view of the fact that, by Article 4, Chapter I, of the By-Laws, it is provided that, in balloting for members, "the law and custom of our forefathers shall be observed, by taking the question with Indian corn and beans; the corn expressing yeas, and the beans nays." The thing is, perhaps, of no great consequence, and the irregularity in the case of Mr. Adams is immaterial. Nevertheless, as President of the Society, in view of similar contingencies which may hereafter arise, I propose to lay down a rule which, unless otherwise ordered, will remain in force at least as long as I continue to be President. The custom I would therefore recommend, and unless otherwise ordered shall carry into effect, will be that, in the case of a vacancy in the Honorary list, the Council shall submit the names of those historians or investigators who seem to it to be most worthy of consideration. These names, as well as others which may be suggested, can be discussed; and an informal ballot then taken, in accordance with the understanding reached at the meeting of April, 1901. If the name of a person not on our lists should be agreed upon, it will be referred back to the Council, to be duly reported by the Council and acted upon in the way prescribed in the By-Laws. If, however, as is more usually the case, and as was the case at the last meeting, a Corresponding Member is selected for transfer to the Honorary roll, the first question to be submitted will be on a motion that the name of the person thus selected, being that of one already a member of the Society, be transferred from the Corresponding to the Honorary list. Should this transfer be unanimously ordered, it will take effect; and the acceptance of the transfer by the person named will have the force of a resignation, creating a vacancy in the Corresponding list. Should, however, objection be made to the transfer, the matter will be referred back to the Council, and acted upon in the way prescribed in the By-Laws; and, if the person thus named be subsequently elected an Honorary Member, his election as such will be construed as working a vacancy in the Corresponding list. The point involved is simply that a person already a member will not in future be elected again a member; but, if no objection is made, his name will be transferred from one roll to the other. Should, however, objection to such transfer be made, the name in question, or some other, will be regularly reported in the way prescribed in Article 2, Chapter I, of the By-Laws, and formally balloted upon in the way prescribed in Article 4, Chapter I. The contingency, however, is one not contemplated when the By-Laws were framed, nor provided for in them. It is due to the new significance given to the Honorary list, and the care taken in selection of those whose names are placed upon it.1 Reflection on the matter further led me since the last meeting into an examination of the By-Laws of the Society as now in force, and it became at once obvious that they stand in need of careful revision and re-enactment. Originally drafted in 18732 and revised in 1881,3 they were seven years later, in 1888, again revised, certain amendments recommended, and the present code adopted. This, the last revision, was twenty years ago. During the intervening period many, and very important, amendments and changes have been from time to time made, while usages and understandings have grown up, or been reached, which have the effect of law, but which have never been reduced to form. Under these circumstances a new revision has been proposed, and the Council now has it under consideration. A printed draft, showing the changes which have been made since 1888, and the amendments necessary to incorporate the usages and understandings since then adopted or reached, will be submitted at the next (March) meeting of the Society. And, by direction of the Council, notice is now given, so that the matter may finally be acted upon in accordance with Article 3, Chapter II, of the present By-Laws at the Annual Meeting in April. The PRESIDENT proceeded: I regret to announce a fresh vacancy in our Resident roll since the last meeting of the Society. Edward Henry Strobel died at Bangkok, Siam, on the 15th January. Elected a Resident Member on the 9th January, 1902, the connection of Dr. Strobel with the Society had been hardly 1 2 Proceedings, x. 326; xv. 51–54. 42 Proceedings, iv. 120-123, 222-235. more than nominal. Most properly chosen in recognition of distinguished services rendered and results accomplished in the field of international law, he was present at the two meetings, in February and March, 1902, immediately succeeding his election. He went abroad immediately after that as official adviser of the King of Siam, designated for that duty by eminent Americans, peculiarly qualified to make a proper selection. Dr. Strobel, therefore, never took part in the discussions of the Society, nor did he communicate anything to our "Proceedings." He, of course, never served on any committee. His name was upon our roll six years only; and, at the time of his death, he stood sixty-fifth in the order of seniority. I shall ask his friend and associate Archibald C. Coolidge to pay tribute to him. ARCHIBALD CARY COOLIDGE then gave an account of the recent history of Siam, and spoke of the important service rendered to the government and later to the King, by Dr. Strobel, especially as to the relations of Siam with France. He paid a warm tribute to him, as having done much, through his high legal ability, his thorough knowledge of international law, and his tactful methods, toward preserving the integrity of the kingdom. LINDSAY SWIFT was appointed to prepare a memoir of Dr. Strobel to be printed in the Proceedings. C. F. ADAMS submitted the following paper: At a recent meeting of an Historical Congress held at Perugia, Italy, in September, Mr. H. Nelson Gay, an American now resident in Rome, submitted an interesting paper, being a part of a work upon which he is engaged, entitled "Le relazioni fra l'Italia e gli Stati Uniti." This paper was based upon original material which Mr. Gay had unearthed in the archives of the American legation at Brussels, and related to an offer of a high command in the Army of the United States made to Garibaldi during the summer of 1861, shortly after the disgraceful rout known as the first Battle of Bull Run. Henry Shelton Sanford, of Connecticut, was then the United States Minister at Brussels, and the material in question was part of Mr. Sanford's official correspondence. Subsequently Mr. Gay put this material into the form of a paper entitled "Lincoln's Offer of a Command to Garibaldi light on a disputed point of history," which appeared in the last November (1907) issue of "The Century Magazine."1 He there gives the history of this offer which, now forgotten, at the time caused some discussion; but the details connected with it are now for the first time revealed. It will be remembered that Garibaldi, in 1861, was living in retirement. The present kingdom of Italy, under the rule of Victor Emmanuel, had been brought into existence as the result of the operations in which Garibaldi had taken so famous and prominent a part in the summer of 1860, but did not yet include the Papal temporality. The seat of government of the newly united Italy had been established at Turin; but Garibaldi was looking forward to the occupation of Rome as the capital of the kingdom. His fame was, of course, world-wide. Mr. Gay now makes public a correspondence which passed at the time, and in which Mr. Sanford took a prominent part. As is well known, nothing resulted from the most ill-considered move to which it relates; but none the less it has an historical interest, and moreover it conveys a lesson. The correspondence took place during the earlier months of my father's seven years of diplomatic service in England, he having reached London during the previous May. He knew nothing of it until it was over; but I find in his diary the following long entry, under date of Friday, September 20, 1861, which has a certain significance in connection with Mr. Gay's article in the November "Century." I reproduce it in full: Had visits also from Mr. Sanford and Mr. Motley, both of whom came to dine with me. The former seemed very anxious to explain to both of us his agency in the invitation extended to Garibaldi to go to America. This matter has given occasion to a good deal of unpleasant remark in Europe, as indicating that we did not feel competent to manage our business, with our own officers. I had been consulted about it by Mr. Lucas, who wished authority to contradict it, which I could not give him excepting in so far as the story affirmed that the supreme command had been offered to [Garibaldi]. I gave him on Tuesday my version of the matter, which was this. That probably some irresponsible individual had first sounded [Garibaldi] as to his 1 lxxv. (No. 1), 63–74. disposition to go. Then that the government on receiving information of this had authorized an offer of a command: That Garibaldi had demanded a general power, which could not be admitted, and the negotiation had gone off on this issue. My conjecture proved in the main correct, though there were material additions in the narrative of Mr. Sanford. It seems that one James W. Quiggle, officiating as consul at Antwerp, some time since whilst travelling in Italy made acquaintance enough with Garibaldi to induce him to volunteer a letter of enquiry as to his feeling on the American question. The reply was of such a kind as to induce Mr. Quiggle to send a copy to the Department of State. This had brought a letter of instructions to Mr. Sanford to go and make Garibaldi an offer of a position of Major General, being the highest army rank in the gift of the President. At the same time it eulogized Mr. Quiggle, and directed Mr. Sanford to offer him any place under the General that he might prefer. Sanford, professing to be well aware of the responsibility resting on him, and desirous of keeping the control of the matter in his hands, yet posts off first of all to Mr. Quiggle and reads him the instruction as well as the compliment to himself. Quiggle insists upon seeing and reading it, is cunning enough to take a copy, and then on the strength of it anticipated poor Sanford by writing at once to Garibaldi to appraise him that the government had forwarded him a formal invitation to take the supreme command in America, of which he would receive due notice presently. Finding this misconception fastened on the mind of Garibaldi by this folly of his own, his next task was to remedy the evil in the best way he could. Accordingly he goes to Turin, where he finds a friend of Garibaldi who has come from him to notify the King of Sardinia that he is ready to go to America if his services are not wanted in Italy. In other words, he threatens to withdraw the aid of his popularity to the King if he refuses to advance forthwith upon Rome. The King is too wary to be drawn into the trap; so, with great professions of good will, reluctantly grants his consent to the chief's departure. It follows that Garibaldi mortified at the failure of his scheme has no resource but to execute his threat. But here again Mr. Sanford is compelled to intervene to protect the American Government from the effects of Garibaldi's misconception. To that end he pays him a visit and discloses to him the fact that he can have a command, but not the supreme control. This of course changes his views again. He cannot think of going to America without having the power of a Dictator, and the contingent right to proclaim emancipation to the slaves. On this point the negotiation went off. A strange medley of blunders. Garibaldi however felt so awkwardly placed by his failure to carry the King off his feet, that he still clung to the idea of paying a visit to America as a private citizen. Mr. Sanford offered him every facility to go out as a guest, but he |