REPORT OF THE PRESIDENT, 1916. 15 



departments of research is not only necessary by reason of the 

 extent and the complexity of the affairs of the Institution, but it 

 should be regarded as a fundamental principle of sound adminis- 

 tration. No one can follow the details of all these varied affairs. 

 A division of labors is indispensable, and to the greatest extent 

 practicable the director of a department of research should be 

 encouraged to be the autocrat of his departmental destiny. 

 But in so far as departments are granted Uberty of action it is an 

 equally fundamental principle of administration that they should 

 assume corresponding responsibilities. Autonomous freedom 

 and reciprocal accountability are then, in brief, the essentials of 

 the theory under which the departments of research have evolved. 



In consonance with the theory just indicated and in conformity 



with the precedent set a year ago, no attempt is made here to 



furnish abstracts of the current departmental 



D?partoents. I'Gports. They give sufficiently condensed sum- 

 maries of departmental activities and depart- 

 mental progress. They are, as a rule, highly technical papers 

 and difficult of adequate appreciation even by those somewhat 

 familiar with the subjects considered. But this is not only just 

 as it should be, but it is inevitable if the investigations under 

 way are worth making. Our confidence in them must be 

 founded in large degree on the general principles revealed in the 

 advancement of science. Great and admirable achievements 

 were attained by the ancients prior to the epoch of recorded 

 history; still greater achievements were attained by the Greeks, 

 the Arabs, and the moderns down to the epoch of Galileo and 

 Newton; while competent judges have estimated that greater 

 progress was secured in the nineteenth century than during all 

 previous history. It is quite within conservative reason, there- 

 fore, to assume that if we continue to follow those principles, 

 now grounded in more than twenty centuries of repeatedly 

 verified experience, in the light of accumulated and recorded 

 knowledge, we may confidently expect to achieve corresponding 

 further advances. 



The question is sometimes raised as to how the efficiencies of 

 investigators and of departments of research are, or possibly 

 may be, estimated. Occasionally, also, there seems to be enter- 

 tained along with this question the hypothesis that research is a 



