300
However, the Province Administration did not appear to be able to “put [the patrimony] to use right away,” as the Committee’s members had hoped, and things only
got more complicated as the acceptance of the donation was deliberated. In the
minutes of the public sitting of the Provincial Board of July 8, 1926, annexed to the
notary deed, we read, “negotiations (started) with the Presidency of the School’s
Administrative Commission in order to be sure that the building would be built on
the property of the province assigned to School, and that the observatory would be
operated under the School’s care and expense.” In turn, the School Committee had
begun “negotiations with the Ministry of the National Economy in order to obtain
financial assistance from the same Ministry. (…) If the Ministry, as it seems, wants
to support the initiative of the School’s Administrative Commission, one could have
an Institution of great scientific usefulness in Reggio (…) without any cost on the
Province’s budget.”
From one resolution to another, from one institution to another, matters went on
for many decades – years that included another war, the postwar reconstruction, and
the Italian economic boom.
The last mention we can find (Finzi 1971: 147) about this unachieved and phantasmal “Secchi Monument” is that, in 1970, 43 years after its donation to the
Province and 90 years after the publication of the Manifesto with the original proposal, the sum had grown to 900,000 lire – about 8000 euro at today’s value, from a
value of half a million euro that it had reached just before the Great War. This was:
just barely enough to build a meteorological hut. But not even a hut was built, not even in a
flowerbed of the public gardens.
Our search for any post-1970 information about the unused funds (if any) of the
Secchi Monument in the Historical Archives of the Polo Archivistico del Comune di
Reggio Emilia and in the Archives of the Provincia di Reggio Emilia have been
without result.
17.13 Why Did the Committee Fail?
Undoubtedly, the economic and social difficulties connected with the Great War, in
addition to the meddling of a scientific community that sometimes saw that “nest
egg” more as a chance to develop their personal facilities than to exalt the memory
of the great astrophysicist, did not help the work of a Committee that in any event
showed itself to be slow, confused, undecided, and certainly overwhelmed by the
many proposals with so many disparate interests that came from every direction.
The other insuperable obstacle was the statutory constraint that the Monument
had to be set up in Reggio Emilia. In fact, a large telescope placed almost at the sea
level and in the middle of the misty Po Valley would have been almost useless.
Moreover, the development of instrumental technology in the following years turned
quickly to the reflecting telescope – the last large refractor built was the 102-cm of
Yerkes Observatory in 1897 – and to sites at high altitudes, far away from cities. The
F. Bònoli and A. Mandrino
However, the Province Administration did not appear to be able to “put [the patrimony] to use right away,” as the Committee’s members had hoped, and things only
got more complicated as the acceptance of the donation was deliberated. In the
minutes of the public sitting of the Provincial Board of July 8, 1926, annexed to the
notary deed, we read, “negotiations (started) with the Presidency of the School’s
Administrative Commission in order to be sure that the building would be built on
the property of the province assigned to School, and that the observatory would be
operated under the School’s care and expense.” In turn, the School Committee had
begun “negotiations with the Ministry of the National Economy in order to obtain
financial assistance from the same Ministry. (…) If the Ministry, as it seems, wants
to support the initiative of the School’s Administrative Commission, one could have
an Institution of great scientific usefulness in Reggio (…) without any cost on the
Province’s budget.”
From one resolution to another, from one institution to another, matters went on
for many decades – years that included another war, the postwar reconstruction, and
the Italian economic boom.
The last mention we can find (Finzi 1971: 147) about this unachieved and phantasmal “Secchi Monument” is that, in 1970, 43 years after its donation to the
Province and 90 years after the publication of the Manifesto with the original proposal, the sum had grown to 900,000 lire – about 8000 euro at today’s value, from a
value of half a million euro that it had reached just before the Great War. This was:
just barely enough to build a meteorological hut. But not even a hut was built, not even in a
flowerbed of the public gardens.
Our search for any post-1970 information about the unused funds (if any) of the
Secchi Monument in the Historical Archives of the Polo Archivistico del Comune di
Reggio Emilia and in the Archives of the Provincia di Reggio Emilia have been
without result.
17.13 Why Did the Committee Fail?
Undoubtedly, the economic and social difficulties connected with the Great War, in
addition to the meddling of a scientific community that sometimes saw that “nest
egg” more as a chance to develop their personal facilities than to exalt the memory
of the great astrophysicist, did not help the work of a Committee that in any event
showed itself to be slow, confused, undecided, and certainly overwhelmed by the
many proposals with so many disparate interests that came from every direction.
The other insuperable obstacle was the statutory constraint that the Monument
had to be set up in Reggio Emilia. In fact, a large telescope placed almost at the sea
level and in the middle of the misty Po Valley would have been almost useless.
Moreover, the development of instrumental technology in the following years turned
quickly to the reflecting telescope – the last large refractor built was the 102-cm of
Yerkes Observatory in 1897 – and to sites at high altitudes, far away from cities. The
F. Bònoli and A. Mandrino