With two very sore feet, a car full of goodies and considerable pride in our organization, your president returned from Hershey this year thinking that it had been one of the finest of the fall meets I have ever attended. The weather was great, attendance was high, and there seemed to be lots of good stuff on the fields. My sweet wife was also very pleased that I returned home without yet another car, for her a sure sign of success!

More to the point, both our S.A.H. Board Meeting and Annual Banquet were highly successful, and our tent on the White Field was the center of a constant buzz of activity. Thanks to the hard work of Paul Lashbrook, Stan Lyman and numerous others, our location seems to have become a sort of mini-convention, with old friends, new members and just folks curious about what we do crowding into our space to trade stories, ask questions, and just relax among our colleagues. Indeed, we are thinking that we might need to expand somewhat next year, given the numbers and excellent level of participation we had this fall.

Our Board meeting, with 10 percent attendance from all officers and directors, had its usual hefty agenda. The session included lively discussions concerning all of our awards, potential renewed efforts to expand our membership (including a couple of new chapters), the formation of a committee to better define our Society’s strategy and relationship with the world of academic historians, the development of a potential document to advise members concerning options regarding the disposition of their historical collections, and preparations for our next conference in 2006. Clearly, it was a busy but very productive meeting and I want to thank all of my colleagues on the Board for their interest and efforts on behalf of the Society.

As in most recent years, the Awards Banquet was held at the Hershey Country Club on Friday evening and was attended by more than one hundred members and guests, including several award winners. As you will see reported elsewhere in this Journal, it seemed that 2004 was the year of multiples, There were two Cugnot Awards, three Benz Awards, two Cugnots and one Award of Distinction for books in a language other than English, and two Brigham Awards for superb periodicals! We also had excellent winners for the Ingersoll, Bradley and Student Paper Awards, and long-time historian, author and Cadillac expert Maurice Hendry of New Zealand was selected as the Society’s 2004 Friend of Automotive History. All in all, then, it was a banner year for the S.A.H..

Yet, as president, I will admit to having had a bit of concern about such a plethora of distinctions, feeling that it might reflect a certain lack of rigor or even perhaps a bit of indecision on the part of the various committees charged with judging the books, articles, periodicals and other nominations for awards. In reality, nothing can be further from the truth. In each case, the chairs of the committees followed a rigorous policy of allowing their committee members to rate nominees separately, using carefully thought-out numerical scoring procedures and guidelines that guaranteed that there was never any chance of undue influence or pressure being exerted by any individual for one candidate or another. Having seen the quality of this effort I have nothing but the highest praise for all of the reviewers and their respective leaders. Without a doubt, the number of awards reflects the hard work and care with which they performed their tasks.

You might ask why I have gone into such detail about this issue. My answer is twofold. First is the impression that the quality of work being done in the field of automotive history today is clearly improving. This is not to say that past winners have been in any way undeserving, but rather that the awareness of the significance of our discipline is being recognized more and more as time passes. Such awareness is bound to produce broader and better history and perhaps has begun to show itself more fully.

The second answer I would have is that as we grow and mature as a Society, the importance of the integrity of our various awards and the process of their selection are a crucial element in the way we present ourselves to the broader community of historians. Our search for excellence must continue to be as rigorous as it was this past year, Having seen the quality of work that was performed over the spring and summer I have no doubt this important tradition will continue. It is vital for our future.

One last point: we need one essential bit of assistance from our broader membership in this process. I ask that each and every one of you to take the time to identify some book, article, periodical, film, organization or individual that is deserving of a nomination for one of our awards. Then please sit down and write, e-mail or pick up the phone and make sure your choice is nominated. With an expanding field, there is a lot of original work out there. You may be well aware of it, but our awards committees need to know about it too. So keep those nominations coming!

With that exhortation, I will let you get on with your own work, be it writing, researching, or just reading up on all the things that came through the door over a busy summer. Oh, yes… and best wishes to all for a fine holiday season!

- Joe Freeman, SAH President