164 



SCIENCE 



[N. S. Vol. XXXIX. No. 996 



would be turned in this direction. And 

 they will be. The progress of the physical 

 sciences in the nineteenth century will in 

 the coming century be paralleled by ad- 

 vances in the psychological sciences. Sci- 

 ence and education have given us democ- 

 racy; it is the duty and the privilege of 

 democracy to repay its debt by forwarding 

 science and education to an extent not 

 hitherto known in the world's history. 

 J. McKeen Cattell 



THE PMOFESSOBSHIP OF PHILOSOPET AND 



PSYCHOLOGY AT LAFAYETTE 



COLLEGE 



At a largely attended joint meeting of the 

 American Philosophical Association and the 

 American Psychological Association, held at 

 New Haven, December 31, 1913, the report of a 

 committee appointed to inquire into the cir- 

 cumstances connected with the resignation of 

 Dr. John M. Mecklin from the professorship 

 of philosophy and psychology at Lafayette Col- 

 lege was read and approved, nemine contra- 

 dicente, and ordered printed. The committee 

 was composed of Professors A. O. Love joy, of 

 Johns Hopkins (Chairman), J. E. Creighton, 

 of Cornell; E. Hocking, of Yale; E. B. Mc- 

 Gilvary, of Wisconsin ; W. T. Marvin, of Rut- 

 gers ; G. H. Mead, of Chicago, and H. C. War- 

 ren, of Princeton. The report involves princi- 

 ples of general interest to American university 

 teachers and administrators; and the more 

 essential parts are, therefore, here reproduced 

 at length. 



The committee's understanding of the scope 

 and purposes of its inquiry is set forth in its 

 original letter to Dr. E. D. Warfield, president 

 of the college: 



The function of the committee is primarily to 

 secure an authoritative statement of the facts in 

 the case which can be laid before the members of 

 the associations (of both of which Professor Meck- 

 lin is a member) at their approaching annual meet- 

 ings, for their information. The concern of these 

 bodies in the matter is twofold. They consist for 

 the most part of members of the university teach- 

 ing profession, and they are therefore anxious to 

 ascertain the reason for any action which may have 



the effect of injuring the professional standing and 

 opportunities of any of their own members. It 

 would seem, in the second place, desirable that the 

 members of these associations should know some- 

 what definitely what doctrinal restrictions are im- 

 posed upon teachers and investigators in philos- 

 ophy and psychology in the principal American 

 institutions of learning. Such knowledge it is im- 

 portant to our members to have, both in order that 

 their action in making recommendations for posi- 

 tions and the like may be guided thereby, and also 

 that in their judgment of the department of phi- 

 losophy and psychology in any institution, they 

 may bear in mind the predetermined limits of lib- 

 erty of opinion which affect the tenure of pro- 

 fessorships in that institution. It has been pub- 

 licly asserted that restrictions of this kind obtain 

 at Lafayette College. 



In its attempt to secure the desired information 

 the committee, of course, turns first to yourself 

 and to Professor Mecklin. We shall therefore be 

 greatly obliged if you will let us know whether the 

 statements already published in Science and the 

 Journal of Philosophy regarding the circumstances 

 of Professor Mecklin 's resignation seem to you 

 accurate, and what your understanding is as to the 

 doctrinal requirements imposed upon professors of 

 philosophy and psychology at Lafayette. The 

 points about which we especially desire to be in- 

 formed are indicated by the accompanying ques- 

 tions; we shall be obliged if, as an aid to giving 

 definiteness to any statement which the committee 

 may prepare on the subject, you will cover these 

 questions in the reply which we hope yon will be 

 good enough to let us have. 



The appended questions were as follows: 



1. Was the resignation of Professor Mecklin 

 called for by the administrative authorities of 

 Lafayette (a) because of certain doctrines held or 

 taught by him; or (6) because of certain doctrines 

 contained in the text -books used by him? 



2. In either case, what, specifically, were the 

 opinions or teachings to which objection was made? 



3. Are the statements made by Professor Meck- 

 lin in The Journal of Philosophy of September 25, 

 1913, regarded by the administrative authorities 

 of Lafayette College as giving a substantially ac- 

 curate and sufficient account of the facts in the 

 case? 



4. Is subscription to any specified creed a requi- 

 site to appointment to a professorship in Lafayette 

 College? 



5. Are the professors of philosophy and psychol- 

 ogy required, so long as they hold their positions, 



