148 



SCIENCE 



[N. S. Vol. XLI. No. 1048 



ought to be taken only by the organization 

 itself. So it thought its main effort should 

 be to collect representative opinions and to 

 secure the adhesion of a body of men large 

 enough to represent different types of in- 

 stitutions, different lines of work and differ- 

 ent sections of the country. Each mem- 

 ber of the committee was asked to pre- 

 pare two lists of names ; one of men of full 

 professorial rank in his own institution, 

 and the other of men (of like grade) in his 

 own subject, irrespective of institutional 

 connection. Then these two lists were com- 

 bined so as to include names found on 

 either. To simplify the work, invitations 

 were not sent to men in institutions repre- 

 sented by less than five names. 



You will readily see that there was no 

 available way for standardizing the basis 

 of selection employed by the more than 

 thirty men on the committee. Hence it is 

 not only probable that there are omissions 

 of teachers who should have been asked, 

 but that there is inequity of distribution 

 among different institutions and branches 

 of learning. But I am sure that there is 

 no inequality which can not readily be 

 straightened out in the workings of the 

 association itself. It should also be stated 

 that the draft of a constitution to be sub- 

 mitted has not, for lack of time and be- 

 cause of the wide geographical distribution 

 of the men on the committee, been author- 

 ized by the committee as a whole. This is 

 hardly to be regretted for it reserves for 

 each member complete freedom of action, 

 and emphasizes the point that the chief 

 object of its preparation is not to supply 

 an ideal or final draft, but a definite basis 

 for discussions to bring out and register 

 the will of the meeting. At the same time 

 it should be said that the draft does not 

 represent so much the wishes of the mem- 

 bers of the subcommittee personally as the 

 preponderant drift of the opinion-s ex- 



pressed in letters in reply to the circulars 

 sent out. 



As much as this I should probably have 

 felt like saying in any case. But the com- 

 mittee has asked me also to speak upon the 

 reasons for calling this assembly together. 

 What is the proposed association for? Any 

 proposal to increase the existing number 

 of associations, meetings, etc., assumes a 

 serious responsibility. The burden of 

 proof is upon it. 



We are in a period of intense and rapid 

 growth of higher education. No minister 

 of public education controls the growth; 

 there is no common educational legislature 

 to discuss and decide its proper course; no 

 single tribunal to which moot questions 

 may be brought. There are not even long- 

 established traditions to guide the expan- 

 sive growth. Whatever unity is found is 

 due to the pressure of like needs, the influ- 

 ence of institutional imitation and rivalry, 

 and to informal exchange of experience and 

 ideas. These methods have accomplished 

 great things. Within almost a single 

 generation our higher education has under- 

 gone a transformation amounting to a revo- 

 lution. And I venture to say that, in spite 

 of the deficiencies we so freely deplore, no 

 country has at any time accomplished more 

 in the same number of years. 



But have we not come to a time when 

 more can be achieved by taking thought 

 together? In the future, as in the past, 

 progress will depend upon local efforts in 

 response to local needs and resources. We 

 have the advantages as well as the disad- 

 vantages of the lack of the European sys- 

 tem of centralized control. So much the 

 more reason for the existence of a central 

 body of teachers, which, lacking official and 

 administrative power, will express the 

 opinion of the profession where it exists 

 and foster its formation where it does not 

 exist. I am a great believer in the power 



