982 



SCIENCE 



[N. S. Vol. XXXIII. No. 861 



and not for the community, does it foster 

 the belief that the university is not domi- 

 nated bj^ the motive of service; does it 

 create the suspicion that students ignore 

 or forget their duty to the state which is 

 making their self preparation possible? 

 This is a vital question. So with the stu- 

 dent groups that play so large a part in 

 academic communities. Are these groups 

 working loyally for the common welfare, 

 have they due regard for the fundamental 

 things of university life, are they actuated 

 by a sense of responsibility for their mem- 

 bers, do they cultivate tolerance, justice 

 and good-will ? These are questions which 

 individuals and groups must constantly 

 put to themselves and answer frankly and 

 honestly. The good name of the univer- 

 sity is safe only when its members feel an 

 obligation to further the common purpose 

 to make the university a true organ of the 

 whole people. 



So long as this spirit prevails, no sense 

 of arrogance, of exclusiveness, of privilege 

 or caste will enter the minds of its mem- 

 bers. The old distinction of "town" and 

 "gown," the traditional attitude of su- 

 periority toward those outside the walls of 

 the academic cloister, these things have no 

 place in an institution dominated by the 

 spirit of social service. Every man and 

 woman of the commonwealth becomes in 

 this view a supporter and patron of the 

 universitj^, and may expect from it good- 

 will and loyal service. If to say that the 

 university belongs to the state is anything 

 more than phrase-making, every member 

 who has imagination, the power to see the 

 institution in its real relationships, must 

 feel the genuine humility of one who would 

 faithfully serve his fellows. 



If the university is to fulfill its function, 

 it must carry conviction to the people of 

 the commonwealth. It must impress them 

 with its purpose, make them see it as a 



faithful agency of the people. The men 

 and women of the state must not think of 

 the university as an institution which, be- 

 cause it has public support, should lower 

 its standards to admit the weak, indifferent 

 or incompetent, or to graduate those who 

 have failed to reach the minimum of at- 

 tainment. People must not think of the 

 university as a place in which personal in- 

 fluences can secure special privilege. 

 Eather they must regard it as fearlessly 

 loyal to the common welfare, true to high 

 standards of scholarship, truth, efficiency, 

 character and judgment. They must not 

 ask or expect special favors from this serv- 

 ant of the whole democracy. 



If the university purpose is to be 

 achieved the institution must seek special 

 ability wherever this is to be found. It 

 would be a calamity if only sons and 

 daughters of the rich and well-to-do could 

 gain access to higher training. Talent and 

 genius ignore the distinctions of wealth 

 and class. A way must be found by which 

 young men and young women of great 

 promise, however they may be hampered 

 by poverty, may gain access to the social 

 training of the university, and be freed in 

 large part or wholly from the self-support- 

 ing work which makes the best scholarship 

 impossible. We must believe that men and 

 commiinities will catch this vision of the 

 university and by providing scholarships 

 see to it that no exceptional ability shall 

 be deprived of development for the service 

 of the commonwealth. The university 

 would lose its power and its ideals if it 

 ever became a place of privilege for the 

 well-to-do and not a training school for all 

 who have talents and capacities for which 

 the state has need. The controlling ideal, 

 the mastering purpose of the university, 

 therefore, is not a mere phrase or conceit; 

 it is a guiding principle which finds appli- 

 cation to every individual, to every group, 



