REPORT OF THE PRESIDENT, 1912. II 



Such an account must be left to historians interested in the evolution of 

 institutions or to analysts, like De Morgan, in search of a mine of materials 

 for a new "Budget of Paradoxes." It is plainly the part of wisdom, how- 

 ever, not to wait for verdicts of the historian and the analyst, but to make 

 use of such inductions as may be safely drawn, not only from the experience 

 just referred to, but also from that gained in the work proper to the Institu- 

 tion. Most of the theories, ideas, and sentiments involved are subject to the 

 tests of statistical treatment which determine with sufficient accuracy the 

 more fruitful methods of procedure. Of the many inductions which may 

 be thus drawn out of the experience of the Institution a few may be here set 

 down as indicative of existing conditions and tendencies. 

 It is in evidence — 



1. That there are the amplest room and the amplest opportunity for re- 

 search establishments without danger of encroachment on establishments 

 founded for other purposes ; that it is not difficult for the Institution to find 

 appropriate ways in which to apply its income; that there are, in fact, in 

 plain sight ten times as many worthy, practicable subjects of research and 

 ten times as many worthy investigators as the income of the Institution can 

 advantageously subsidize. 



2. That there are many investigations of such magnitude and difficulty 

 that they can not be carried on economically and effectively except by men 

 untrammeled by other occupations. The common notion that research de- 

 mands only a portion of one's leisure from more absorbing duties tends to 

 turn the course of evolution backwards and to land us in the amateurism 

 and the dilettantism wherein science finds its beginnings. 



3. That it is inimical alike to the interests of society and to those of the 

 Institution to look upon it as a mere disbursing agency designed to meet 

 emergencies or to supply deficiencies of other institutions and of individuals. 

 The widely spread impressions that the income of the Institution is sufficient 

 to meet the aggregate of such emergencies and deficiencies, and that the 

 Institution can undertake to play the role of a special providence and thus 

 anticipate the collective needs of deserving individuals and organizations, 

 have no foundations in fact. 



4. That while there may be wisdom in a multitude of counsels, it becomes 

 increasingly difficult of access as the multitude enlarges and is generally 

 obscured, if not hidden, by a conflict of opinions. The current popular im- 

 pression that discoveries and advances may be favorably promoted by the 

 patient examination of a vast aggregate of miscellaneous suggestions is a 

 fallacy abundantly demonstrated by the probably unequaled data available to 

 the Institution. 



5. That it is neither practicable nor advantageous for the Institution to 

 undertake to perfect inventions, to secure letters patent for them, to defend 

 inventors in suits at law, or to exploit successful inventions. The objects of 

 the inventor are primarily egoistic and hence secretive; the objects of the 

 Institution are primarily altruistic and hence non-secretive ; their divergence 



