Febbuabt 26, 1909] 



SCIENCE 



337 



to my coUea^es of the Chicago Section of 

 the American Mathematical Society, as- 

 semhled in an informal way at a dinner on 

 January 1, in connection with the regular 

 meeting of that body. I enclose a copy of 

 the remarks which I made upon that occasion. 

 Let me supplement these remarks with the 

 statement that a committee of the Chicago 

 Section has been appointed to investigate the 

 matter more closely and to report at the next 

 meeting. The committee consists of Messrs. 

 T. F. Holgate (Northwestern), E. B. Van 

 Vleck (Wisconsin), L. E. Dickson (Chicago), 

 A. G. Hall (Michigan) and E. J. Wilczynski 

 (Illinois) . 



Mr. Toastmaster and Gentlemen: It is a diffi- 

 cult task wHch I have to fulfill to-night, to hold 

 your attention after a hard day's work of mathe- 

 matical deliberation, at a time when the average 

 man seeks repose in friendly conversation. But I 

 shall not attempt to excuse myself, and hope that 

 you will pardon this rather unusual proceeding 

 on account of the interest and the importance of 

 the subject. 



We have come together as mathematicians, but 

 most of us are at the same time men in academic 

 life and as such are naturally eager to examine 

 our existing institutions, to inquire whether they 

 are the best conceivable under the circumstances, 

 and if not, to attempt to improve them. 



I doubt whether it is necessary for me to spend 

 much time upon an attempt to convince you that 

 all is not as it should be in our American methods 

 of university appointments. We all know of cases 

 where these methods have failed to accomplish the 

 best results, namely, to secure the best man avail- 

 able at a given time for a position then open. 



Many of our universities and colleges make 

 honest efforts to solve this problem for themselves, 

 and would probably welcome any movement which 

 would assist them in its solution. Others are 

 indiflferent, while still others almost openly prac- 

 tise favoritism of the rankest kind. Many of our 

 smaller institutions rely to a considerable extent 

 upon recommendations made by larger and more 

 influential universities, and the latter have a 

 tendency, quite pardonable under our system, of 

 recommending only their own graduates. Again 

 many of these same universities in filling vacan- 

 cies in their own staff, never would consider a 

 candidate unless he had been one of their own 

 students. The question of personal acquaintance 

 counts too much; whether a man is a good fellow. 



or a man of conservative political and religioua 

 beliefs, whether his personal appearance is pre- 

 possessing, or whether his social attainments 

 render him desirable, all of these questions are 

 quite 'frequently weighed more carefully in the 

 balance than these others: is the man a scholar, 

 and can he teach? If he is a scholar, unless he 

 has some good friends to speak for him, the pre- 

 sumptions are all against him. It is assumed 

 almost as a matter of course that he can not be 

 also a good teacher, and it seems practically cer- 

 tain that he can have no executive ability. Unless 

 the photographer has been especially kind to him, 

 his looks will probably not be satisfactory. 



To return, for a moment, to the question of 

 teaching ability; this is certainly one of the im- 

 portant points to be considered in the making of 

 many and perhaps most appointments. But what 

 methods have we for obtaining any positive or 

 reliable information on that point? I think you 

 will all admit that in most cases the evidence on 

 that score might as well be dismissed; it usually 

 consists of the statement of a few persons who 

 may or may not be qualified to judge, and whO' 

 may or may not know anything about the quali- 

 fications of the candidate as a teacher. 



I wish to pass in review, rapidly, the methods 

 employed in other countries in making university 

 appointments, so far as I have been able to dis- 

 cover them. 



The German system is fairly familiar. The 

 faculty concerned makes recommendations to the 

 minister of public instruction. There is no sys- 

 tematic and public canvass for the purpose of 

 ascertaining the best man; the responsibility of 

 making the recommendation is not fixed upon any 

 particular man or group of men, but upon the 

 faculty as a whole. Since the deliberations of the 

 faculty are not public, any criticism of an appoint- 

 ment once made can not with any degree of cer- 

 tainty be directed toward any particular member 

 of that body. While the system is, I believe, far 

 better than our own and has in most cases given 

 good results, it has often worked great injustice, 

 making possible discriminations for personal or 

 other reasons which under a better system might 

 have been avoided. 



I wish I could speak to you about an English 

 system. But my attempts to find out about it 

 have only led me to conclude that no such thing 

 exists. Each of the universities in Great Britain 

 apparently has its own methods of procedure in 

 selecting its officers of instruction; each of the 

 colleges which forms a part of the university again 



