a different form of training during this period, and I suggest that they should be taught in a manner approximating more to that of the actual works or technical laboratory. Possibly the University professors might see their way to make some use of the special knowledge possessed by the members of this Institute in technical matters. I take it that one of the main features of the Institute is that it consists of a collection of men who are in close and active touch with the chemical industries of this country, and that in that sense it comprises a mass of knowledge and information such as exists nowhere else.It is clear that, save in a few instances, the professorial chemist has not the same kind of knowledge and experience, and I would therefore urge upon the chemical heads of our Universities that they might with the greatest possible advantage to their students and to British Chemistry make sotne use of this source of information, which is,at present, almost untapped. A little has already been done in this direction at the Royd School of Mines, and I am exceedingly I.C. E 66 MR. CHAPMAN. anxious to see the idea extended in other directions. In con- clusion, I would once again say that I feel most strongly that whatever alterations we may decide to make in the nature and scope of our examinations, we should as a professional body, with a responsibility to the public, maintain some control over those candidates who seek admission to our body, and who claim exemption in virtue of other qualifications.MR. OTTOHEHNER: In spite of all the criticisms to which we have listened, the Institute of Chemistry has fulfilled its functions remarkably well under considerable difficulties. The Jnstitute was primarily started for the organisation of chemical practitioners. It was felt that this new profession had no chance of coming to the level of the older professions unless the public had an assurance that the chemical advisers were properly qualified and that their advice was based upon sound knowledge.From the beginning the Institute had to rely upon the help and goodwill of chemists other than practitioners and especially upon the University teachers. I am an old practitioner. When I came on the scene there hardly existed a chemical profession in the modern sense. In most cases when a member of the public required elucidation of a chemical point, the help of a University professor, that is to say of an amateur practitioner, was requisitioned. Most of the so-called analytical and consulting chemists were members of other professions, particularly the medical, When I now look through the long list of practising chemists, very many of whom are personally known to me, I find that they are men who need fear no comparision with the corresponding practitioners of other professions. The public has also learned to know, to use and to respect the chemical practitioner. In most other European countries the chemical profession is not organised ; even in Germany, where it is organised, the average chemical practitioner hardly stands on so favourable a footing as he does here.For all this the credit mainly belongs to the Institute, which has within thirty or thirty-five years brought about this change. I, therefore, do not think that we have any reason to complain of the Institute. Of course times are changing very quickly, and we are all anxious to be in the van. I often now feel that the chemist is too academical 67 MR.HEHNER. and too little technological. In a works the chemist is not unfrequently used merely as an analyst, when his function should be a more important one. I feel that at present there is not a satisfactory distinction between Associateship and Fellowship ; for the Associateship academic training only need be required, but a Fellow should possess practical experience and technological knowledge. At present an Associate proceeds to the Fellowship almost auto- matically on bringing evidence that for three years he has practised Chemistry. That does not seem to be satisfactory. It may, however, be difficult for an Associate, who may have been employed in important work of a confidential nature, to give proof of his practical and technical knowledge.Ayoung chemist might be employed in the 1Xroolwich Arsenal, and not be permitted to furnish the Institute with a thesis in proof of the knowledge there acquired. No doubt the Council would have to find means to overcome difficulties presented by such cases. It is important that the standard of admission to our pro-fession should, on no account, be lowered. Defects in early education can rarely, if ever, be made good in later years; persons afflicted with such defects, even if filled with chemical knowledge, would surely be harmful as members of a pro-fession. The Institute cannot progress at a proper rate whilst some of the most prominent teachers are not members. Their students will not be anxious to become Fellows while the professors stand outside.Yet the membership is of consider- able practical use to a young man. Apart from the fact that in the obtaining of a number of official appointments the Fellowship is almost a necessity, I linow that many of my professional colleagues will not employ as assistants young men who are outside the Institute. The evolution of our profession must necessarily be retarded until professors recognise that they are essential to the Institute and that the practitioners rely upon their assistance. SIR WILLIAM : I am speaking from the point of view RAMSAY of an ordinary student taking his degree. As far as our experi-ence at University College goes, the lnstitute’s examinations are freely taken by those who are taking degree examinations.E2 68 SIR W. RAMSAY. The examinations are very similar, and really, after having passed the one it is very hard to have to pass the other. Why should they take it? Well, they take it because they think they are going to gain some advantage, or advance themselves in the profession, or establish their names before the public. The question is, do they? Well, they do not unless they are going into a particular branch. I do not think from any point of view that that advances them, and very often I have a great difficulty in advising a young man to present himself, seeing that he is not going to become a public analyst. Why should he ? One is obliged to advise a student with a view to his ultimate advantage.I think anyone who has taken the University degree should automatically become an Associate. The Institute ought to make the Intermediate Examination not a professional, but a training examination. It does not differ much from University examinations. Is it necessary that he should take the Final Examination ? I think it might be possible to postpone the Final Examina- tion. The man may not want to go further. Let us take some qualification. He has been practising chemistry in some form or other, and he tells us in an oral examination what he has been doing. That is all we want to know. He might produce testimonials from his employer, and this would make the Fellowship a purely professional affair. Take what is done in medicine. A young fellow goes through his various scientific classes and takes his first professional examination.He takes his second professional examination in which the subject becomes more medical, and then walks the hospitals, and moreover his success depends upon the pro- fessors who practically recommend him. There is something of the apprenticeship system still left in the hospitals. What I recommend would be practically an apprenticeship, but I think some sort of oral examination at which the man states what he has been doing that time-no formal exaniination- could give us sufficient indication as to whether he were worthy of Fellowship. I do think we must progress and get rid of this multiplicity of examinations. I think we should try to accept the examina- tions of all duly qualified bodies.Then comes another question. There are a number of people who are outside. At present we 69 SIR W. RAMSAY. do not admit them at all. There are cases in which that is very hard indeed. There are the cases of laboratory boys who become admirable chemists. We ought to have some “back door ” for such people. I do not know how that ‘‘ back door ” should be arranged, That opens the question, ‘‘Are we going to keep up the system of examinations such as we have? ” I cannot say; it is an open question. I think generally the upshot is this, that we want a small committee with the power (very much on the lines of Royal Commissions or a Committee of one of the Government Departments) to take evidence, and we ought to hear evidence on the medical side.They could give us advice, and it would be very helpful. IVe should then be on firmer ground for taking further action. I do not think the thing should be hurried. It appears to me that a Com-mission should precede any attempt to solve our difficulties. SIR WILLIAM The object of this meeting is toTILDEN: obtain information, and I should like to congratulate you on the great success of this Conference, which I cannot help feeling is one of the most important meetings ever held by the Institute. One of the first remarks I heard this morning had reference to the ignorance of the manufacturers in the North as to the qualifications of ,qssociates and Fellows.I am not surprised to hear they do not know much about the Institute, but that seems to indicate that the Institute has not been sufficiently made known in that part of the world. There are apparently large bodies of manufacturers in the North who have not heard of the Institute of Chemistry, and I think some of our members ought to let them know. Nearly every part of the subject has already been discussed, and though there is some diversity of opinion, there is not such a great diversity of opinion as might be expected, on fundamental things. I am quite in agreement with those who think the door of the Institute should be held wider open so as to provide for the admission of those trained chemists who by some accident are, under present conditions, excluded.Certainly the door should be wider open, and I am in agreement with those who think that we ought to recognise the examinations held by many of the Universities of this country, and the degrees with Honours in Chemistry which are conferred by 70 SIR \V. TILDEK. those Universities, and I think we should excuse those candidates who hold qualifications of this kind from further examination by the Institute. But I should like to express my feeling that while I agree in general with this view I cannot think it would be wise for the Institute to accept the Degrees of any and all Universities, without sufficient enquiry. I cannot forget the occasion when I was President when a Fellow of the Institute brought under my notice and I brought before the Council the conditions under which Degrees in Science were given by one of the old Universities of this country.Now those conditions were so disgraceful that for a time-I do not know whether there is any Member of the Council present who remembers that day-the Council actually seriously discussed whether this great and ancient institution should not be cut off our list. I do not suppose that state of things exists in any British University at the present time; but I think there can be no doubt that the standard of qualifications required for Degrees in Science in the several Universities is 1.ery different. Would it be possible to equate, say, the University of London against the University of Oxford, or the University of Manchester against the University of Cambridge ? They work on different lines, and the Degrees that are conferred certainly represent some- thing quite different.Now, what I think with regard to this matter is that while I should be glad to see a considerable number of these Degrees recognised by the Institute of Chemistry, I think it should be only after very careful enquiry, and I would suggest if the Council thinks fit to extend in this direction it might at once begin to open negotiations with the heads of the chemical departments in some of the more important Universities. I should like to see a step taken in that direction, but we must not admit all and sundry without enquiry. I agree very cordially indeed with some remarks which were made by Mr.Hehner regarding the importance of general education, and on that ground I feel with regret that I must differ from my friend, Sir William Ramsay, about admitting the laboratory boy. I do not say that you will not find extremely clever people among this class; the question is whether they will fairly represent professional chemistry if we help them to get into general practice. I think 71 SIR W. TILDEN. not, and it is on the ground of deficiency of general education I have in the past mainly felt an objection to admitting these students who come to the evening classes of many Institutions. Very many of these are most worthy, most industrious, very intelligent, but somehow I think that if we are going to build up a body comparable in social standing as well as professional rank with the great Institutions which have been referred to this afternoon, we must see that we do not admit too many of a class of persons who, whatever their other merits may be, are certainiy not qualified to represent the Institute on public occasions, and in the eyes of the world.I think we have had a very profitable day, and that we shall go away feeling we have a good deal to think about. Those Members of the Council who have attended the meeting will be deeply impressed with the serious character of the business that lies before them, which will be to endeavour as far as possible to interpret the feeling of this meeting and put it into some kind of practical operation.PERCY : NoPROFESSOR F. FRANKLAND one could have listened to the speakers without realising that there is a wide-spread feeling that the doors of the Institute should be opened more widely in some way or other, First of all we have got to determine whether this Institute is to consist simply of a small section of chemists or whether it is to include practically all properly trained chemists of repute, We have already deplored certain notable gaps in the ranks of our Membership, and we hope that these particular gaps will be filled up before long. Now, the difficulty about getting this Institute to include really the whole body of well-trained chemists has been the existence of tbese external examinations. I am not one of those who criticise these examinations at all.I believe these examinations have done an immense amount of good, and that they have done good not only to persons who would not have been otherwise examined but that they have re-acted on the examinations of the Universities, and that the standard of University examination in Chemistry is higher to-day than fifteen or twenty years ago, largely because of the cxcellence of the examinations of the Institute of Chemistry. But as 72 PROF. FRANKLAND. already pointed out by the first speaker, Professor Green, the main object of most students who go to Universities or Technical schools is ultimately to gain employment, and there cannot be the slightest doubt that employment in works and employment in the teaching of Chemistry is not furthered by the possession of a diploma of the Institute of Chemistry, and I do not see why it should.A manufacturer says to me he wants a promising young fellow, but he only cares what my recommendation is, and what I write on half a sheet of note- paper is in that case worth more than any diploma or any degree. He wants a personal recommendation, and that is all he is concerned with. Now, we want to get these promising young fellows into the Institute, and I therefore think we ought to make certain exemptions, at any rate in respect of the Intermediate Examination. We already do that. The degree with Honours, first or second class, in a number of Universities exempts from the Intermediate Examination, but nothing exempts, as far as I know, from the Final Examination for the Associateship.I think many of the speakers were not quite clear about this point. ‘There are plenty of exemptions already from the Intermediate Examination, but there are no exemp- tions from the Final Examination for the Associateship. think the exemptions from the Intermediate want carefully re- considering, and we have heard from many speakers the kind of exemption which is advocated, as, for instance, a four years’ Honours course at a University. At any rate, I think that a four years’ Honours course at the University gaining first or second class Honours is a very fair ground for exemption from the Intermediate Examination. And yet I would not say it is entirely justified, for the examinations of the Institute differ from the examinations of the University, and I cannot at all agree with Sir William Ramsay that “ It is quite easy for degree students to pass these examinations.” I have been an Examiner of the Institute myself, and I have often found that Honours graduates of the Universities fail in these esamina- tions, and I think that is often likely to occur.The University course is now so crowded, the matter has to be so rushed through, that students do not really acquire sufficient skill in the performance of the manipulative part of their work. The Institute demands a certain amount of manipulative skill. A 73 PROF.FRANKLAND. large number of problems are set to be worked out in a short time.The standard of accuracy demanded is, I believe, higher than the accuracy demanded by the University examinations. Indeed, University examiners are sometimes bewildered as to how they are to assign any marks at all. As regards exemption from the Final Examination for the Associateship, it has already been suggested that the M.Sc. degree, in- volving research and presentation of a thesis, should furnish exemption from that. That seems to be a very reasonable proposal, but it is one which would require to be carefully looked into, and I am not at all sure that, even if this were encouraged, some auxiliary examination, established in respect of manipulative skill, might not advantageously be super-added to this M.Sc.for research. I think if we exempted a large number of men from the Intermediate Examination there would be more hope of getting a greater proportion of the total number of well-trained chemists into our fold, and that, I take it, is the first consideration. I heartily sympathise with what has already been proposed about differentiating between the L4ssociateship and the Fellowship in some totally different manner from that which is in force at the present day. Here again I favour the idea of research, or responsibility of sotne kind equal to it, for Fellowship of the Institute. This will, however, require very careful consideration, because, of course, as we all know, there is research and research, as has been put by one of the previous speakers.There is, I think, on the whole a very easy way of discriminating between these two different kinds of research, that is, as to whether the research is the independent work of the Candidate, or has only been suggested to hini by a teacher. I think that where a man is going to submit research for qualification for the Fellowship there ought to be no question as to whether he is the real author of the research. It is not to be got at by any absurd regulation that his published work must bear only his name. It ought to bear his name, but if it also bears that of some assistant or pupil who has worked under him, so much the better. I think that on broad lines of that kind a great im- provement in our qualifications might be made, and especially from the point of view of introducing a larger number of chemists into our ranks.In this connection I would like to say that 74 PROF. FRANKLAND. provision ought to be made with regard to these technological science degrees, such as have been spoken of by Professor Green, and also recognising more fully the work which is being done in the Technical Institutes. We know now hat the chemical, physical, mathematical, and engineering depart- ments are presided over in these Institutions by men of high attainments and reputation, and it is not at all right that the work of such men should be entirely passed over in this way. How they are to be recognised is a matter of detail. There is no doubt a change should be made in the regulations of the Institute with regard to these Institutions.VC'e have often heard of avenues being provided for the laboratory boy. As a matter of fact the laboratory boy can get in, and it is quite right that he should. He can get a degree from the London University, and he then only has to submit himself for examinations at the Institute. We do not want the laboratory boy as a laboratory boy, but we want those laboratory boys who are capable of developing into members of our own class, and there are such. I should only like to say further how indebted we are to you, sir, for having provided the opportunity for this most interest- ing Conference, and I fed sure that this Conference will lead to most material results, and that there will be some change- important, we hope-in the regulations of the Institute.think it is very remarkable that a set of regulations have been found to work on the whole fairly well for a period of twenty years, nearly a generation of men, and it is now time that we should re-consider our position. I would, in conclusion, refer to the position of physics in the regulations at the present time. One of the regulations of the Institute is that a student should, during his University career, take a course of physics. At present, the course of physics for the Intermediate University Examination in Physics is not considered to be quite sufficient. It is necessary for a student, as I read the regulations, to continue his physical studies beyond the Intermediate Examination.That is imposing a considerable hardship on many students. It is all right if a student is going to take chemistry as his principal subject and physics and mathematics as subsidiary subjects for his degree ; but in some of our branches of the Final Exatnination, physics 75 PROF.FRAXKLAND. is not so important. IVe have the fermentation branch and the food and drugs branch. Kow in order that he shall properly qualify for those, he ought to be attending other classes besides, and there simply is not time for all. Again, if he is going in for metallurgy, that also prevents him from attending an extra class in physics, and the reason is that physics beyond the intermediate examination is of such a purely mathematical character that it also involves attendance at some mathematical classes, and thus prevents him from taking up these other branches, as fermentation and metallurgy, which involve attending a number of other classes in addition to classes in those particular subjects. I think there is less necessity for this further study of physics in the physical department, because in our chemical departments a large amount of time is now devoted to that part of physics which is most useful to the chemist.I think a special study of physics in the physical department beyond the intermediate examination of the University is much less required now than it would have been ten or fifteen years ago. :MR. DAVIDHOWARDMr. Chapman has so exactly described the idea of the man that I want that I associate myself with him.On behalf of the manufacturing chemists, I do protest against the idea that the Institute is to insist on foisting on us part-educated chemists. If we want bottle-washers, we can get them. If we want some testing machines, we can get them. If we want a man who can think, nothing less than the standard of the Institute will give anything worth having at all. You want a good general education, including physics. You want a good general knowledge of how to think. A little Greek does no harm. You want a practical know- ledge ;and with regard to the Intermediate Examination, unless we are quite sure that the examinations of the Universities are ejzisdent gezzevis with our own, then we must continue to hold then).What you want in the average chemical works is a man who can think for himself. With regard to research, what we want is a man with the power of finding his own way. If it were only a question of working out ideas, we have bottle-washers who have been 76 MR. HOWARD. trained to do the work for us. It is the man who can do the preliminary thinking that we want. I knew a Ph.D. who published a brilliant thesis, and was the most hope-less man to work with I have ever known in my life. The research habit is the life of the manufacturing chemist. You want thorough education, thorough practical knowledge, and the habit of thinking. There are only three things you can give: to know what one knows; to know what one does not know; and to know where to find what one wants to know.A man who knows steel manufacture down to the ground would be perfectly hopeless in any other work so far as what he knows, unless he had the art of learning. I doubt really whether any University can turn out a man so ready for this practical work that he has not to learn a great deal, because no Universities can test the insides of the particular works in which he is working. No two works work alike. You must not imagine you can turn out a finished chemist by any means of education except the test of experience. I say keep up the standard of the Institute whatever you do. My experience of manufacturers is that nineteen out of twenty are as grossly ignorant of chemistry as is possible, and that they do not know what they want.PROFESSOR : Having been prevented from attend- THOMSON ing the meeting in the morning, I had no intention of speaking. There is one point, however, that I should like to emphasise in the consideration of the education which apparently is required by a young man preparing for the Institute and ultimately going out into professional chemical work. That is, that he should take the qualifications both of a University and of the Institute. We must endeavour in the future to get, as far as possible, some reciprocity between these two ideas of education, and that reciprocity might, I think, be brought about by a closer association between the teachers in the colleges and the authorities of the Institute; so that the former might have the support and help of the Board of Examiners of the Institute.What I mean is a closer connection between the college teacher and the practical professional man. If that can be arranged I think much improvement might be made. Undoubtedly we have come 77 PROF.THOMSON. to a point at which some change must be made, and if we can possibly do so by a union of the energies of the college teacher and the professional man the Institute will make, I think, a strong position in the future. THEPRESIDENT: In winding up this Conference it is my pleasing duty now once again to express the grateful thanks of the Council to those members who have come here-many of them at great personal inconvenience and from great distances -in order to help us in our deliberations.As a practical outcome, of course, 211 I can say at present is that the questions raised are of such fundamental importance and likely to lead to such widely important results that we must proceed slowly, with caution, before we can hope to give practical effect to, and harmonise the various conflicting views that have been put forward. But certainly I agree with the remarks of one of the speakers that, in spite of apparent diver- gence of view, there is really an underlying unanimity of thought as regards the fundamental proposition of making the Institute as representative of the profession as it can possibly be made, and that is the idea that has permeated this gathering.I have nothing more to add, except to say that I shall take very great care on my own part that the various notions that have been put forward shall be carefully summarised and digested, put into print and circulated, and that I shall move in Council that a Committee be appointed to go into the whole question of the regulations with a view to seeing what revisions are necessary, and how they can be effected. With a hearty vote of thanks to the President, moved by Mr. David Howard, and seconded by Mr. Charles E. Groves, the meeting dissolved. Notes received after the Conference. DR.A. JAMIESON WALKER,Technical College, Derby. After consideration of the important opinions expressed at the conference, I should like to submit to the Council my views as to the needs of the Institute and the best means of supply-ing them.The great want in the profession of chemistry at the present time is an Institute capable of exercising a large degree of 78 DR. A. J. WALKER. influence on the training of chemists for both professorial and technological work, and at the same time of inducing manu-facturers to select adequately trained men at reasonable salaries, and not ‘‘ Chemical labourers,” at labourers’ wages. The Institute of Chemistry is undoubtedly the Association of chemists best qualified to fulfil these functions, provided its scope is considerably extended. I shali indicate my view as to the procedure best adapted to attaining this extension of scope, and the reasons underlying my opinion.The first step has been indicated by Prof. Green and by Dr. Forster : all chemists should be brought into the Institute. To this end the Council should endeavour to induce all pro-fessorial chemists in positions of responsibility, and not already Fellows, to join the Institute, and thus awaken their interest in its work. Once members themselves, they would be dis- posed to advise their students to join, and thus the whole of the rising generation of chemists would be brought under the influence of the Institute, and stimulated to acquire its qualifi-cation. By this means I believe that within twenty-five years every adequately trained chemist in the country would have become a member, and that the enormous accession of influence acquired by the Institute would lead to the elimination of the ‘‘ Chemical labourer,” a consummation heartily to be desired in the interests of the manufacturers themselves.As an instance of the deleterious effect of the ‘‘ Labourer ” system I may cite the case of a large firm which decided to instal a steel plant in their works. As “Chemist ” they selected a clerk from the office, completely ignorant of the subject, and sent him to evening classes to learn chemistry. An expensive modern plant was erected, and,after some months’ working it was found that the output of the furnaces was far in excess of the capacity of the rolling mills. Had the firm been advised by a properly trained chemist this anomaly and other diffi- culties would not have arisen.As it was, after a few months the firm in disgust decided to shut down their steel works, and the entire plant was scrapped at a sacrifice of many thousands of pounds. Much more serious than the loss to this individual firm, however, is the creation and dissemination of the idea that the inability of a “Chemical labourer” to advise on such matters as the design of plant 79 DR. A. J. WALKER. constitutes a full condemnation of the whole profession of chemistry from the manufacturer’s standpoint. The second step was suggested by Professors Frankland and Henderson, Principals Gardner and Wertheimer, Mr. Coleman, and Dr. Slater Price. It consists in the inclusion among the Institutions recognised by the Council of those Technical Colleges with a record indicating their courses to be on a level with those given by the Universities and Colleges already on the list, due care being exercised to prevent any lowering in the present standard of training demanded by the Institube.I feel that this caurse is imperative, and that its adoption would exercise a highly important influence on the development of the scope and prestige of the Institute. At the time of the inception of the Institute of Chemistry, the profession, like the other professions of the day, was in the hands of the middle class. Conditions are now altered, and the growth of democracy is tending to level class distinctions, and recruit the profession partly from the ranks of the sons of workers. Many of them are not in a financial position to attend a recognised institution for the purpose of receiving their chemical training, but can afford to take the courses pro- vided by the local technical college.They receive a sound training of university standard, and many of them -take the external degree of London University, and by this back door gain access to membership of the Institute. The possession of this degree is merely an indication, though an important indication, of the standard of the training they have received. While I should always urge such students to take a degree, I know from experience that there are instances of excellent chemists who have been prevented, not by lack of chemical knowledge but by other causes, from becoming graduates.Such men lose the advantage conferred by membership of the Institute, and the Institute loses prestige through the absence of the names of able men from its list of Associates and Fellows. By failing to make provision for such cases the Institute keeps out of touch with the spirit of the age, and the history of the evolution of our universities has demonstrated the fact that close and sympathetic contact with the movements of the time is essential to the real fulfilment of the highest functions of an educational institution. 80 DR. A. J. IYALKER. To ensure the maintenance of the training at the Honours graduation level of the University, I suggest that only technical colleges having approved courses of study and a satisfactory record should be recognised, and that the Head of the Chemistry Department in each college should also have to be recognised in a similar way to that practised by the University of London.The recognition of the Heads in this way seems to me an important factor, for it is a truism that the college is made by the staff, and not the staff by the college. In this connexion, in view of the fact that one provincial technical institution has furnished a member of the examination board, I should like to quote froni Professor Palmer Wynne’s note, altering the word ‘‘ Universities ” to ‘‘ Technical Institutions.’ ’ “The Institute employs as examiners men who are Professors in Technical Institutions.If it can trust these men to examine its candidates, it is a question very well worth asking why the Institute cannot trust these Pro- fessors . . . to teach . . .-candidates for the Intermediate or the Associateship in subjects other than Food and Drugs.’’ The third step would be in the direction indicated in Pro- fessor Kipping’s note regarding research work, but I would modify his suggestion by admitting to the F.I.C. after the candidate has done research work of a public or private character, or after he has occupied a position of responsibility in his profession. For the A.I.C. I should make research work optional, but would suggest the undesirability of making the award on research wxk only, without further evidence of the fitness of the candidate to receive the qualification.Briefly summarised the reforms suggested are : I. The extension of the influence of the Institute, with the object of bringing all scientific chemists within its pale, and of eliminating the ‘‘ chemically unfit ” from industrial work. 2. The opening of the door of the Institute to able men without financial backing, to be effected by the recognition of suitable technical colleges. 3. The encouragement of research, and the differentiation between the A.I.C. and the F.I.C., making the second qualification an evidence of ability and experience. 81 DR. A. J. WALKER. Feeling as I do that the Institute should become the focus of the chemical profession, I have ventured to submit the reforms indicated for the consideration of the Council.A number of my own students, now Fellows or Associates, and occupying good posts in educational and industrial avocations, could not have attained their positions but for the possibility of local training. Others equally able, and occupying no less useful positions, have been excluded from membership of the Institute through no fault except lack of means during their student days. For similar men I put in a plea that the door should be opened to them through the medium of the technical colleges. I would also urge that the Institute should seize this opportunity of consolidating into one influential and powerful body the various heterogeneous units now constituting the profession of scientific chemistry.If this opportunity is lost, the progress of the profession must be indefinitely retarded; if it is used well, the rising generation will owe a deep debt of gratitude to the wisdom and prevision of the Council of the Institute of Chemistry. PROFESSOR P. PHILLIPS BEDSON,D.SC., ARMSTRONG COLLEGE,NEWCASTLE-UPON.TYNE. I. It must be conceded that there are a considerable number of graduates in Chemistry in this country, who find their way into the Industries and the practice of the profession of Chemistry without seeking enrolment as Associates or Fellows of the Institute. Further, it is as readily acknowledged that it is desirable that the Institute should be fully representative of the profession, and should to the public and the profession occupy a position in this relation, similar to that which the Institute of Civil Engineers holds to the Engineering profession.I would, therefore, support the concession proposed by Pro- fessor Dixon, whereby the graduate in Honours in Chemistry, who, after a further residence at his University, has been admitted, in recognition of research work, to the Mastership in Science, shall be allowed to proceed to the Associateship of the Institute, without being required to submit to a formal examination by the Examiners of the Institute. I have in mind several instances of students, who, after obtaining the Degree of B.Sc. in Chemistry, have, for example I.C. F 82 PROF.BEDSON. as 1851 Exhibition Scholars, proceeded to Germany and successfully obtained the Degree of Ph.D.for research in Chemistry. These men have on their return to this country obtained positions in practice, and although at the commence- ment of their career they intended to seek to become Associates of the Institute, they have been deterred from doing this by the natural disinclination to submit themselves to a further formal examination test. Assuredly the Institute would be the stronger by securing men so trained as Associates and ultimately Fellows. 2. In no case should the Fellowship be conferred until the Associate is at least thirty years of age, and then only when the Council is satisfied that the Associate has, subsequent to his admission, been actively engaged in the pursuit of the pro- fession in some capacity or other.3. As the degree of B.Sc. is given for proficiency in pure #Chemistry, but also for proficiency in Applied Chemistry, or in Arts to which Chemistry is basal, it should be required that in all cases claiming recognition, under the concession mentioned above, the curricula should embrace as complete a training in Chemistry as is at present required by the regula- tions of the Institute for the Intermediate Examination. This would also apply to the existing regulation, whereby a graduate of a recognised University obtains exemption from the Inter- mediate Examination of the Institute. 4. In regard to the recognition of other Institutions for the training required for admission to the Intermediate Examination, I think the essential is that this training must be subsequent to the completion of the entrance Examination in general education, and should require attendance at day classes, as set forth in the existing regulations of the Institute.5. Mr. Chaston Chapman, in section 3 of his notes, draws attention to an attitude of mind, which is very widely prevalent. The Institute has, by its regulations and examinations, done something to correct such misconceptions, but undoubtedly much remains to be done in the education of the public in this regard. 6. Iiithout altering in any essentials the present regulations of the Institute, I think the Council should be empowered to 83 PROF.BEDSON. make known that it is prepared to consider the applications for admission to the Associateship, of Honours Graduates in Chemistry, who have proceeded to a higher degree than the Bachelorship; and if satisfied, on the report of its own examining Board, that the claim is good, the Council be entitled to admit the applicant.Further, that in such cases previous registration as a " Student " shall not be required. INDEX OF NAMES. I'AGR Arnold, J. 0. . Hubner, J. . . . . 52 Bedson, P. l'. . Irvine, J. C. . . -I7 Bruce, J. . , Jackson, H. . . '7, 49 Chapman, A. C. . Keane, C. A. . . -53 Coleman, J. B. . Kipping, F. S. . . 17,50 Crossley, A. W. . Knecht, E. . . . . 52 Desch, C. H. . Lapworth, A. . . . 18 Dixon, H. €3. . Meldola, K., President. 3, 28,77 Donnan, F. G. . Morgan, G. T. . . .42 Findlay, A. Orton, I(.J. P. . . 46 Fisher, W. W. . Pope, W. J. . . . 40 Forster, M. 0. . Price, T. S. . . . -57 Fowler, G. J. . Kamsay, Sir \Z-. . . . 67 Francis, F. E. . Smithells, A. . . . 19 Franltland, P. F. . Thomson, J. M. . . . 76 Gardner, W. 1%. . Tilden, Sir \V. . . . 69 Green, A. G. . Turner, T. . . . . zz Hehner, 0. . . Walker, A. J. . . . 77 Henderson, G. G. Wertheimer, J. . . . 4G Holloway, G. T. . Wood, J. K. . . zz,.44 Howard, D. . . Wynne, W. P. . . . z+ firadbury, Agnew, & Co. Ld., Printers, Londoii and Tonbridge.

ISSN:0368-3958    

DOI:10.1039/PG913370G001

出版商:RSC    

年代:1913

数据来源: RSC