Apeil 3, 1914] 



SCIENCE 



493 



. . . moves in a mysterious way 

 His wonders to perform. 



The difficulty is that if an autocrat obtains 

 unlimited powers, whether in the nation, the 

 state, the city, the family or the university, 

 he does not always prove to be wise and benev- 

 olent, and it may even be argued plausibly 

 that the wise and benevolent despot is the 

 worst kind, for he works the greatest demoral- 

 ization. It is true that in a democracy we can 

 afford to give large power to our leaders, for 

 they are subject to the popular will. In the 

 British democracy the monarch can only be 

 permitted to be a social ornament, as he is 

 there for life and his son after him. In our 

 American democracy the president of the 

 nation has extraordinary influence, but he 

 can only maintain it so long as he reflects 

 public sentiment. In Great Britain the cabi- 

 net is directly responsible to the parliament, 

 and represents in its constitution the diverse 

 elements of the majority, the prime minister 

 not being necessarily the one most influential. 

 This method is more democratic than ours, 

 and in my opinion preferable. We have tried 

 it with tolerable success in the commission 

 form of government adopted by a number of 

 cities. This is also at the present time being 

 used in several colleges and universities, but 

 not much can be expected here so long as it is 

 a temporary expedient to last only until a 

 president can be found. 



It may indeed be seriously questioned 

 whether the superior initiative and efficiency 

 which one-man power is supposed to have is 

 not more than counterbalanced in a uni- 

 versity by the loss of these traits in the 

 subordinates. A superman requires as his 

 correlative many undermen. It is almost 

 impossible to supervise the teaching and 

 research of professors. Such an attempt is 

 charmingly portrayed by President Maclaurin 

 of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology 

 in connection with the report on academic 

 efficiency of the Carnegie Foundation: 



The superintendent of buildings and grounds, 

 or other competent authority, calls upon Mr. 

 Newton : 



Superintevdent : Tour theory of gravitation is 



hanging fire unduly. The director insists upon a 

 finished report, filed in his office by 9 a.m. Mon- 

 day next; summarized on one page; typewritten 

 and the main points underlined. Also a careful 

 estimate of the cost of the research per student- 

 hour. 



Newton: But there is one difficulty that has 

 been puzzling me for fourteen years, and I am 

 not quite. . . . 



Superintendent (with snap and vigor) : Guess 

 you had better overcome that difficulty by Mon- 

 day morning or quit. 



The sinister side of the president's control 

 of the professor is shown in two cases which 

 have recently become public property. At 

 Wesleyan University the professor of political 

 science and sociology was compelled to resign 

 after some remarks on the observance of the 

 Sabbath and, at Lafayette College, the pro- 

 fessor of philosophy and psychology was dis- 

 missed because his teaching was thought not 

 to be in accord with the stricter standards of 

 the Presbyterian church. We are not here 

 concerned with questions of academic freedom 

 or of permanance of tenure, but only with the 

 methods of determining what the professor 

 may say and how he shall be dismissed. As a 

 matter of fact, in these two cases the alleged 

 infractions of orthodoxy were slight. Several 

 clergymen have told me that they might very 

 well have made the remarks of the Wesleyan 

 professor, and the Lafayette professor remains 

 a Presbyterian clergyman in good standing. 

 At Wesleyan, the president asked for an ex- 

 planation of the remarks of the professor, de- 

 manded his resignation and accepted it, the 

 three letters being written on the same day 

 without the possibility of official consultation 

 with the faculty or trustees. The fact that in 

 this case the alleged ground for the dismissal 

 was not the real cause does not improve the 

 situation. At Lafayette, in like manner, the 

 president wrote to the professor demanding 

 his resignation in view of the supposed con- 

 tents of a course. In this instance the pro- 

 fessor was given a hearing before the trustees, 

 but the president was naturally upheld. 



A distinguished army engineer has recently 

 stated that he would not accept the commis- 

 sionership of police for New York City unless 



