July 5, 1912] 



SCIENCE 



23 



to be counted among the more doubtful prod- 

 ucts of the democratic movement: the preva- 

 lence of mediocre or popular standards — i. e., 

 those which the common man can reasonably 

 hope to attain — an uncritical faith in majori- 

 ties, a pessimistic estimate of the possibilities 

 of individual achievement, over-emphasis of the 

 importance of cooperative activity ("team- 

 play")- A preference for mediocrity and a 

 disposition to neglect, disparage, or hinder 

 men of pronounced genius arise from all this. 

 The organization of the university should 

 therefore encourage a liberal and enlightened 

 individualism; the tendency to make men 

 conform to fixed standards, whether set by 

 academic authority or by what happen to be 

 the fashionable prejudices of the time, should 

 be frowned down, or, still better, laughed 

 dovsTi. Under these conditions men of dis- 

 tinguished ability will be far more likely than 

 at present to make their way into universi- 

 ties and to produce their best work. The ex- 

 isting organization of the universities over- 

 emphasizes the managerial side for the rea- 

 sons I have already briefly indicated. Hence 

 I should favor a change in the direction of a 

 general simplification and decentralization. 

 "With reference to the reforms you propose, my 

 opinions are very much as follows. I refer to 

 the numbered paragraphs of your article. 

 (1) The professors should undoubtedly form 

 part of the corporation; alumni and other 

 members of the community only in so far as 

 they show real knowledge of university con- 

 ditions. Such a body could be depended upon 

 to select suitable trustees. (2) The president 

 should be elected by the professors from among 

 their number for a fixed term (e. g.) four 

 years. There should be no obstacle or limit to 

 reelection ; a good man would thus hold his 

 place. (3) and (4) I favor all possible auton- 

 omy to schools, divisions, departments and in- 

 dividuals. Salaries of professors should be 

 adequate and uniform. I am inclined to urge 

 the adoption of a system like the Italian : i. e., 

 election of the professor by men of reputation 

 in his own department of learning, in his own 

 and other universities. (5) I approve of all 

 these suggestions. 



LETTERS FROM THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY 



With regard to the first proposition, the 

 suggestion of forming a corporation consisting 

 of the professors, officers and alumni, does not 

 meet my approval. The only feature that 

 makes membership in such a corporation desir- 

 able is the privilege of voting for trustees. In 

 the first place I do not feel that this privilege 

 alone would suffice to secure a paying mem- 

 bership, such as is contemplated in the propo- 

 sition. In the second place, I should not like 

 to see trustees chosen by this method. It 

 would seem to me to carry with it all the diffi- 

 culties inherent in political elections — namely, 

 parties, electioneering machinery — a contin- 

 ual agitation to arouse the interest of the bet- 

 ter element to meet the designs of those who 

 were acting from self-interest or ignorance. 

 The most important work of trustees, in my 

 opinion, is to safeguard the financial interests 

 of the university, and for this purpose they 

 should form a small body, the individuals of 

 which should be selected by the board itself, 

 or in the case of state universities by some re- 

 sponsible authority, e. g., the governor of the 

 state. It should be a permanent board made 

 up of citizens of standing, men of integrity 

 and ability, whose interest in public affairs 

 will induce them to accept such a trust in 

 spite of the fact that it brings work and re- 

 sponsibility without any personal profit. I 

 do not feel that a board of this character can 

 be obtained by a general election among 

 alumni. It would be difficult or impossible 

 for the alumni to acquire the information 

 requisite for intelligent voting. In regard to 

 the second proposition, I am heartily in favor 

 of the suggestion that the president shall be 

 appointed by the trustees upon nomination by 

 the faculty — he should be the choice of the 

 faculty — I believe that such a method of selec- 

 tion would strengthen greatly the bonds be- 

 tween president and faculty, especially if 

 there was added the further provision that all 

 appointments and appropriations be made 

 upon recommendation of the faculty or of 

 some board representing the faculty and 

 chosen from its membership by election. I 

 do not, however, agree to the latter part of 



