212 president's address — section h. 



Why should we concentrate our training on a few subjects while 

 more vital ones are left out altogether ? 



I recently asked my assistant what class of men he would pick 

 out to help him if called upon to proceed urgently with a difficult 

 construction job. He replied without hesitation, " The men 

 wholly trained on the works," and he was right. But this ought 

 net to be so. Our university-trained men, with their equipment 

 of scientific knowledge, ought to be the best men for a hard job. 

 To make them so we should train them not only to pass examina- 

 tions but to do things. They should be made to realize that 

 the knowledge they acquire is not the end, but is to be used as a 

 means to achieve results. 



They should be prepared to face the world and to overcome 

 difficulties; not only to design bridges that will carry their load 

 safely, but to estimate their cost and build them for that cost, 

 and so protect those they work for from financial disaster. 



All this i*equires a broader training than is new given, and 2>ar- 

 ticularly a training in scientific method as applied to solving all 

 the problems that arise in the engineer's work, including the 

 business and financial problems. The study of finance and com- 

 merce to an extent that will give the student Kiiowl&dge of the 

 principles and practice of ordinary business and acquaintance with 

 tlieir scientific aspects should not be left out. 



The work of the universities, as it comes under my notice, has 

 improved much of late years, and I look hopefully for further 

 improvement so that they may develop the personality of the men 

 they turn out, and fit them to lead in the world's work as men 

 of action and foresight, with knowledge of affairs, and not men 

 . who can only make calculations and look for billets. Billets are 

 and will be waiting for well-trained men. 



But I must pass on. With all due respect to the fine body of 

 professors and lecturers at our universities, I would like to ask, 

 " Do we secure the best men for those positions " 1 What should 

 be the first test for them 1 Is it enough that a man should have 

 gained high place in examinations ? Is it enough that he is we.l 

 up in his subject ? Should we not place first as a qualification 

 that he is " apt to teach "? We want men with natural gift for 

 teaching improved by training, and having a good knowledge of 

 their subject, but I fear too often the students suffer through hav- 

 ing to sit under men who, while they know their subjects well, do 

 not succeed in making others know and understand them in a 

 thorough manner, and the students too often through want of 

 intelligent understanding scrape through their examinations and 

 go away and soon forget. 



