248 Proceedings of the Ohio Academy of Science 
CHARLES BROOKOVER. 
By HERBERT OSBORN AND FRANCIS L. LANDACRE. 
(This sketch was not presented at the meeting, but prepared later for 
publication in the Proceedings. ) 
In the death of Professor Charles Brookover, which occurred at 
Louisville, Kentucky, March 17, 1922, the Ohio Academy has lost 
one of its distinguished members, one who for many years was associated 
in the scientific and educational work of the state and contributed 
worthily to the academy. 
He was born in Adams County, Ohio, March 11, 1870, and obtained 
his collegiate education at Ohio University, at Athens, obtaining the 
degree of B. Ped. and M. S. from that institution. He carried graduate 
work at Columbia University and University of Chicago, receiving his 
Ph. D. degree from the latter institution in 1910. He taught in 
Colorado College, Buchtel College at Akron, Medical Department of 
University of Arkansas, and in the University of Louisville, Louisville, 
Kentucky. Especially while at Akron, where he taught from 1901 
to 1913, he was active in the scientific work of the state, attended our 
meetings with great regularity and was particularly active in the 
entertainment of the Academy at its Akron meeting in 1910. He 
spent a number of summers at the Lake Laboratory and was one of 
the most esteemed members of the staff, serving as Acting Director 
during the summer of 1914. He was a man of high ideals and a most 
cheerful, helpful disposition, and his death is mourned by a host of 
intimate friends and scientific associates. 
His research work was largely upon neurology of the lower verte- 
brates; and in this field he was a recognized authority. His papers, 
while not numerous, were always thorough and conscientiously worked 
out. Very little if any, of his work will need revision. He was cautious 
about propounding hypothesis and always preferred to accumulate a 
mass of carefully verified facts and then leave the ultimate interpretation 
to some one else. He was not timid in drawing conclusions, but realized 
fully that the great need, especially in comparative neurology, is a large 
body of well established facts from which, finally, safe conclusions 
may be drawn. He was quite willing to contribute less than his 
colleagues provided that his contributions could be considered safe 
and as far as possible, final. What he might have done if he had been 
in robust health is uncertain. With a serious handicap in health, 
however, his contributions, especially to comparative neurology, are. 
notable and a matter of pride to his friends and colleagues. 
