REPORT OF THE PRESIDENT, I906. 33 



Since the trend of development of the Institution still hinges to some 

 extent on the relative merits of large projects carried on under the direct 

 supervision of the Institution itself and of small projects 

 Large versus Small committed to individuals whose afl&liation with the Insti- 

 ^°^^^ ^' tution may be only temporary, a large amount of atten- 



tion has been given to this question during the year ; much more in fact 

 than to any other. It is a matter of daily correspondence, of daily inter- 

 views, and of daily importunities. With a desire to see all sides of this 

 question and to hear all arguments thereon, the President has solicited much 

 of this correspondence and many of these interviews. He has received a 

 wealth of highly esteemed advice and suggestion along with much more that 

 must be characterized either as impracticable of application or as fraught 

 with grave danger if applied. 



A considerable portion of this advice and suggestion would make instruct- 

 ive reading if printed, altho they are in large degree conflicting and need, 

 obviously enough, here and there, correction for personal equation ; but, 

 aside from greater concentration on matters of detail, they do not differ 

 essentially in the aggregate from the advice and suggestion given by mem- 

 bers of the advisory committees whose reports are printed in the earlier Year 

 Books of the Institution. Hence it does not seem worth while to add to the 

 bulk of printed discussion along this line, even in the cases of correspond- 

 ence whose authors would doubtless approve publication of their views. 

 The President desires here, however, to express his warm appreciation of 

 the counsel on this question given him confidentially by many colleagues in 

 the academic and scientific world. Whether this counsel has been pro or 

 con as regards his own views an effort has been made to weigh it fairly. 



In the meantime there have been some opportunities for reflection on the 

 various aspects of the question, while the Institution is accumulating experi- 

 ence which, tho not as yet conclusive in its bearings, furnishes important 

 indications of the lines along which development may be expected to be 

 effective or ineffective. It seems desirable, therefore, to state here some of 

 the provisional conclusions to which observation, experience, and reflection 

 have forced me, not without opposition, in some cases, to preconceived notions. 



Categorically these conclusions are the following : 



First, that the Institution may not advantageously enter the fields now 

 occupied by colleges and universities. It should be no part of the function 

 of the Institution to endow scholarships and fellowships for indigent stu- 

 dents, nor to supply helpers, assistants, apparatus, libraries, museum collec- 

 tions, etc. , for purely educational work, nor to supplement meager salaries 

 of college and university professors whose work is primarily educational. 

 This conclusion and the specifications enumerated seem so axiomatic that 

 their statement would be quite superfluous here if the Institution were not 

 daily importuned for aid in one or more of these and many similar ways. 



3— YB 



