May 24, 1912] 
necessary a strong executive responsible 
to the people and professors subordi- 
nated to the public service, when they 
would not approve of the irresponsible 
autocracy of the private corporations. 
Professors at Harvard and Yale may take 
satisfaction in the long traditions and wise 
precedents which obtain at these universi- 
ties, when they would not care to live 
under the system in use at Columbia and 
Chicago, 
It was originally my intention to base 
this paper on an analysis of the letters re- 
ceived, but the exigencies of an engage- 
ment made it necessary to prepare its first 
version before the proofs could be obtained, 
the letters written and the replies received. 
It is indeed somewhat difficult to summar- 
ize such a large number of points of view 
which represent both real differences of 
Opinion and differences due to the fact that 
various situations were under considera- 
tion. It seems best to print the letters, and 
to permit those interested to draw their 
own conclusions. The letters will be given 
under the institution from which they 
come when there are as many as ten re- 
plies, the institutions otherwise being 
grouped. In general, the letters are placed 
in the order of their preference for the 
existing system of university control which 
I designate as a limited autocracy. Omis- 
sions have been made from some of the 
longer letters and, formal compliments, 
apologies and the like have been erased. 
Thus a large percentage of all letters begin 
with the phrase ‘‘I have read with inter- 
est,’’ ete. Other slight editorial revision, 
such as eliminating the paragraphs, has 
been undertaken, but every effort has been 
made not to alter in the slightest degree 
the opinions expressed. There is given 
here a table showing the source of the re- 
plies and the only classification that I shall 
attempt to make. Its validity can be 
SCIENCE 
807 
judged by those who care to read the let- 
ters. 
Limited Represen- 
Autoc- | Greater | tative 
racy | Faculty | Democ- | Total 
Present | Control |racy; Plan 
System Proposed 
Harvard .............+. 9 6 11 26 
Yale...... 1 6 4 11 
Columbia 2 2 10 14 
Pennsylvania 900 0 3 9 12 
Johns Hopkins........ 0 2 14 16 
Chicago ..........0...2+ 1 0 17 18 
Cornell ............0.00+ 0 4 8 12 
Mass. Inst..........0.--. 3 4 3 10 
New England......... 6 6 12 24 
Middle States ......... 3 4 21 28 
Col. for Women...... 1 2 5 8 
Southern ............--- 1 3 9 13 
Michigan............... 0 3 a 10 
Wisconsin. ............ 5 4 4 13 
Minn. [1]. Mo. Cal. 5 5 18 28 
C. & W. State ........ 2} 7 14 23 
C. & W. Private ..... 7 7 16 30 
Anonymous......+....- 0 1 2 3 
Motaleitescessserecseenss 46 69 184 299 
Of the 299 replies 46 are taken as favor- 
ing the system usual in this country, which 
is designated as a limited autocracy, 69 as 
favoring a system in which the faculties 
have greater share in control, as at Yale or 
the Johns Hopkins Medical School, 184 
as favoring a plan of representative dem- 
ocracy more or less similar to the one pro- 
posed. Five sixths of those holding the 
most important scientific chairs at our uni- 
versities believe that there should be a 
change in administrative methods in the 
direction of limiting the powers of the 
president and other executive officers and 
making them responsible to those engaged 
in the work of teaching and research. This 
is an agreement greater than I had antici- 
pated. When eighty-five per cent. of 
those responsible for the conduct of a 
given system unite in holding that it 
should be altered, the case may be regarded 
as strong. Political and social changes 
are usually made on a much narrower ma- 
jority. It is true that five of the six 
presidents who replied—they are of course’ 
