900 
ing new members, the president or some 
equivalent power should be able to prevent the 
university becoming too one-sided. It should 
lie in the hands of the president, or equivalent 
power, to introduce such new men into the 
faculty as may permit of the university work 
expanding harmoniously and uniformly. Of 
course, the appointing power in the hands of 
a president tends to give large influence to an 
individual. To counterbalance that tendency, 
along the lines of your plan, it seems to me 
that it should lie out of the power of the 
president to dismiss faculty members except 
for flagrant cause. Faculty resignations 
should only be exacted by faculty action. To 
sum up, I should like to see your scheme 
amended by giving appointing power, under 
certain restrictions, to college presidents, but 
giving dismissing power exclusively to fac- 
ulties. 
The plan you propose has many advantages. 
In the case of a department devoted to re- 
search it is very important that the officers 
eoncerned, who are familiar with the subject, 
should have almost complete control of the 
administration, especially as regards the ap- 
pointment of the staff and the plans of work. 
It is a misfortune when such a department is 
controlled by a body of men who have no 
technical knowledge of the work undertaken, 
or, by personal inspection, familiarity with 
the investigations actually in progress. It is 
particularly unfortunate when such a body is 
more interested in another department of the 
university and is likely to take action for the 
benefit of the latter at the expense of the 
former. The case is like that of the stock- 
holders of a small railway controlled by a 
larger railway system. Their interests are 
likely to be sacrificed for the benefit of some 
portion of the system in which the directors 
have greater interests. As regards the details 
of your plan, I think that you go too far in 
reducing the powers of the president. Every 
university should have one man of very high 
grade who would devote his entire time to the 
work. He must be a man of affairs and 
eapable of keeping the work of the university 
SCIENCE 
[N.S. Vou. XXXV. No. 910 
before the influential portion of the public. 
I do not believe in the English system of a 
non-resident chancellor who is simply a figure- 
head. If the various departments were repre- 
sented on the governing board, and had the 
right of nomination as proposed in your (4), 
the powers of the president would be sufii- 
ciently reduced. With these modifications 
your plan seems to me a good one. 
(1) I do not see why members of the cor- 
poration should pay annual dues. It seems to 
me likely that the revenue would be smaller 
under this system than under the present one 
in which many men elected to university 
offices voluntarily give much time and money 
to worthy objects which they foster. I also 
think it advisable to keep in all forms of goy- 
ernment some degree of subordination and 
that the best interests of all the professors of 
an institution are best guarded by having the 
allotment of funds in the hands of men who 
are unhampered by personal interest in ob- 
taining an allotment as must be the case where 
a professor serves as a member of the corpora- 
tion or body making allotments. The tend- 
eney would, I fear, be to work to the advan- 
tage of certain professors and departments 
and against a fair deal for other professors 
and departments. (2) I think the election of 
a president by the faculty might be an im- 
provement on the present system. The matter 
of the salary of the president should be ad- 
justed to circumstances. It is to be presumed 
that the president has unusual expenses by 
reason of his office, which unless allowed for, 
might result in only wealthy men being able 
to take the position. It seems to me the 
president should have powers greater than the 
professor, but perhaps only those which per- 
tain to the chairman of a meeting acting in 
accordance with parliamentary rules. I would 
grant him veto power in regard to financial 
measures. (38) Agreed to, except that a de- 
partment or division may be able to conduct 
its affairs wisely when the number of members 
is less than the minimum of ten prescribed by 
the “ psychological constant.” (4) Agreed to. 
(5) Agreed to. My chief objection to a 
change from the present system of placing the 
