July 5, 1912] 



SCIENCE 



27 



than that of a professorship. The point made 

 in section (4), that the same salary should be 

 paid for the same office, the same amount of 

 work and the same teniire of office, is, I think, 

 fundamentally important. This is, I believe, 

 the case at Harvard, and largely the case at 

 Tale. The opposite policy of obtaining, and 

 especially of retaining, a professor for the 

 smallest sum to which he, by any method, can 

 be induced to submit, is short-sighted, and 

 not conducive to the highest results. This 

 method fosters discontent, and often indiffer- 

 ence and inefficiency. It deals with the pro- 

 fessor by the same method that a corporation 

 deals with its hirelings, and thus detracts 

 from the dignity and desirableness of the posi- 

 tion. I would add that publicity in all such 

 matters is absolutely essential to the good-will 

 and harmonious working of an institution of 

 learning. It might be urged as an argument 

 in favor of the former, and against the latter 

 system, that one professor is inherently worth 

 more than another; and by the methods at 

 present in vogue in making promotions this 

 is true. But let no one be promoted to the 

 rank of a full professorship in any one of our 

 leading institutions of learning who does not 

 measure up at least to a certain high mini- 

 mum standard, and then let the salary re- 

 ceived by a professor be determined by the 

 years of service in his rank. If I may add a 

 word of a general character in reference to 

 university administration in this country, it 

 would be: model our system as closely as pos- 

 sible, with the conditions existing in this coun- 

 try, after the German universities. Their 

 present system of administration is the out- 

 growth of years, and in many cases of cen- 

 turies, of experience. And what is the result? 

 The finest system of higher education, beyond 

 comparison, that the world has ever seen. 

 Indeed, most of the productive men of science 

 in this country, even to-day, have learned 

 their lesson in the German universities, and 

 transplanted research from Teutonic soil to 

 this country. Such results as have been ob- 

 tained in the German universities could 

 scarcely have been reached under a system of 

 administration that was seriously defective. 



It might be objected that the conditions in 

 this country are fundamentally different with 

 respect to higher education than those in Ger- 

 many, and such an objection unfortunately 

 contains a large element of truth. Neverthe- 

 less, we should profit by those greatest insti- 

 tiitions of learning; adopting their system of 

 administration as nearly as the existing condi- 

 tions here will permit ; and not learning the les- 

 son of university administration all over again 

 from the very beginning by experience. This 

 is, I think, the real solution to the greatest 

 problem in higher education in America to- 



Your proposals concerning the organization 

 of universities are absolutely in line with my 

 own hopes. Unless the working staff of the 

 university gets a chance to help in the shaping 

 of broader ideals of university life their in- 

 terest will always be low. The superstition of 

 one-man power is one of the worst impedi- 

 ments to a wider training of a spirit of col- 

 laboration, the lack of which makes public life 

 as well as university life an opportunistic 

 medley. It is deplorable that to-day the man 

 who can enlist the cooperation of some finan- 

 cial magnates is a most forcible element in 

 setting the pace in university policies. With 

 regard to detail, I suppose the closer we keep 

 to the English and Scotch pattern the more 

 likely are we to reach the result, on account 

 of the anti-German feeling existing in many 

 quarters. This would mean the adoption of 

 having a chancellor of the university, whereas, 

 personally, I should prefer to have a rotation 

 of the rectorship among the faculties, similar 

 to what exists in the Swiss universities. 



I am in hearty sympathy with the under- 

 lying principles of your proposals. Taking 

 them up separately: (1) The idea of a large 

 corporation and of elective trustees is un- 

 doubtedly right. I think a chancellor essen- 

 tial. (2) The duties of the president are not 

 given in your statement. It seems to me that 

 the chairman of the senate might assume the 

 responsibilities. (3) The idea of subdivision 

 of the faculty into schools is right. I assume 



Jf 



