academy of sc. ES c BS .] BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH. 149 



Respecting what is to be regarded as a permissible function of a State university and 

 what is to be regarded as nonpermissible or scarcely permissible in the uncertain borderland 

 between what is accepted doctrine and what are debatable issues in political, social, and religious 

 fields — particularly in matters where organized bodies of citizens differ — President Van Hise 

 was rather strongly predisposed to put a distinctly broad interpretation on the functions of 

 the university. He thought it not only the privilege but the duty of the university to give the 

 State leadership, even in lines regarded by some others as at least debatable. While this view 

 did not go so far as to include the precise matters that divided the organized political parties, 

 it yet did embrace matters closely akin to these, matters felt by some others to fall within the 

 outer borders of party policy. The more conservative policy of leaving a clear margin of safety 

 between the conceded fields of scientific inquiry in such matters, on the one hand — in which all 

 right-minded citizens should concur — and the fields of party conflict, on the other, seemed to him 

 to fall short of the full duty of the university to the State. As a natural result of his vigorous 

 advocacy of some policies held by others as debatable, friction of the milder sort arose at times 

 and made the path of his administration less smooth than it might have been under the more 

 conservative policy, but this never went so far as to loosen the great hold of the institution or of 

 its president on the affections and pride of the people of the State. His administration of the 

 university was a declared success; both he and the university under his care exercised a pro- 

 found influence on the intellectual and material progress of the State. 



In his scientific inquiries great pains marked every part of the research and all stages of 

 preparation of the results. Combined with invincible industry there was a steadiness of purpose 

 that drove the work constantly forward to completion. Virility, sturdiness, and strength of 

 grasp were leading traits. He seems to have suffered less loss of time and energy from hesitancy 

 or vacillation than is common to workers of less steady purpose. His intellectual tread was 

 firm; but yet there was openness of mind, readiness for reconsideration, and suceptibility to 

 change of view. He abandoned old views in favor of new with promptness and periodically 

 reconsidered his conclusions with a view to revision. He persistently sought deeper and larger 

 intellectual perspective. A notable trait was his strong desire for the significance of phenomena 

 and the philosophy that lay in their depths. His power of generalization was pronounced 

 and came declaredly into play in his larger conclusions relative to metamorphism, pre deposi- 

 tion, and the genesis of the great terranes he studied. 



His home life was singularly happy, though shadowed in his last years by the death of 

 a beloved daughter. He leaves a devoted wife and two affectionate daughters. His personal 

 qualities were of the highest order. He was a congenial companion in the office, the laboratory, 

 and the field. His point of view was large and liberal, always incisive, often humorous. His 

 convictions were strong, and the courage of his convictions never seemed to fail him. He 

 was outspoken and manly in bearing, frank, and strong in his friendships. He respected the 

 sincere and called forth sincere respect in return. 



He received a due measure of the honors his work merited. Williams, Dartmouth, Chicago, 

 Yale, and Harvard conferred upon him their highest honorary degree. A long list of scientific 

 societies in this country and abroad honored themselves and him with membership. He was 

 chosen to the presidency of practically all the scientific societies to which he could be regarded 

 as naturally eligible. 



