230 HISTORY OF THE [1880-1920 to all the Fellows, asking their opinion. The result of the voting was : In favour of 8 o'clock . . 104 5 > ^^5 Neutral ..... 149 Preferring some other hour . 16 394 At a Special General Meeting, called chiefly for another purpose in the following May, the resolution that the ordinary meetings be held at five o'clock was put and lost. The question was next brought forward at the Annual Meeting in 1890, as a motion that business should commence at four o'clock. After some discussion it was decided to defer the question for further consideration by the Council. At their meeting in April, the Council resolved not to give an opinion as to the hour of meeting, but they put it on record, that if the ordinary meeting were held not earlier than half-past four, they would have time to finish their own business before it. A Special Meeting was held in the following December to consider a proposal by Mr. Chambers, that for a period of one year the meetings be held at half-past four. As a Bye-Law could obviously not be altered for a limited period, leave was given to withdraw the words " for the period of one year," but even though the hour of half-past four was amended to five o'clock, the altered resolution was rejected. All the same, Mr. Chambers brought it forward again in the following February, when it was again lost, but this time only by four votes (35 to 31). The motion next came before the Society at the Annual Meeting of 1894, when it was again negatived, although the Council acknow- ledged that the change would not interfere with their business. The question was then allowed to rest till 1900, when a Fellow sent in a notice in January ; and as it appeared doubtful whether it had been received a month before the Annual Meeting (as required by the Bye-Laws), it was made a motion of the Council, without expressing any opinion on it. The discussion was very full and animated, and an additional argument was drawn from the fact that the British Astronomical Association met in the afternoon and seemed to prosper. From the way in which the motion was brought forward, Mr. Knobel inferred that its object was rather to elucidate the opinion of the Fellows than with the idea of taking a vote on it. He therefore moved the previous question, which eventually was carried. Many Fellows who voted for this were probably influenced by their regard for the
