May 29, 1908] 



SCIENCE 



861 



Wien spoken to about it, some of them have 

 admitted that they were negligent in the 

 matter, but said it was not possible for trus- 

 tees, who are busy men, to spend any time 

 on details; they necessarily had to leave all 

 such things to the chancellor. Other uni- 

 versities, however, have expert engineers on 

 their boards of trustees who are very active 

 in seeing that the engineering college is 

 kept up to the standard of other engineering 

 colleges throughout the country in methods 

 of administration, in curriculum and in 

 equipment. At Syracuse University the 

 chancellor himself does not take any active 

 interest in the college of applied science. He 

 attends a faculty meeting only once a year, 

 and practically all of his administration of the 

 college is done through the medium of the 

 superintendent of buildings, who acts also 

 as the chancellor's valet and spy. 



This superintendent is a rather remark- 

 able man. His connection with the univer- 

 sity began as janitor of Grouse College. 

 From that position he has been gradually 

 advanced until he is not only superintendent 

 of buildings, charged with their heating, 

 lighting and repairs, but is also supervisor of 

 new construction and purchasing agent. His 

 salary is equal to that of the highest paid 

 professor in the university, and his power is 

 greater than that of any dean or any faculty. 

 Pour years ago he had a quarrel with the 

 professor of practical mechanics in the L. 

 0. Smith College, Professor W. M. Towle, 

 and told tales to the chancellor about him 

 which caused his dismissal. His successor. 

 Professor George D. Babcock, was con- 

 tinually in trouble with the superintendent, 

 who interfered with his work and equipment, 

 and rather than submit longer to his inter- 

 ference he resigned a year ago. Professor 

 Cardullo, who was instructor in machine 

 design, was appointed to succeed Professor 

 Babcock. He is a most able man, a man 

 whom it would be to the best interests of 

 the university to retain, but he also is about 

 to leave on account of the trouble which 

 the superintendent has made for him. My 

 predecessor, acting dean Chas. L. Griffin, had 



to leave five years ago on account of the 

 actions of the superintendent of buildings. 

 It is entirely probable that the chancellor's 

 prejudice against me is due chiefly to that 

 same man's tale-bearing. Two or three 

 months ago on one occasion he was so grossly 

 insulting to Professor Shepard, of Smith 

 College, that Professor Shepard demanded of 

 the chancellor that the superintendent should 

 make an apology to him or he would at once 

 resign. The chancellor compelled the super- 

 intendent to make an apology, which is the 

 only instance known of his being curbed by 

 the chancellor. He is the chancellor's con- 

 stant companion and confidant and appears to 

 have more influence over him. than any other 

 single person in the university. As to his 

 relations to the faculty, students and alumni, 

 it is doubtful if he has a single friend or 

 adherent. It would be difficult to find a man 

 more universally hated. The chancellor 

 seems to be the only man connected with the 

 university who believes in him. 



The chancellor has charged me with being 

 a " disappointment to the administration 

 [which means himself] from almost the be- 

 ginning of his official relation to the institu- 

 tion " but he has not made a single specific 

 charge in that matter. He also says that I 

 can not meet him on amicable terms and that 

 he can not address me concerning the work of 

 the college without being subjected to the em- 

 barrassment of controversy and contention. 

 The foundation for aU these statements is of 

 the flimsiest possible character. I have never 

 refused to meet the chancellor in an amicable 

 discussion of any subject, and the little con- 

 troversies we have had have scarcely aver- 

 aged more than one per year, and usually 

 they lasted not over five minutes. The fol- 

 lowing is a statement of aU my controversies 

 with the chancellor, in five years, so far as 

 I remember them: 



1. A few weeks after taking office in 1903, 

 I made a social call on the late Dean Mc- 

 Chesney, in his office, in the college of Fine 

 Arts. We discussed the work of the Fine 

 Arts college and the relation of fine arts to 

 education. Dean McChesney mentioned the 



