Sayfadaki görseller

A paper on “A Course in the Testing of Materials," by Professor W. K. Hatt, Purdue University, was read by the author. The preceding papers were discussed by Professors Hibbard, Goss, Merriman, Lanza and Sperr, members of the Society, and by Mr. William Metcalf and Professor Bradley Stoughton, members of the American Society for Testing Materials.

A paper on “The Plan and Scope of Proposed Investigation of Structural Materials under the Auspices of the United States Geological Survey,” prepared by Messrs. J. A. Holmes and Richard L. Humphreys, was presented by the authors.

The paper was discussed by Messrs. Holmes, Humphreys, Hall and Leslie, of the American Society for Testing Materials, and by Professors Hatt and Lanza, members of both societies.

The meeting then adjourned.

The following members registered and were in attendance: C. Frank Allen, W. H. Boughton, I. O. Baker, Edward Caldwell, G. L. Christensen, H. E. Diller, C. B. Dudley, J. A. Fisher, Jr., A. H. Ford, W. H. Freedman, H. P. Gillette, E. D. Grant, A. F. Ganz, W. K. Hatt, J. A. Hunter, Chas. S. Howe, A. Lincoln Hyde, H. Wade Hibbard, C. R. Jones, M. S. Ketchum, Edgar B. Kay, William Kent, P. A. Lambert, Gaetano Lanza, Edgar Marburg, Mansfield Merriman, Henry S. Munroe, F. W. McNair, F. H. Neff, Chas. A. Perkins, Louis E. Reber, Wm. G. Raymond, F. P. Spalding, George F. Swain, H. E. Smith, F. W. Sperr, A. N. Talbot, H. P. Talbot, A. A. Titsworth, F. E. Turneaure, C. A. Waldo, W. O. Wiley, A. L. Williston.

REPORT OF THE SECRETARY. At the beginning of the last meeting the membership of the Society was 325. Fifty-one candidates were elected at the St. Louis meeting and eight were elected later by the council during the year. Several members have resigned during the year, leaving a membership of 379.

That the Society is becoming well and favorably known among teachers and practicians is made evident by the fact that several papers have been prepared for the present meeting by men in practical work. The influence of the Society in lines both educational and practical is becoming greater each year.

The finances have been well cared for and the Society is now in excellent financial condition. The rapidly increasing membership is tending to make the work of the officers quite arduous, especially the work of the Secretary. This matter requires serious consideration.

During the past year the Society has suffered a loss by death of Thomas Messenger Drown, President of Lehigh University, and Burton S. Lanphear, Assistant Professor of Electrical Engineering in Iowa State College.

Respectfully submitted,

Milo S. KETCHUM, Secretary.

REPORT OF THE TREASURER. The Treasurer of the Society would respectfully report as follows:

The total receipts during the year 1904–5, as given in the itemized statements herewith, have been $1,450.54 of which $870 was for current dues. There is at present a balance of $510.56 on hand; which is somewhat less than the balance reported at the last meeting, owing to certain accounts for sale of proceedings and reprints of papers not having been collected. When outstanding accounts are settled the balance will be considerably more than at the last meeting.

A condensed statement of receipts and expenditures is here given.

Cash from report of September 1, 1904. .....

.$ 552.34 Reprint of author's paper.

4.20 Current dues

870.00 Past dues collected...



Expenses of St. Louis meeting..
Secretary's expenses
Treasurer's expenses
Printing Vol. XII. of Proceedings, etc.
Committee on Statistics......
Committee on Graduation Requirements.
Secretary's honorarium
Balance, cash on hand...

.$ 91.05

90.29 44.51 522.37 50.00 41.76 100.00 510.56

$1,450.54 Respectfully submitted,



President Michigan College of Mines.


It is fact worthy of remark that mining engineering has figured very little in the transactions of the Society for Promotion of Engineering Education. Few mining engineers or mining professors take part in the meetings of the Society, and some two or three papers in the earliest volumes comprise almost the only reference to mining subjects in the proceedings. It is true that among the hosts of civil, mechanical, electrical, railway, and other engineers, the number of mining engineers seems almost insignificant and at first sight apparently justifies the silence concerning them, yet when the value of mining products is considered and with it the extent of the industries dependent more or less directly on mining, there is reached a very different estimate of the mining engineer and his training. From this latter view point, it would seem that either this Society should modify its general title or that we should hear more about the training of men for this particular profession.

Back in 1886 Professor R. H. Richards, then president of the American Institute of Mining Engineers, in his address at the Bethlehem meeting reached the conclusion that “mining schools have amply proved the necessity for their existence.” Six years later, namely, in 1892, the Engineering News was investigating the distribution of engineering graduates among the different courses in American schools, and in publishing its results drew the conclusion that all of the then existing mining schools would better give up their hold on life and allow their resources and energy to be devoted to other lines of engineering training. To get the spirit of the discussion by this able journal it is worth while to quote a few of its sentences.

“Mining engineering itself is a rapidly expanding department of professional work, while the number of graduates from mining schools has been steadily declining since it reached its climax (of sixty-one graduates only) in 1884.

“So much for the mining schools. If there is any real need for them as separate institutions, apparently they are not so organized as to fill that need. It would seem far wiser for most if not all of these (fifteen) schools to drop these courses and separate degrees altogether under these circumstances, using the released staff to strengthen their other courses. The training they give does not seem to be any special help to a man entering into mining work. Otherwise the number of graduates would increase at least as fast as the mining interest, which grows prodigiously.

“The mining engineer who graduates from the average course is at a disadvantage, even on his own chosen ground. He is neither fish, flesh, nor red herring. He is not so good an engineer as those who graduate from the other engineering courses because he has not been so thoroughly grounded in engineering. He is not so good a chemist as those who graduate from a chemical

« ÖncekiDevam »