The Drift Of Things - New Name For The Institute?

SHOULD the name of our Institute be changed? Perhaps one should say, should it again be changed, for until 1919 the name was the American Institute of Mining Engineers. When the American Institute of Metals joined our ranks we became the American Institute of Mining and Metallurgical Engineers. To make it a full mouthful, and strictly legal, one should add the word "Incorporated." At the June meeting of the Board of Directors it was suggested that this name was not a particularly happy one, especially so far as members of the Petroleum Branch, comprising a quarter of our membership, were concerned-not particularly appropriate as the name for the professional society for petroleum engineers. Apart from the petroleum group, the present name is felt by some not to be sufficiently comprehensive. Most geologists and many metallurgists, ceramists, and fuel technologists, for instance, are not engineers. They could never qualify as registered professional engineers under the licensing laws and yet they are valued and fully qualified Members of the AIME. The Directors, at the June meeting, thought the idea of a change in name should be presented to the membership for discussion, and suggested this column as the avenue of approach. Nine years ago Dean Steidle, of Penn State, recommended among other things that the name of the Institute be changed to "American Institute of Mineral Technologists and Engineers." In an editorial in Mining and Metallurgy in January 1944 objection was offered to this name but "American Institute of Mineral Engineers" was suggested. A special committee appointed by the Board to review Dean Steidle's suggestions (W. B. Heroy was Chairman) suggested that if the AIME were starting from scratch, the American Institute of Mineral Engineers might be a preferred name. It was not thought that the change suggested by Dean Steidle was one of major importance, and the comment was made that "the present name has gained prestige through many years and is cherished by our membership. An important element of 'good will' is attached to it and some of this would be unquestionably sacrificed by any change." In M&M for February 1945, Oliver C. Ralston went into the derivation of the terms mineralogy and metallurgy, and pointed out that both Mining and Metallurgical mean "digging," etymologically. He went on to show, with tongue in cheek, that if we want a short and all-inclusive name it should be American Institute of Geo-urgists, or, for euphony, Geolurgists. Oliver's brilliant development seems to have been received with speechless wonder! Should a decision ever be made to change the name, we think most members will agree that the American Institute of Mineral Engineers is to be preferred over anything yet suggested. "Mineral" has become, through usage, a much broader term than is indicated in the dictionary. Webster states that a mineral, in the true sense, must be inorganic, but Murray's Oxford English Dictionary seems more liberal, defining "mineral" as "any substance which is obtained by mining; a product of the bowels of the earth;" and "mineral oil" as any oil of mineral origin, as petroleum or shale oil. Certainly "the mineral industry" is ordinarily taken to include those activities based upon processing all the metallic and nonmetallic ores and deposits found in the ground, including the fuels. One advantage of this title is that the familiar abbreviation, "AIME" need not be changed. The advisability of maintaining a well-known abbreviation is evident, and was recognized, for instance, when the Committee for Industrial Organization became the Congress of Industrial Organizations some years ago. But if the petroleum engineers are the ones to be chiefly considered in revising the name of the Institute, it is by no means certain that they would feel that they are much more adequately recognized in a group of Mineral Engineers than in a society of Mining and Metallurgical Engineers. 'And then there remain, of course, the considerable number of professional members of the Institute who are not engineers at all. Comment from readers is invited.