A UNIVERSITY PENSION SYSTEM 507 



system, but one qualified at every step by favoritism or partiality. One 

 who has occasion to visit many colleges of the country will be astonished 

 at times by two methods of procedure in this matter, diametrically 

 opposite, and yet entirely to be reconciled with the methods under which 

 our colleges are governed. He will be astonished in the first place at 

 the inhumanity which will turn out an old teacher after long service 

 with no means of support. He will be astonished in the second place at 

 many institutions by the presence in the faculty of a considerable pro- 

 portion of teachers who have long outlived their usefulness and who are 

 practically pensioned by their retention in service. It is not one of the 

 smallest of the disadvantages of this form of pensioning that the pres- 

 ence of the aged and the infirm often arouses in the minds of shallow 

 and impatient men a disregard for the really superior qualities which 

 many of those in advanced years possess. There are always those who 

 believe under such circumstances that all evils can be remedied by a 

 sweeping edict which often tears down more than it builds up. 



The most serious objections brought against either the contributory 

 or the non-contributory form of pension are two. Those who make the 

 objections fear that pensions from an outside source may undermine 

 the sturdy virtue of independence, and in the second place that the 

 granting of such pensions and the security which may come from their 

 anticipation will produce a decay of the fundamental virtue of thrift. 

 To these moral arguments may be added the economic contention that 

 pensions lower wages. 



While there are certain differences between systems of pensions 

 intended for working men and those intended for teachers, it neverthe- 

 less remains true that all these objections may be urged against a system 

 of pensions for teachers with as much reason as against a system of 

 pensions for working men. Human nature in teachers and in working 

 men is in no sense different, and if these be sound objections in one 

 case they are doubtless sound objections in the other. 



The first of these objections seems to me to rest in large measure 

 upon a false ground. A man can be independent and yet not insist 

 upon paying himself for everything that he receives. In the complex 

 organization of modern society no individual in any class of society pays 

 for everything which he receives. The wealthy boy at college is a pen- 

 sioner in very much the same way that the poor boy is. John Hampden 

 lost nothing of his feeling of independence by partaking of the bounty 

 of William of Waynefleet. Nor did Milton or Charles Darwin experi- 

 ence any impairment of their sturdy qualities of spirit from having been 

 educated through the generosity of the Lady Margaret. That is a 

 singular, and probably a narrow, man who has not partaken of the 

 benevolence of others. The whole effect and outcome of that partici- 

 pation depends upon the spirit in which the benevolence is tendered 



