lescope of
the largest size from Mr. Clark.

It happened, however, that Secretary Welles had announced in his
annual reports as his policy that he would recommend no estimates for
the enlargement and improvement of public works in his department,
but would leave all matters of this kind to be acted on by Congress
as the latter might deem best. As the telescope was thrown out of
the regular estimates by this rule, this subject had failed to be
considered by Congress.

Now, however, the fact of the recommendation appearing in the annual
report, furnished a basis of action. Mr. Hilgard did not lose a
day in setting the ball in motion.

He called upon me immediately, and I told him of the recommendations
in the last two reports of the superintendent of the observatory.
Together we went to see Admiral Sands, who of course took the warmest
interest in the movement, and earnestly promoted it on the official
side. Mr. Hilgard telegraphed immediately to some leading men of
science, who authorized their signatures to a petition. In this paper
attention was called to the wants of the observatory, as set forth
by the superintendent, and to the eminent ability of the celebrated
firm of the Clarks to supply them. The petition was printed and put
into the hands of Senator Hamlin for presentation to the Senate only
three or four days after the dinner party. The appropriation measure
was formally considered by the Committee on Naval Affairs and that on
Appropriations, and was adopted in the Senate as an amendment to the
naval appropriation bill without opposition. The question then was
to get the amendment concurred in by the House of Representatives.
The session was near its close, and there was no time to do much work.

Several members of the House Committee on Appropriations were
consulted, and the general feeling seemed to be favorable to
the amendment. Great, therefore, was our surprise to find the
committee recommending that the amendment be not concurred in.
To prevent a possible misapprehension, I may remark that the present
system of non-concurring in all amendments to an appropriation bill,
in order to bring the whole subject into conference, had not then
been introduced, so that this action showed a real opposition to the
movement. One of the most curious features of the case is that the
leader in the opposition was said to be Mr. Washburn, the chairman
of the committee, who, not many years later, founded the Wa