Febbuakt 15, 1907] 



SCIENCE 



253 



Solomon, Job and Socrates would be inadequate. 

 The thing is an obvious impossibility, and, as 

 said before, a crude attempt to force the distinc- 

 tion places a most undesirable emphasis upon a 

 distinction that fundamentally has no place in 

 the academic life. The very fact that a presi- 

 dent is willing to prove to his board that Pro- 

 fessor A. is worth $2,600 to the university, while 

 Professor B. is worth $2,700, seems to suggest 

 rather forcibly that the result might better be 

 left to the throw of a die. 



We must also remember that under present 

 circumstances these discriminations may mean all 

 the vital difference between finding a debit or a 

 credit in the year's accounting. If professors 

 were paid upon an adequate basis, the problem 

 would shift in importance, though the relative 

 value of principle would be the same. A salary 

 should secure a reasonable, comfortable living. 

 The salary is intended to permit one to live and 

 pay one's bills; those bills are largely determined 

 by the standard of living. The butcher and the 

 baker — unlike the graduate student — do not con- 

 sult the salary list before making out their bills. 

 These come in to the fortunate and the unfortu- 

 nate alike. 



Nor can I see any useful purpose that a diflfer- 

 entiation of salary serves. I have never heard 

 any defence thereof that at all aims to set forth 

 its utility. It is generally set forth as a prac- 

 tical necessity. A certain man can be had only 

 by offering him a certain salary. Trustees are 

 influenced by these superficially business-like con- 

 siderations; and so the specious argument with 

 its attendant evils returns and grows in force. 

 Yet in the long run, the university that strains 

 its maximum efforts to pay adequate salaries will 

 reap the benefits of its worthier policy. Indeed 

 that is the case to-day. To anticipate the ocoa- 

 Bion of a summons elsewhere, to place the em- 

 phasis upon academic privileges, to make it clear 

 that the best the university can do is already 

 done, and is not withheld until a ' hold-up ' forces 

 the situation, is more likely to attract and re- 

 tain the proper kind of man than any shrewd 

 juggling with the translation of academic deserts 

 into dollars and cents. 



r do not address myself to the practical prob- 

 lem — related yet different — of providing a system 

 for the proper advancement of men from subor- 

 dinate to the higher positions. I believe the 

 issue in such cases is properly that of determin- 

 ing by academic standards when and whether the 

 candidate is to be advanced to a higher q'ank. 

 Some should be advanced more rapidly than 



others. Such differentiation is part of the selec- 

 tion that is as necessary in the academic as in 

 any other career. But once selected, the further 

 differentiation of salary should be affected by no 

 other consideration than time of service, and such 

 other regularly provided conditions as belong to 

 every man's career. 



20. 



As an ideal, the payment of uniform salaries 

 to all who may bear the same title would seem 

 highly desirable, inasmuch as it would in efi'ect 

 recognize the equal value or importance of one 

 department with another. 



As a matter of practical university administra- 

 tion, it will always be difficult to realize any such 

 ideal, and chiefly for these reasons: 



1. While all professors should be equally 

 eminent in their respective professions, such will 

 not be the case in any actual faculty. Certain 

 individuals may tend to stagnate, others to draw 

 forward and in various ways differences are sure 

 to exist. 



2. As a result of these differences, either in 

 professional or in collateral qualifications, it will 

 result that in a real sense, certain individuals 

 may become of more value than others, no matter 

 on what basis ' value ' may be estimated. Such 

 differences may not improperly be made the basis 

 of a difference in salary. 



3. Due to one cause or another, the services of 

 different members of the same grade of the teach- 

 ing staff may have different market values. Cer- 

 tain individuals may be more or less prominently 

 before the public, or may receive calls from other 

 institutions, and if it is desired to retain their 

 services, an advance in salary must be made. 



To summarize: if universities could be provided 

 with ideal faculties and administered under ideal 

 conditions, doubtless equality of salary in the 

 same grade should and would prevail. Under 

 actual conditions and as a practical administra- 

 tive problem it does not seem likely that it ever 

 will. 



21. 



I am strongly inclined to think that men bear- 

 ing the same title in a given institution should 

 receive the same salary, or what would be better, 

 if practicable, that there should be a fixed scale 

 of advancement by years so that new appointees 

 could start in at the bottom of the scale and 

 receive a regular increase of salary until a cer- 

 tain maximum is reached. It might be necessary 

 to recognize services in other institutions at simi- 

 lar grade in adjusting the pay of men changing 



