The University RecordVolume XIII APRIL I 927 Number 2YOUR NEXT STEP1By HERMAN NIELS BUNDESENCommissioner of Health for the City of ChicagoThe University of Chicago is a young institution of learning, but ithas already more than made Its mark. It has taken its place as a leaderamong colleges and universities in the United States for its Independenceand courage — independence in seeking new paths, and courage in following them.The University of Chicago has made its mark not only because it hasbeen growing In an academic sense, but because it has also seen that thedevelopment of learning is something more than research in vacuo. Manyof the departments of the University engage in pure research and in itsapplications as well.It was with a feeling of great pride that I accepted the invitation ofyour President to deliver this convocation address today. For severalyears members of the faculties of the University of Chicago have beenamong my close advisers in the Department of Health. We have workedtogether to the end that the Department of Health might better serve thecity of Chicago, and that the University, in its medical and public-healthfields, should better avail Itself of the facilities the city offers.Last year Chicago had the lowest typhiod fever death-rate of any ofthe large cities In the world: only twenty-four deaths during the entireyear of 1926, a rate of less than one in 100,000 persons. Much of thecredit for this record is due to Professor Edwin O. Jordan and his coworkers, who by their aid and guidance have made possible this accomplishment.1 Fart of an address delivered on the occasion of the One Hundred Forty-fifthConvocation of the University, March 15, 1926.49So THE UNIVERSITY RECORDIn 1926 Chicago had the lowest infant death-rate of her history, andled such cities as New York, St. Louis, and Cleveland. There were nearly500 fewer deaths of babies under one year of age during the year 1926than in the preceding year. Heretofore but little use has been made of thewealth of statistical material in the Department of Health until the University of Chicago, through Professor I. S. Falk, conducted studies thatare now being quoted all over the country. The value of these studies canbest be illustrated in the words of Dr. Haven Emerson, formerly commissioner of health of New York City and now professor of public health inColumbia University. Discussing the results of a research by Dr. Falk inwhich it was demonstrated that infant welfare work preserves not the unfit but the fitness of the fit, he says, in an article in the Survey: "Nothingmore heartening came out of the recent Buffalo meeting of assembled sanitarians of America than this resounding blow in the interests of the wholetruth about infant mortality, and the benefits that follow, at least for tenyears, a reduction in baby deaths."These are just a few of the things that demonstrate clearly the valueof co-operative work of universities and health departments. I could enumerate many other examples, chosen from fields of interest other thanthose that are particularly my own. Many of you are acquainted with thework for civic betterment of Professor Merriam and his colleagues, ofMiss Abbott and her co-workers in social service, of your men in Law andDivinity, and know how they are contributing not only to the research ofthe University, but to the advancement of public welfare. But what is being done now is only the beginning of what the University will do to serveChicago and the country when it uses, to the full, opportunities for co-operation with official and unofficial agencies in the city.Today, having finished your academic training, you are about tomake your next step. I only follow the tradition of convocation speakerswhen I take it upon myself to give you advice. In one form or other, allof you are facing the veil of the future. You are thinking of success. Whatshall be your guiding principles? -The first is this: courage. (I quote from Barrie.) "You must excuseme if I talk a good deal about courage to you today. There is nothing elsemuch worth speaking about to undergraduates or graduates or white-haired men and women. It is the lovely virtue — the rib of himself thatGod sent down to his children" ("Courage").With courage, the world and all that's in it is yours. In the abstractit is no difficult task to know courage. But in the course of the day's rou-YOUR NEXT STEP Sitine it is not always a simple matter to be courageous. My own rule hasalways been never to step on a man's toes if you can step on firm groundwithout stepping on his toes, but if you cannot step on firm ground without stepping on his toes, then step all over his feet if necessary, but always step on firm ground. You cannot be true to high ideals withoutcourage.The second is health — not just freedom from sickness, but real, positive health, both physical and mental. There is nothing that is of greaterimportance to the individual than his health, for upon it depends greatlyhis attitude toward life and his relation to his fellow-men. Generallyspeaking, the man who has health, both physical and mental, is successful,and the man who is sick in mind or body is unsuccessful. Health is thegreatest investment of life, and as we have only one life to live, we maywell ask ourselves how we are investing our health assets.You have been well trained and you have passed the necessary examination in the subjects of your curriculum — but are you really fit to meetlife's obligations? How is your physical and mental health?Each day in the United States there occur many deaths that are preventable — preventable by just a little ordinary care in preserving healthreserve. I am sure that none of you would think it a very sound plan toadvocate that there be no more bank audits. Such balances, you say, mustbe taken to make sure that the financial status of a business institution issound. True. But is it not even more important that we audit our healthreserve than our financial reserve?The point I am making is this: that everyone should have a completehealth examination at least once a year, not to find out if he is sick, but tobe sure that he is well. I can give you no better health advice at this timethan to suggest that you acquire the right kind of health habits, such asgetting plenty of fresh air and sunshine, exercise and play, rest and sleep,and using a simple, wholesome diet of milk, fruits, vegetables, cereals,eggs, and some meat. Following these rules will not only add years toyour life, but, what is better still, will add life to your years.Of equal importance is mental health. It has been truly said: "As aman thinketh in his heart, so is he." The things that get into our mindsdetermine our fate.Look closely at the care-free faces of young people. What will thosefaces show ten years from now? Then they will reveal to the world the• mature character that is now being formed. Will we see the clean lines ofcourage, the firm lips of determination, the bright, sparkling eyes ofhealth?52 THEjUNIVERSITY RECORDWe must keep our minds from thoughts which injure and smirch, forour thoughts make our lives.We cannot think sickness and live health.We cannot think miserably and live joyously.We cannot think crooked and live straight.Sooner or later what we think will show in what we are.To be a successful citizen of the world, you must begin by being aworthy citizen of your community. The present chaotic state of international affairs reflects on a larger scale what is everywhere evident in ourown political subdivisions. The apathy of the best citizens is the greatestcurse of democracy. You must take an active interest in the administration of government. Consider the matter of voting and the matter ofcrime. What will you do with these duties of citizenship? Surely you willnot do your full duty to your country and to yourself unless you stand solidly behind the forces of law and order. Do you exert your right of franchise? Do you take the trouble to vote? It is a part of every citizen's dutyto vote — to vote as he thinks is right, but to vote. Less than half the electorate of this country cast their ballots at the last presidential election.Many of those who remain away from the polls are the severest critics ofgovernmental policies.In 1896, 80 per cent of the possible vote of the United States was castin the presidential election, and every four years since then has seen a decrease in the ratio of votes, as follows: 1900, 73 per cent; 1904, 69 percent; 1908, 66 per cent; 1912, 62 per cent; 1916, 56 per cent; 1920, 49per cent. The citizen has duties as well as rights, and emphasis must beplaced, not upon the right to vote, but upon the duty to do so.Recently there has been a great deal of discussion regarding the crimesituation. Many remedies have been suggested to control crime in Chicago. Some of them may be enumerated as follows: ( 1 ) The state shouldhave more time to collect witnesses. (2 ) The municipal court ought to trycases faster. (3 ) Bonds ought to be raised. (4) The municipal court oughtto try more cases without sending them to the grand jury. (5) The criminal court should have more judges. (6) The sheriff and the criminalcourt clerks should have more help. (7) Trial judges should be grantedmore power. (8) There should be more murder courts, gun courts, automobile courts, and we should have larger jails and more police stations.Is that really the way to control crime? I do not think so*A few years ago Chicago spent $1,000,000 for one thousand extra policemen. Did that reduce crime? No, of course not. Recently the citizensYOUR NEXT STEP 53of this city voted $8,000,000 for a new jail and a new police station tohouse — whom? The criminals that are to come.Thieves, murderers, and thugs are not made in a day. They are theoutput of homes and communities where laxity and indifference reign.The criminals of tomorrow are in our homes and schools and on ourstreets today — impressionable, eager to learn, looking for something todo, for a hero to worship.I believe that one of the greatest obstacles to the solution of the crimeproblem is that we have been talking and thinking in terms of police, jails,courts, and reformatories, and that we have been advocating methods ofrepression and punishment. Of course, I do not believe in coddling criminals. If they have committed crimes, they should be punished, but nocity should and can depend upon its police courts and its police system topreserve the moral fiber. You cannot shillalah law and order into the soulof a child with a policeman's club. Force does not create justice; nor dolaws create morality. These qualities must come from within, from an enlightened mind. We must develop in our children a love of morality for itsown sake, rather than a righteousness based upon the fear of the consequences of immorality.Therefore, I say emphatically that the foremost preventive againstcrime in the future is moral education. America should spend as manymillions of dollars for institutions of learning — for churches, for schools,for playgrounds, for universities, with their refining influence — as forjails and courts and police, so that in twenty or thirty years she will notneed so many jails and police.America is worth saving and, if she is to be saved, she will be savedby you and men and women like you; and if she is lost to the world, theforemost example of democracy and freedom will be lost by you and thoselike you. But we know that to get rid of evil we must have fortitude toface it frankly and fearlessly. To win battles we must first go to the front.There is just one fellow who is worse than a quitter, and that is the fellowwho is afraid to begin.Crime and disease must be exposed to the cleansing light of universalknowledge, because they maintain themselves upon public ignorance. Acampaign of education such as this great university is making will domuch to break down the conspiracy of ignorance. The public can be reliedupon to respond as soon as it learns.The big thing in the world that counts is not how much money youmake, but what good you do for your fellow-men.In closing, let me offer you the following thought for your future guid-54 THE UNIVERSITY RECORDance : How are you building for the future? Your younger brothers andsisters and the young people in your community are going to look to youfor guidance. They are just like clay in the hands of the human potter.What they will be depends largely upon the wisdom and skill of you whomold them — not upon the preaching of standards or mottoes on the wall,but upon examples of your daily life.A careful man I want to be,A little fellow follows me.I do not dare to go astray,For fear he'll go the selfsame way.I cannot once escape his eyes,Whate'er he sees me do, he tries.Like me he says he's going to be,The little chap who follows me.He thinks that I am good and fine,Believes in every word of mine.The base in me he must not see,That little chap who follows me.I must remember as I go,Through summer's suns and winter's snow,I am building for the years to be,The little chap who follows me.WMfMfsMA'MWfJMWW. VM•Md^A^dit^A^JM^^After replica of John S. Sargent's PortraitTHE FOUNDER— JOHN DAVIDSON ROCKEFELLERPRESIDENT HARPER AND "THEGREAT UNIVERSITY"By THOMAS W. GOODSPEEDThis is a story of Dr. William R. Harper, the first President of theUniversity of Chicago. Many others, like John D. Rockefeller ,"necessari-ly enter into it, but it is a story of Dr. Harper. When it begins he was aprofessor of Hebrew and Old Testament Interpretation in Yale. From1879 to 1886 he had occupied the chair of Hebrew in the Baptist UnionTheological Seminary, which is now the Divinity School of the University. That school was then located in the suburb of Morgan Park, whichis now a part of the city of Chicago. Endowed by nature with extraordinary gifts for both teaching and organization, his fame increased so rapidly that in 1886, in his thirtieth year, he was called to Yale. His successthere was such that within three years he came to occupy three separatechairs of instruction, in the College, the Graduate Department, and theDivinity School. It was during these early years of his work in Yale thatthis story begins.SEEING INTO THE FUTUREAt that time I was the secretary of the Theological Seminary at Morgan Park and had come into relations of intimate friendship with Dr.Harper. I recognized him as a great man in the making. I had made avain effort to retain him in Chicago by uniting with others in having himelected president of the first University of Chicago, which was just thenending its career of thirty years. We thought he might save and rehabilitate it. When this failed to hold him and he left us, on July 17, 1886,three weeks after the Old University finally closed its doors, I wrote tohim this word: "Hold yourself ready to return here sometime as president of a new university." During the succeeding two years I was muchengaged in efforts to establish such an institution, and kept Dr. Harperinformed of all that was being attempted. I mention these personal matters to explain why he wrote to me on October 13, 1888, a letter whichcontained some astonishing statements. It said:I spent last Sunday at Vassar College. .... Much to my surprise Mr. Rockefeller was there. When I had finished my morning lecture he joined me and we spentthe rest of the day together Other matters came up, but the chief question5556 THE UNIVERSITY RECORDwas the one of the educational problem Above all he talked for hours in reference to the scheme of establishing the great university at Chicago instead of inNew York. This surprised me very much. .... The long and short of it is that Ifeel confident that his mind has turned and that it is a possible thing to have themoney which he proposed to spend in New York diverted to Chicago. He himselfmade out a list of reasons why it would be better to go to Chicago than to remain inNew York.Dr. J. M. Taylor, president of Vassar, was with his two guests duringmuch of that day and talked about it to Dr. H. L. Morehouse, who hadbeen chiefly instrumental in bringing into being the American BaptistEducation Society, which had been organized in Washington, D.C., fouror five months before, and had made Dr. F. T. Gates its executive secretary. Of this talk of Dr. Taylor with him Dr. Morehouse wrote to Dr.Gates in part as follows: "The question of the establishment of a university at Chicago was also discussed. Taylor took very strong ground, asalso did Harper, upon the importance of having such an institution atChicago. As I understand Taylor, Mr. Rockefeller coincided with themin their views of the necessity of a strong institution at Chicago." Dr.Taylor does not seem to have heard anything about the "great university" or about founding it in "Chicago instead of New York." If he hadhe would have spoken of these things. He was not present, indeed, in allthe interviews of that day, and did not hear all that was said.But Dr. Harper speaks as though these things were the principaltopics of discussion. I showed his letter to only three men: Dr. J. A.Smith, editor of The Standard; Dr. G. W. Northrup, president of theSeminary; and Dr. F. T. Gates. *Some of them discounted the statementsabout the "great university." They were too good to be true. They werenot to be taken as a literal statement of what Mr. Rockefeller had said,but as impressions made on Dr. Harper's eager, enthusiastic mind. Thiswas very likely true, but it was this impression made on Dr. Harper, hisinterpretation, or, if you please, his misinterpretation of what was in Mr.Rockefeller's mind that determined his own future and illuminates thisstory.WHAT WAS THE GREAT UNIVERSITY?What, then, was the "great university" which was the burden of Dr.Harper's letter to me, and how did it happen that he supposed the "greatuniversity" to be the subject of Mr. Rockefeller's long conference withhim?The question, What was the great university? leads directly to Dr. A.H. Strong, president of Rochester Theological Seminary. As Dr. F. T.Gates says, "He was for more than forty years one of the most honored,PRESIDENT HARPER AND "THE GREAT UNIVERSITY" 57respected, and influential members of the Baptist denomination. Inlearning, in dignity of person and character, in force of will, in firmnessof conviction, in vigor and beauty of literary style, no man in that denomination surpassed him." He was through many years a friend of Mr.Rockefeller, who had given him liberal financial assistance for the seminary of which he was the head. His son had married Mr. Rockefeller'seldest daughter. He was the senior of the two friends by three years,and had this further warrant to be adviser and encourager in good causes.Before he was forty-five years old Dr. Strong conceived the plan ofa great graduate university to be established in New York City, nationalin its scope, to stand at the head of all American universities. It was tobe a university in the true sense, having no undergraduate departmentsor courses attached to it — a great graduate university, nation-wide in itsscope. He perceived in the rapidly growing fortune of his friend, Mr.Rockefeller, which even in the seventies of the last century was promisingto reach vast proportions, the providential means for the realization ofhis splendid conception. He became obsessed with the thought of it. Hecame to believe that both he and Mr. Rockefeller had been raised up byProvidence to carry this conception to realization. He urged it upon Mr.Rockefeller, in the words of Dr. F. T. Gates, "with the utmost reach ofhis power of persuasion. He enlisted all the resources of his great denominational influence in his cause. He did not shrink from urging the schemeupon him as a heaven-sent duty." And this he continued to do throughmany years. The plan required an initial gift of five millions with anadded million each year for twenty years. (Dr. Strong had little conception fifty years ago of the cost of such a university as he had planned.)A STAR OF THE FIRST MAGNITUDEDr. W. R. Harper was during these years a very young man. But hisextraordinary genius brought him early and wide recognition. In his appearance a star of the first magnitude rose above the horizon of the educational world. When he went to Yale in 1886 he and Mr. Rockefellerhad just become acquainted, and soon drew together. Dr. Strong earlyrecognized Dr. Harper's great qualities, and came to regard him as themost promising scholar in the country. He was twenty years older thanDr. Harper. He had been urging his plan for the great university on Mr.Rockefeller for years, but up to 1887 had received little, if any, encouragement. But in that year he accepted an invitation to make a Europeantour with Mr. Rockefeller, during which he seems to have thought thathe made real progress, and was greatly encouraged. Concluding after his5* THE UNIVERSITY RECORDreturn that the co-operation of Dr. Harper would be helpful, the planwas unfolded to him and he was asked by Dr. Strong to unite with him inthe organization and conduct of the great university. The eager mind ofthe young scholar at once caught fire at the suggestion of something greatto do and he entered into it with all his heart.Dr. Strong immediately wrote to Mr. Rockefeller:I saw this morning Profssor W. R. Harper of Yale and let him know the mainfeatures of my plan for a university in New York. He thinks it in whole and in itsseveral parts not only a practicable plan .... but he says he would give his whole lifeto such an enterprise if he could further it. But he has just been interviewed by President Dwight to organize at Yale somewhat the same scheme of general linguisticstudy by post-graduates which I want him to do in New York, and he has beenpromised the headship of that whole department. My dear Mr. Rockefeller, if we letthat man go out of our hands it will be the greatest loss our denomination has sustained during this century. .... It was fortunate that I saw him just when I did,for we welcomed the possibility of doing work for his own denomination again.The very next day Dr. Strong wrote again commending Dr. Harper inthe strongest terms and urging Mr. Rockefeller to have an interview withhim, saying, "I earnestly hope that you can see him soon."I am far from supposing that Dr. Harper got his conception of thegreat university from Dr. Strong. His Hebrew schools, his lectures, andhis eager interest in education had made him acquainted with the leadingcolleges and universities of the country. His mind naturally conceivedlarge plans. There can be no doubt that he had had great educationaldreams. He was so constituted that it could not have been otherwise. Butnow there was joined to a great educational scheme a patron, the benefactor whose wealth and philanthropy made him the one man to providethe means to carry the plan into execution. This man was already hisfriend, and he knew the nobility and greatness of his nature. He wasassured that Mr. Rockefeller was favorably considering the plan. It wasthis that awakened his enthusiasm. He became in some way convincedthat Mr. Rockefeller was intending to found a great university. It wasthis conviction, not the educational plan of Dr. Strong, that led him tosay that "he would give his whole life to such an enterprise, if he couldfurther it." He was soon encouraged to believe that he could.Acting apparently on Dr. Strong's suggestion, Mr. Rockefeller, aboutNovember i, 1887, invited Dr. Harper to visit him. I received a letterfrom Dr. Harper dated November 7, 1887, and apparently written to saysome pleasant personal things. As a matter of fact it contained a passagewhich I now believe marked the turning-point in Dr. Harper's life anddetermined his entire future. It was an account of a fateful interview,PRESIDENT HARPER AND UTHE GREAT UNIVERSITY" 59written in the following colorless words: "I was invited to spend Saturday with Mr. Rockefeller in New York City. I need not say that I enjoyed myself exceedingly, lunching with him at noon, driving for two orthree hours in the afternoon, and visiting with him in the evening. In thecourse of our conversation many things were taken up." That was all,and it was quite meaningless to me. I never attached any meaning or importance to it until twenty-nine years later, when I received its interpretation in a letter from J. P. Cadman, who had been in those early days onDr. Harper's staff of helpers. I received this letter the first week in June,191 7, a year after my history of the University of Chicago was published.Mr. Cadman wrote that on a Thursday or Friday in November, 1887,Dr. Harper told him that he had received an invitation from Mr. Rockefeller to come to New York on Saturday and make him a visit. At thebeginning of the following week Dr. Harper told Mr. Cadman that Mr.Rockefeller took him riding in Central Park behind a span of very finehorses, that they had talked for hours; that Mr. Rockefeller had put himthrough the greatest examination he had ever been subjected to, askinghim all about his plans, his family, his studies, etc., and had unfolded tohim a plan he was considering of putting eight or ten million dollars intothe founding of a great university in New York City, in which he wishedDr. Harper to have a leading place. (I want to say in passing that Mr.Cadman is an absolutely reliable witness, as everyone who knew him willagree.)This interview seems to have persuaded Dr. Harper that Mr. Rockefeller had actually made up his mind to found the great university. Mr.Cadman, indeed, wrote me that Dr. Harper said that Mr. Rockefellertold him that he was considering the matter. But Dr. Harper jumped tothe conclusion, which was apparently unwarranted, that the matter waspractically decided, and all the enthusiasm of his nature was awakened.He believed he had had a look into the inner secrets of the mind of thatgreat and inscrutable man, and he never surrendered that conviction. Itgave direction to all his future life. But immediately he began to find itdifficult to get access to Mr. Rockefeller, who wrote him November 10, "Iam unable at this writing, as I had hoped to do, to indicate anything definitely in regard to a time for further conversation on the same questionwe discussed when you were last with me in New York." Five days later,November 15, Dr. Harper wrote and said, "I do not wish to have you feelthat this matter is being pressed upon you. .... I feel confident, however, that if anything is to be done it ought to be done soon." At the sametime the case was being strenuously urged by Dr. Strong. There were6o THE UNIVERSITY RECORDthree or four letters in November, 1887, which pressed the matter withincreasing urgency. As late as November 22, so confident was Dr. Harperthat the case had been practically decided in the affirmative that he wroteto Mr. Rockefeller as follows: "I do not know whether you are aware ofthe fact that Dr. Broadus is to speak at New Haven next Monday night.In all probability he will spend Saturday and Sunday in New York City.I have wondered whether this would not be a magnificent opportunityfor us to have an interview with him. I am sure that Dr. Strong would beglad to come on from Rochester, and perhaps this is as favorable a timeas could be found." Dr. Broadus was the most eminent Southern Baptistscholar and a highly valued friend of Mr. Rockefeller. He had recentlypromised at least partial service in the great university.DISAPPOINTMENT — DELAYAnd now, just when their hopes were highest, these promoters of thegreat undertaking met a crushing disappointment. On November 30 Mr.Rockefeller wrote to Dr. Strong, at the same time sending a copy to Dr.Harper, "Yours of the 26th at hand. For all the reasons, I have decidedto indefinitely postpone the consideration of the question of the universityor theological seminary in New York." I said this was a crushing disappointment. It would have been to most men. But the plan of the greatuniversity had taken such a hold on its two promoters, they felt it to beso worthy of the one man in the world so well able to undertake it, andhad been so convinced of his profound interest in it, that they could notand would not believe he had dismissed it from his mind. Dr. Strongwrote him many later letters in regard to it, to which the briefest noncom-mital answers were returned.But we are here concerned with what Dr. Harper thought and did.In acknowledging the disappointing note of November 30, he said, "Nogreater service can be rendered the Baptist denomination and throughthat the country at large, than that which would result from such an enterprise as has been under consideration." When in 1886 Dr. Harper leftthe Theological Seminary at Morgan Park to go to Yale, he was appointed lecturer in the former institution, with control of the department ofHebrew for three years. He therefore spent January of each year inMorgan Park, and during the month the work of the institution wasturned over almost entirely to him. On December 20, 1887, in anticipation of this visit, he wrote Mr. Rockefeller: "I venture to ask you howfar I am at liberty to speak of what has been said and done in referenceto the university matter. When I go to Chicago I shall be questioned onPRESIDENT HARPER AND UTHE GREAT UNIVERSITY" 61every side. I do not want to seem unpleasantly silent. May I speak of itin a very general way?" This letter makes it evident that the great university was still very much on his mind and that he still believed it to beon Mr. Rockefeller's mind. This inquiry received the following answer:"If you refer to the university talked about for New York, think wouldnot say much about it — more than that there has been more or less talkabout something of that kind for a number of years among different onesof our people, but nothing definite arrived at yet." That last phrase wasa curious one, "Nothing definite arrived at yet." Well, after all, perhapsit was still on his mind, not definitely dismissed. At all events that wasthe interpretation Dr. Harper determined to place on it. On his returnfrom Morgan Park, therefore, he sought an interview, and, it having beenfixed for Saturday (February 20 was perhaps the day), Dr. Harper wroteto Dr. Strong about it and the latter immediately answered, expressing hispleasure over the impending interview and his conviction that their greatuniversity was still on Mr. Rockefeller's mind. He went on to say:There are a score of possible reasons for delay on his part which are, all of them,consistent with his adoption of the scheme I should be only too glad of anopportunity of laying the matter again before him. I look to you to do what I aminhibited from doing. I trust you will impress upon him the importance of takingtime by the forelock and of making a beginning at once, however small it be It is an encouragement to me that the scheme does not lose its hold on you.Something interfered and this interview did not take place. Two furthersuggestions as to dates did not prove acceptable, and on April 28, 1888,Dr. Harper wrote to Mr. Rockefeller telling him that both he and Dr.Strong had been urged by friends to consider the presidency of the University of Rochester. He thought it would be "a vital mistake at present,"evidently referring to their hopes about the great university in New York,and saying of that plan: "I fully believe that the time is ripe for action,and I can only hope that you may soon see your way clear to take definitesteps Should it be convenient at any time for you to see me, Iwould be very glad indeed to go into the city. I do not, however, desirein any way to trouble you." I think the answer he received to this lettermust have dazed him a little. It said: "Have nothing new to say in regard to the university. I do not see that it would be hindered if you wereto take it up later on account of your meanwhile having been president ofRochester University. This new experience would the better fit you forthe wider sphere."So far as I know these were the last communications between Mr.Rockefeller and Dr. Harper about the great university in New York City.62 THE UNIVERSITY RECORDThe summer which would take them both away was at hand. Probablythey did not meet again for more than five months. Apparently Mr.Rockefeller had definitely dismissed the great university from his mind,though his two friends could not believe this. For two years longer Dr.Strong clung to the hope that he would again take it up. And the lastglimpse we have of Dr. Harper in the spring of 1888 shows him urgingthe great university in New York on Mr. Rockefeller's attention. Nextcame the historic interview between them at Vassar College. It will berecalled that in Dr. Harper's letter to me of October 13, 1888, he wrotethat "Mr. Rockefeller talked for hours in reference to the scheme of establishing the great university at Chicago instead of in New York." Itmust be remembered that when this interview at Vassar took place Dr.Harper's mind apparently reverted immediately to the only question thathad been discussed between them during the preceding year, the greatuniversity. When at breakfast Mr. Rockefeller asked for an interviewand began to talk about education, he seems to have concluded that Mr.Rockefeller had in the back of his mind the great university. When hefound that Mr. Rockefeller had concluded that Chicago ought to havean institution of learning, he said to himself, as he afterward wrote to me,"His mind has turned and it is possible to have the money he proposed tospend in New York diverted to Chicago." Dr. Harper's enthusiastic nature again caught fire. According to President Taylor's account of theinterview, Mr. Rockefeller made no mention of a great university in Chicago, and the events of the eighteen months that followed gave no indication that such an institution was in his mind.At the same time, we cannot forget that the educational questionthat had been discussed between Mr. Rockefeller and Dr. Harper duringthe year preceding this meeting had been that of the great university,and that this had made a profound impression on Dr. Harper's mind.When Mr. Rockefeller now expressed his conviction of the need of an institution of learning in Chicago and his readiness to assist in establishingit, nothing seems to have occurred to Dr. Harper except that this wasthe great university he believed to be still in Mr. Rockefeller's mind. Perhaps the wish was father to the thought. And thus he wrote me a letterreflecting his own mind and hopes, which would probably have been agreat surprise to Mr. Rockefeller if he had seen it.So far as I can remember, at the time of which I am writing, October, 1888, 1 had never heard of the great university in New York. Aboutthis time Dr. Strong published a pamphlet containing his plan in full andsent it to a number of scholars. As I, however, had no knowledge of this,PRESIDENT HARPER AND UTHE GREAT UNIVERSITY" 63the phrase "the great university," of Dr. Harper's letter of October 13,made no special impression on my mind. It only awakened the hope thathere at last was a prospect of securing in Chicago what our hearts werelonging for: a high-grade college which would grow into a university.THE SUN BEGINS TO SHINEEvents followed in rapid succession after October 15, 1888. On thevery day I received Dr. Harper's letter telling me of the Vassar interview,Dr. F. T. Gates, corresponding secretary of the newly organized American Baptist Education Society, had read to the Baptist Ministers' Conference a powerful argument, showing convincingly that the first greatthing to be done was to establish a well-equipped institution in Chicago,a college which should develop into a university. Before him, therefore,I laid the Vassar letter, and arranged with him to send a copy of hispaper to Dr. Harper, who immediately forwarded it to Mr. Rockefeller.The next thing was a visit I made to New York at the end of the firstweek in November, 1888, after a telegraphic summons followed by a letter from Dr. Harper in which he said:This is the most important step that has been taken in the matter of the Chicagouniversity. It is absolutely certain that the thing is to be done : it is now only a question as to what scale. I have every time claimed that nothing less than four millionswould be satisfactory to begin with, and have expressed my desire for five. Just whathe [Mr. Rockefeller] wants to do and what his definite ideas are I cannot yet tell. Ihave never known him to be so interested in anything and this promises much.Dr. Harper met me on my arrival in New York, spent the evening withme, and again assured me that Mr. Rockefeller was ready to help establish a great university with four or five millions to begin with. AlthoughI could not quite work myself up to five millions, I stood by him loyallyin next morning's two-hour interview. To my great disappointment andbewilderment, I found Mr. Rockefeller not nearly so far advanced as Ihad been led to expect. He was in an inquiring and co-operative mood,not one of initiative and origination. If Chicago wished to establish aninstitution he was ready to co-operate, but that was all. He gave noslightest indication that he had ever had $4,000,000 to begin with suggested to him in connection with the Chicago institution. This had beenthe plan of the great university in New York, and undoubtedly Dr. Harper had talked of four or five millions in that connection. And in his mind,and he supposed in Mr. Rockefeller's mind, this was the same plan. Toward the end of the interview Mr. Rockefeller said, "I am prepared to putinto this enterprise several hundred thousand dollars," and turning to mesaid he would like to have me tell him frankly what I would like to have64 THE UNIVERSITY RECORDhim do, and asked me to give him my inmost thought. Summoning allmy courage so that I might not fail Dr. Harper, I answered that mythought was that he should propose to give outright $1,500,000 and when$500,000 had been raised from others, that he would then join in thefurther effort to build the institution up into still greater strength, thepurpose being to get at least $4,000,000 within ten years. He promised tothink over all that we had said, and the interview ended. At my hotel Iput my proposal in writing and sent it to his office. He answered at oncein a letter which said: "The amount you suggest for me to contribute isvery large and I am not prepared to name anything like such a sum and,indeed, not prepared to say anything on the question now. I will bepleased to have you run in and lunch with me at one o'clock at my office."I did not receive this letter till after I reached my home in Morgan Park.It convinced me that Mr. Rockefeller's purposes did not include "a greatuniversity to begin with"; that Dr. Harper's expectations as to the initialsubscription were far too great; and that, unless we wanted to defeat ourselves, we must at once moderate our demands. Without consulting Dr.Harper, therefore, I proceeded to do this on my own responsibility, reducing the amount asked from him from $1,500,000 to $1,000,000, andconcluding my letter to him as follows: "If you must, cut down and modify what I suggest in all directions. Only insure in some way the liberalendowment of the work of instruction." I still held to the plan for securing, with his help, $4,000,000 in ten years, as Dr. Harper so much desired.I immediately informed Dr. Harper of what I had done. He expressed strong disapproval of the concession I had made. In two successive letters he spoke of this as a serious mistake. Curiously enough, atthe same time he made to me this extraordinary statement, illustrativeof how little he really knew of what was in the mind of the reticent manwe were dealing with: "He is clear on the point of the $4,000,000, andhe purposes to give $1,500,000, of the first $2,000,000, and $1,500,000,of the second two. I am sure that this is the way it will come out." Itwill be noted that this is precisely what Mr. Rockefeller had written mea few days before that he had no idea whatever of doing.CROSS-PURPOSESLooking back across the gulf of years that now separates us fromthe period of which I write, we seem clearly to have entered on a curiousconflict of views and plans and efforts. On the one hand were we inChicago who wanted to see our educational work restored in the establishment on a sound financial basis of an institution of which the firstPRESIDENT HARPER AND t(THE GREAT UNIVERSITY" 65necessity was the college, the undergraduate department, but which wewere confident would develop into a true university. The passing of onlya few weeks of time indicated that these were also substantially the viewsof Mr. Rockefeller and Dr. Gates, On the other side was Dr. Harper,who had in mind the great university, a graduate institution devoted toresearch, together with professional schools, connected with which, if thegreat university could be got in no other way, there might be a college ofundergraduates.We were thus working at cross-purposes. We were not doing this intentionally, or even consciously. We were working, as we believed, in themost perfect accord. At the Chicago end of the line we took Dr. Harper'sword for it, until we learned better, that Mr. Rockefeller was planningfor Chicago a university to begin with, but we always regarded the college as the first and indispensable element of it. That was what we wanted, but we were prepared to be grateful for whatever came to us beyondthis. Let me quote here from a letter from Dr. Harper to Mr. Rockefeller,dated November 15, 1888. It will illustrate the hopes and visions thatwere in his mind. He says: "One or two new points have come up. I willjust hint at one of them. Why should not this university erected at Chicago include as an organic part of it, besides the theological seminary,also various colleges throughout the West. What better name than theUniversity of the West," in other words, the "great university." Eightdays later he wrote to Dr. Gates: "I believe most thoroughly that thebest place for a Baptist University, in the highest sense of the term, is inthe City of Chicago"— once more the "great university."At just this time an event occurred which throws a curious light onwhat I am trying to say. Dr. Harper felt it necessary to acquaint Dr.Strong with what he conceived was now in Mr. Rockefeller's mind. Themessage greatly disturbed Dr. Strong. He at once jumped to the conclusion that the great university of his dreams was to be established inChicago. He wrote Dr. Harper a long letter (about 2,000 words) vigorously protesting against this. Dr. Harper was so much disturbed that hesent the letter to me, asking me to prepare an answer to it, to be sent asfrom him to Dr. Strong. This I did, writing with great care and seekingto remove Dr. Strong's hostility to the plans for Chicago. In sending Dr.Harper an accompanying letter, I said:Dr. Strong concedes the main point, viz., the need of an institution of a high classat Chicago. He is, and has been, and will continue to be, in favor of a college of thefirst rank here. Very well. That is just what we want — to begin with. Give us that,which it will take $4,000,000 to equip properly. If it grows into something more, no66 THE UNIVERSITY RECORDone can blame us. The great university consisting of post-graduate departmentsonly [of which I had just learned] is not what we have in mind. Leave that to Dr.Strong's peculiar and private possession and wish him Godspeed in it. Win Strongto a friendly attitude. Let us win him to neutrality, if we cannot form an alliancewith him.Dr. Harper did not approve nor adopt the letter I had suggested.He wrote to me:It is not a college but a university that is wanted, a university of the highest order, having also a college. However, I have yielded to your opinion and have writtento Dr. Strong a letter incorporating the substance of the material you sent me. Some ofit I felt I could not write, but a good portion of it was sent. In doing this I throwthe responsibility on the Morgan Park gentlemen, for I assure you I dread the result.Just what he wrote to Dr. Strong I do not know. But it is clear thathe so modified the letter I had prepared for him to send that he totally defeated the purpose of it. Dr. Strong's fears were not removed;his suspicions that we were engaged in persuading Mr. Rockefeller tobuild his great university in Chicago were confirmed, and his hostilitywas intensified. With my views I was entirely honest in preparing theletter. With his views Dr. Harper was just as honest in making thechanges he did. He had great, magnificent plans, far beyond my humblerhopes.THE COLLEGE FIRSTIt is interesting to note the course of events. On December 3, 1888,the board of the newly organized American Baptist Education Societyheld a meeting in Washington. Dr. Gates, the secretary, presented hisargument for a high-grade college in Chicago. The board was convincedand by a unanimous vote instructed the secretary to use every means inhis power to originate and encourage a movement to establish in thatcity a well-equipped college. Dr. Harper was at the meeting in close association with Dr. Gates, who convinced him that the new society couldgo no farther than a well-equipped college and that a college to beginwith was the thing to aim at. They talked together most of one night,and Dr. Harper, who was a fair-minded man, wrote me and generouslysaid, "I think I appreciate better now your last proposition to Mr. Rockefeller and desire to retract all statements I made in reference to it. Iwrote too hastily." This was just like the generous-minded man he was.It so happened that in December, 1888, he was finding access to Mr.Rockefeller difficult, and the high-grade college to begin with, as compared with the university to begin with, did not command his wholehearted allegiance. He felt that the time had come to turn over the nego-PRESIDENT HARPER AND "THE GREAT UNIVERSITY" 67tiation with Mr. Rockefeller about the proposed institution in Chicagoto Dr. Gates, who, as secretary of the Education Society, was the logicalman to take it in hand and whose whole soul was engaged in the purpose toestablish it. Dr. Gates, therefore, went to New York and was introducedto Mr. Rockefeller, and the two men soon found that their views as towhat should be done in Chicago were identical, namely, the establishment of a college to begin with which might, if Chicago proved the rightsoil for it, grow into a university. Dr. Gates's first approach to Mr.Rockefeller was, at the latter's request, by letter. In this letter the firstpoint dealt with the scope of the proposed institution, and he said:May not the question whether the institution contemplated in Chicago shall bea college or a university be held in abeyance for a few years without imperiling anyvaluable interest? Even if a university were now designed, the college would naturally be the first work, and to thoroughly equip a college, in the wisest way, willalmost of necessity be the exclusive work of the earlier years. .... If ... . experience and study on the ground shall demonstrate the need and assure the success ofadvanced departments or technical schools the years will be seen to bring here andthere exceptional openings. .... Holding the possible scope of the institution inabeyance for a few years will cost nothing, while time will of itself solve the question easily and with certainty.All the initial steps took the course thus marked out. Of course theplan was far from being what was in Dr. Harper's mind. But whateverof heartbreak it cost him, he stood loyally and zealously by Dr. Gatesand worked with him whole-heartedly to carry out the plan for the college to begin with. In April, 1889, a committee of nine eminent men wasappointed by the executive committee of the Education Society as a committee of inquiry on the proposed institution of learning in Chicago. Dr.Harper was one of the nine. They planned as largely and liberally as theydared and recommended that immediate steps be taken by the EducationSociety to found in Chicago "a well-equipped college, leaving any desirable further development to the natural growth of time." At its annualmeeting in Boston the following month, May, the Society adopted thisresolution, as to "a well-equipped college," omitting the reference to further development. At the same time Mr. Rockefeller made the initialsubscription of $600,000 "toward an endowment fund for a college to beestablished at Chicago." All the subscriptions made to complete the million dollars required were given for a college. I wish to call particular attention to the fact that through all this radical modification of his ownplans for the "great university," or for a "university to begin with," Dr.Harper had worked loyally and earnestly with Dr. Gates in furtheringthe movement. He never for a moment sulked in his tent. He assisted Dr.68 THE UNIVERSITY RECORDGates in formulating the report of the committee of nine. A little later hewrote Mr. Rockefeller:At your request I asked Mr. Gates to write out the more important of thepoints. This idea of a college wow, perhaps a university later, is, it strikes me, mostexcellent Now may I not inquire: Are not the difficulties clearing away?The feeling is certainly unanimous (including even Dr. Strong) as to the desirabilityand the necessity of a great college. I wonder if it will be possible for you to saysomething definite to the brethren soon. I ask this, not because I am personally interested (for as perhaps Dr. Goodspeed has written you, I have refused absolutelyto consider the question of going myself to Chicago), but because, as a Baptist, Ifeel the great necessity of immediate action and the entire hopelessness of any effortwhich does not emanate from you. Pardon these words and do not take the troubleto reply to them.But Mr. Rockefeller always answered Dr. Harper's letters, and in answer to this one he said: "Pleased to receive yours of the 13th. Of late Ihad rather come to feel that if Chicago could get a college and leave thequestion of a university until a later date that this would be more likelyto be accomplished. If possible I will see Mr. Gates tomorrow."DR. HARPER SEEMS TO FADE FROM THE PICTUREIt was true, as Dr. Harper says, that as soon as he was convinced byDr. Gates that "the great university to begin with" must be given up for"a college to begin with" he had assured us that we must give up ourhope that he would become president, which we had insisted from the beginning that he must be. He refused to listen to us any longer. He hadno interest in administering a college. He felt that there was no placefor him in a college. And this was quite true. The subjects of his studyand teaching were university subjects. We, on our part, however, neverfor a moment abandoned our purpose to make him president, if we evergot our institution. And, on his part, he continued to work for the collegewe now hoped to establish, as earnestly as he had done for the universityof his earlier hopes and efforts. When we got into the campaign for thefirst million dollars he constantly wrote us sympathetic and encouragingletters. He said, "You may count on me for anything and everything Ican do to help." When we had finished our work successfully we receiveda gratifying surprise.Throughout eighteen months Dr. Harper had remained fixed in hispurpose to have no official connection with the proposed institution. During that time, indeed, the question of the presidency was in abeyance.The practical question during all that period was, Shall we have any institution at all? not, Who shall be its president? But in the appointmentPRESIDENT HARPER AND UTHE GREAT UNIVERSITY" 69of the first board of trustees by the Education Society board during thelast week of the campaign for the first million dollars, Dr. Harper wasnamed as a trustee with the distinct expectation that he would be thepresident of the institution. Dr. Gates and I had never given up that expectation. Neither, I believe, had Mr. Rockefeller. I cannot speak forhim, the most reticent of men when he wished to be. At any rate, on theday the campaign ended, Dr. Gates being too busy to write, I wrote Dr.Harper, at too great length for quotation here, urging upon him the dutyof accepting the presidency which I felt confident would be proffered him.As I have said, the answer to this letter was as gratifying as it was surprising. He said: "I am much more inclined to consider the Chicagoquestion today than I have been at any time." He wanted to know howMr. Rockefeller and Dr. Gates felt about the matter, now that it had become a practical question. He soon heard from both those gentlemenurging the presidency upon him, Mr. Rockefeller saying: "I agree withthe board of trustees that you are the man for president, and if you willtake it I shall expect great results. .... I confidently expect that wewill add funds from time to time to those already pledged to place it uponthe most favored basis financially." Dr. Gates wrote: "You are the onlyman I have ever seriously thought of for that position. .... Whathave I done that you should now inquire of Goodspeed where Gatesstands, you rascal! .... That you will be offered the presidency Ihave not a doubt."THE COLLEGE FOUNDEDThe first meeting of the board of trustees of the new institution, thenew college, was held July 9, 1890. Dr. Harper was present. A committee was appointed on the nomination of a president and the organization of the University. But it was made known to Dr. Harper that everymember of the board expected him to become president. And then acurious thing occurred. No, it was not curious, but the most naturalthing in the world, Dr. Harper being what he was. His mind immediatelyreverted to the "great university," and as preliminary to that, a universityinstead of a college to begin with. As a consequence he was at onceplunged into a distressing mental conflict. There were a number of thingsinvolved in this, but it soon became evident that the thing that was reallytroubling him was the fact that he wanted a university in Chicago, whileprovision had been made for a college only. True, the institution wasbeing incorporated as The University of Chicago, but this was a misnomer, a name only, the incorporation of a hope. We asked him to drawup a plan of organization for the educational work of the new institution.7o THE UNIVERSITY RECORDBut his mind remained barren of ideas for perhaps the only time in hislife. It refused to function on a plan of college organization. He wantedthe "great university," at the very least a university to begin with. OnJuly 31 he wrote to me this: "It does not seem possible to do what oughtto be done, what the denomination will expect, what the world will expect, with the money we have in hand. There must in some way be anassurance of an additional million." He made this feeling known to Dr.Gates, who communicated it to Mr. Rockefeller. He must have felt re-assurred when the message came to him from that gentleman: "I confidently expect that we will add funds from time to time to those alreadypledged to place it upon the most favored basis financially." The letterwhich conveyed this message contained also an invitation to visit Mr.and Mrs. Rockefeller in Cleveland. Preliminary to that visit three thingswere done.BEGINNING SMALL, BUT TO GROWIn the first place, Dr. Harper, in the course of the letter acceptingthe invitation, said: "The denomination and indeed the whole country isexpecting the University of Chicago to be from the very beginning aninstitution of the highest rank and character. Already it is talked of inconnection with Yale, Harvard, Princeton, Johns Hopkins, the Universityof Michigan, and Cornell With the money pledged I cannotunderstand how the expectations can be fulfilled. Naturally we ought tobe willing to begin small and grow, but in these days when things aredone so rapidly .... it seems a great pity to wait for growth whenwe might be born full-fledged."In the second place, Drs. Harper and Gates spent August 17, 1890,together at Morgan Park, and matured the plan for making the college"the university to begin with." Mr. Rockefeller was to be asked in theapproaching visit in Cleveland to give an additional million dollars tomake this possible, and Dr. Harper was to agree to accept the presidency.In the third place, the plans agreed on in this Morgan Park conference were taken to Cleveland by Dr. Gates and laid before Mr. Rockefeller, and the way was thus prepared for Dr. Harper's visit.Had Mr. Rockefeller's mind been working toward the result whichDr. Harper had reached? Was he also returning to a great conceptionwhich had been in his mind before? I do not undertake to answer thesequestions. No one, I least of all, has any warrant for interpreting on thisquestion the thoughts of that remarkable man. This is a story of Dr.Harper and an attempt at partial interpretation of what was in his mind.PRESIDENT HARPER AND UTHE GREAT UNIVERSITY" 71The purpose in his mind was, with Mr. Rockefeller's help, to build inChicago the "great university." He was now more certain than ever thatthis was also the purpose of Mr. Rockefeller. In urging him to accept thepresidency, Mr. Rockefeller, who was accustomed to weigh his wordscarefully, had written, "I confidently expect that we will add funds fromtime to time to those already pledged to place it upon the most favoredbasis financially." Dr. Gates, who carried this letter to Dr. Harper andwas more intimately related to these negotiations than anyone else, haswritten as follows:The words beginning "I confidently expect" certainly did commit Mr. Rockefeller, in his own time and his own way, to found a university in Chicago comparable in resources to Columbia and Harvard, which were then on the "most favoredbasis financially" of any American universities. These are the most important wordsever uttered in connection with the history of the University. I had suggested thathe write to Dr. Harper urging him to be president. But I did not suggest that heinsert that pledge. It was wholly his own conception. It created the University ofChicago. I carried the letter to Dr. Harper from Mr. Rockefeller's house. That wasthe moment of the pre-natal conception of the future University of Chicago. Thecollege had been conceived, using the physiological term, in Boston; the university,in Dr. Harper's formal acceptance of the presidency, based on Mr. Rockefeller's greatletter of committal.When, in compliance with the invitation to visit Mr. and Mrs. Rockefeller in their Cleveland home, Dr. Harper went to Cleveland September4, 1890, he found his way so prepared that he met with no difficulties.In 1888-89 many anxious months elapsed before the Founder of the University finally saw his way to pledging $600,000, conditionally, to establish a college in Chicago. He had not then been ready to talk about auniversity, much less to undertake its founding. Now all was changed.A university to begin with was the only thing considered. Most of thetime of the visit was spent socially, only a few hours being given to business. Mr. Rockefeller readily promised the additional million and gave itall for university instead of college work. The sum of $200,000 was forthe purpose of giving the University its first professional department —the Divinity School; and $800,000 was to be an endowment for graduatework.THE GREAT UNIVERSITY OPENS ITS DOORSAnd when the new institution opened its doors to students, October1, 1892, it was not as a college, but as a university. In a statement madein 1897 Dr. Gates said that Mr. Rockefeller's conceptions of a university were never72 THE UNIVERSITY RECORDless broad than those of Dr. Harper, or his ideals of what the University of Chicagomay become .... less expansive or magnificent. Before he had ever been approached in behalf of an institution at Chicago, he had visited great institutions inour own and in foreign lands, and he had intimately contemplated for years the planof an institution involving far greater expense than any now involved at Chicago.If in 1888 and 1889 Mr- Rockefeller had seemed for some inscrutablereason to favor and to be willing to contribute for a college only atChicago, certainly in 1890 he welcomed the idea of a university to begin with, and the great university to come. The minds of those two greatmen seemed to have come together. It would perhaps be correct to saythat only one thing divided them. The new president, Dr. Harper, wanted,not a college with a few graduate departments added, but a real graduateuniversity with an undergraduate department attached to it. In otherwords, he wanted the great university of his dreams from the start. Hehad written to Mr. Rockefeller, "It seems a great pity to wait for growthwhen we might be born full-fledged." His heart was set and his mindmade up on organizing from the outset the great university. I think hebelieved that Mr. Rockefeller's mind would go along with his in this purpose. The trouble was that he took this for granted and did not consultthe Founder in advance, but virtually committed him to vast expenditureswithout previous consultation and agreement.Thus it came about that President Harper conceived and organizednot merely a university, but the great university, at the very beginning.It was not, in any way, the university of Dr. Strong, referred to in theearlier part of this story. The educational plans of these two men wereso different that they could not be compared, but only contrasted. President Harper owed nothing in his plan to Dr. Strong. His plan was hisown, the work of an educational genius, designed to be begun on a largescale and providing for indefinite expansion.There were 120 members of all grades in the first faculty. Harvardand Michigan alone had larger corps of instructors. Princeton and JohnsHopkins had about half as many. There were more than forty departments of instruction. It goes without saying that for such an institution as was organized the funds in hand and in sight were ludicrouslyinadequate. Before the opening of the work of instruction, however, tohelp bridge the gulf between income and expenditures, Mr. Rockefellermade a new contribution of a million dollars and followed this threemonths after the University opened with another million. Two or threeyears later, however, so rapidly were new departments organized, so fastPRESIDENT HARPER AND UTHE GREAT UNIVERSITY" 73the scope of the institution expanded and the scale of expenditure increased, that notwithstanding the fact that the Founder had added millionafter million to his gifts, and the fees from students had largely increased,an indebtedness of half a million dollars had been incurred.The Founder, although he was a princely giver — as all the worldknows, the greatest giver of all time — had the very natural wish to havethe opportunity to give of his own volition and not under a feeling ofconstraint; to be given the option of providing for new obligations beforethey were incurred, instead of feeling compelled to do this after expenditures had been made about which he had never heard until they had tobe paid. In 1897 ^r- Gates said to Major Rust, the Business Managerof the University, and to me :One of the misfortunes of the present situation is that in every instance withinrecent years in which the University of Chicago has appealed to Mr. Rockefeller forfunds, the appeal has not been for new enterprises about to be undertaken, in whichhe might exercise his judgment as to whether they should or should not be undertaken, but the appeal has been in every instance to make up deficits already created,to meet exigencies in which the University is committed, and from which, if it be notextricated, it will suffer irreparable damage.In sending copies of this interview to the conferees he concluded his comments on it in the following references to the Founder and the Presidentof the University:Mr. Rockefeller has known from the first, what he has only lately disclosed toothers, this, namely, how largely he might, under favorable conditions, become interested in the University of Chicago ; and he has known that he would himself give,not only far more cheerfully, but also far more largely, under a conservative andprudent management that avoids debts and deficits. Finally, let me add that Mr.Rockefeller, rejoicing in all that has been achieved, recognizes and extols the greatqualities of leadership, enthusiasm, and organizing ability in Dr. Harper withoutwhich the present development of the University would have been impossible. Helooks to the Trustees, whose invaluable services he also heartily recognizes, not tochill this ardor or discourage it, but to guide it into channels of solid and permanentprosperity.This closing sentence set the Trustees an impossible task. It is notin any sense a criticism when I say that the conception of the great university and his mission to create it had become so controlling in President Harper's life that he could not moderate his pace. He tried to do it.He thought he was doing it. Compared to the development he longed tosee, the opportunities and demands for which were ever before him andcalled to him to go forward, he felt that progress was very slow. Hevoiced this feeling in one of his convocation statements when he lamented74 THE UNIVERSITY RECORDthat we were growing old fast while little was being accomplished. Andhe could not stop or really moderate his pace while the great conceptionwhich filled his mind, still unrealized, compelled him to go on.NO DEFICITS FOR EIGHTEEN YEARSOne thing more closes the story of President Harper and "The GreatUniversity." Was Dr. Gates right when he said in 1897 tnat the Founderwould give not only far more cheerfully, but also far more largely, undera policy that would avoid debts and deficits? He might today appeal tofacts and figures to show how right he was. During the first fifteen yearsof the University's history Mr. Rockefeller gave it a total of $15,000,000,a million dollars a year. After the more conservative policy was adoptedin 1906, deficits were speedily brought to an end. There has not been onefor the past eighteen years. In the first four years of the new policy, thegifts and subscriptions of Mr. Rockefeller aggregated the enormous sumof $20,000,000, and in the fifteen years since, the contributions and subscriptions of John D. Rockefeller, Jr., and of the various Rockefellerfoundations have aggregated above $12,000,000 more. Yes, Dr. Gateswas right.In his relations to the University the Founder, Mr. Rockefeller, exhibited a patience, tolerance, magnanimity, far-seeing intelligence, andmunificence that are priceless inheritances which will enrich the institution for all time to come. These qualities have made him the benefactorof all mankind.To sum it all up: We, lowly minded people of Chicago, got what wefelt to be our primary need, a great college, which developed and expanded beyond all expectation. Through the magnanimity and munificenceof Mr. Rockefeller, the public spirit of Chicago, the co-operation of hisfaculty and his own extraordinary abilities, President Harper securedthe great university on which he had set his heart. That phenomenalgenius conceived the University that was to be; in the fifteen years helived to preside over it made it one of the leading educational institutionsof the country, and built himself and his ideas and ideals into it in sucha way that they have largely controlled that marvelous developmentwhich, under his wise successors, Presidents Judson, and Burton, andMason, has continued uninterruptedly to this day, with the largest promise of continuing advance. Being dead he still lives.THE CHICAGO LYING-IN HOSPITALAND DISPENSARYBy JANET AYER FAIRBANKThe affiliation of the Chicago Lying-in Hospital and Dispensary andthe University of Chicago, effected in January of this year, will add tothe University's new medical school an institution which for many yearshas been recognized as pre-eminent in its field. Its reputation is international, and to it come medical observers from all over the world to studythe methods developed by its founder and chief of staff, Dr. Joseph B.DeLee. It operates a modern hospital and four dispensaries in Chicago,which are of service to thousands of mothers each year.Thirty-one years ago the Chicago Lying-in Hospital and Dispensarywas founded by Dr. DeLee in the conviction that medical science hadneglected the problem of childbirth. Conditions in obstetric teaching andpractice, when he began his work, were, to take the term used by himrecently before the Mothers' Aid, "awful." Rich and poor suffered alike;20,000 mothers died annually in the United States, and more than 100,000babies lost their lives each year, because obstetrics was not regarded asthe concern of the best doctors of the time. Dr. DeLee's object was tomake obstetrics a branch of medical science as progressive and as important as other departments of medical science. His success is attestedby the fact that in the great medical school of the University of Chicago,obstetrics and gynecology will rank with the departments of surgery andmedicine.Dr. DeLee's first step was in February, 1895, when he opened a dispensary in four small rooms of a Maxwell Street tenement. Before theyear was over, 204 women had had the assistance of its service, and 52students and 12 physicians had received instruction in practical obstetrics. Before the third year of operation, there was a pressing demand formore room and for a hospital. In 1899 a house was rented for that purpose on Ashland Boulevard. It had a capacity of 13 beds; and when therent for the first month and the bills for repairs had been paid, there remained in the treasury just 61 cents; but from that time on, progresswas rapid, and public-spirited men and women of Chicago have assistedgenerously with their services and their money. The present hospital7576 THE UNIVERSITY RECORDbuilding, at 426 East Fifty-first Street, has 127 beds, with fifteen morefor isolation cases in the Mothers' Aid Pavilion. Three free dispensariesare also operated by the Hospital. Since the opening of the first dispensary in Maxwell Street, the dispensary service has treated 69,242mothers and babies in their own home, and cared for 19,795 gynecologicpatients. In the Hospital, 28,735 babies have been born, and 10,004 obstetric and gynecologic cases have been treated there. Service is withoutregard to race and sect, and also without regard to ability to pay. Thereare three classes of treatment available: free, part-pay, and full pay;but all receive the same consideration and service. To persons of moderate means, the Hospital has been of particular value, for it affords thosemothers of families having modest incomes facilities nowhere else available.The Chicago Lying-in Hospital is unique in the fact that it is managed by women, although three men serve on its board of directors — thelegal representatives of the Hospital, and a bank president who is a member of the finance committee. In addition to the work done through theboard of directors there is that accomplished through the agency of theMothers' Aid Club, a loyal and effective group of 1,500 women who aredevoted to the interests of the institution. This club, in the past, has notonly built its own pavilion in connection with the Hospital and endowedtwo wards in the main building, but each year contributes a substantialsum toward the support of the Hospital and supplies half a millionsurgical dressings and all the hospital garments needed by the patients.The agreement of affiliation with the University of Chicago was madebecause the board of directors and the medical staff, consisting of Dr.Joseph B. DeLee, Dr. Frank Cary, and Dr. C. S. Bacon, believed thatsuch an association would mean an extension of the superb work done bythe Hospital during the past 32 years, and a guaranty that the presenthigh standards of its medical direction would be continued indefinitely.Not only will the genius of Dr. DeLee be perpetuated, but the institutionto which he has given his life will continue to advance because of thebenefits to be received from the laboratories of the University and thecontributions of its research men in obstetrics and gynecology.Accomplishment of the affiliation requires that the Hospital mustraise a sum of $1,000,000, in addition to the amount which the sale ofthe present hospital building will bring. The active campaign for fundswas begun on January 24 and has met a gratifying response. On March1, $340,000 was assured.CHICAGO LYING-IN HOSPITAL AND DISPENSARY 77THE UNIVERSITY AND THE CHICAGOLYING-IN HOSPITALAt the meeting of the Board of Trustees of the University held January 8, 1927, there was consummated an agreement by which the ChicagoLying-in Hospital and Dispensary and the University have become closely affiliated in order to continue and extend the beneficent service for humanity which has been maintained by the former organization since 1895.This work began only a few years after the founding of the Universityand only one year after the affiliation between it and Rush Medical College was effected, an arrangement that has been so profoundly influentialin extending the medical work of the University.The agreement between the two corporations provides not for unionbut for affiliation, an arrangement which unquestionably promises greaterefficiency for each. The agreement is based upon the common purposeof the organizations: "the improvement of the teaching and the practiceof obstetrics and gynecology and the advancement of knowledge" in thesefields. The agreement sets forth that the Hospital, that is, the corporation, will provide out of its funds on or before January 1, 1929, hospitalbuildings on University land, such buildings to conform to the most modern requirements for a maternity hospital, both as regards the structureand its equipment. The main building, to be erected not far to the westof the University's medical buildings, will be designated the "ChicagoLying-in Hospital." This hospital will contain about 120 beds for obstetric cases, a portion of them to be available for teaching, with everypossible provision for care of patients and of the hospital and teachingstaff. There will be built also a separate "Mothers' Aid Pavilion" for theisolation of infected cases and for gynecological cases.The Hospital in general will have control of, and responsibility for,hospital service, care of patients, and management and maintenance ofthe hospital buildings and grounds. It will establish and maintain theinternal organization of the Hospital according to the most efficient andmodern methods of hospital management. The internal organization,however, is to be subject to the approval of the University. The administrative staff will be appointed by the Hospital upon the nomination ofthe University. The Hospital will pay all costs of all services except theprofessional services of the medical staff.The University will appoint the professional staff of the Hospital andof its outlying branches and dispensaries without cost to the Hospital.This staff will consist of members of the teaching corps of the Depart-78 THE UNIVERSITY RECORDment of Obstetrics and Gynecology of the University, and all residents,assistant residents, internes, and dispensary assistants.As the chief interest of the University is the opportunity for teachingwhich the hospitals will provide, the following portions of the agreementare printed practically in full :The professional staff will have the exclusive right to perform and direct professional services for patients within the hospital, provided, however, that any patient may, at her request, call into consultation any physician not a member of thestaff. The professional staff will have the full and exclusive rights consistent with thewelfare of the patient, to use all except private patients of such staff of the Hospital,for purposes of study and of teaching; private patients of the staff of the Hospitalwill be so used only when their express permission shall have been obtained.The University will pay all salaries for teaching members of the Department ofObstetrics and Gynecology, provided, however, that if the dispensaries of the Hospital shall be on a self-supporting basis, the salaries of dispensary assistants will be payable out of the excess of income over outgo, if any, of the dispensaries.The University will provide, without cost to the Hospital, all professional medical care of patients, including consultations by members of other departments of themedical schools and hospitals of the University, and including laboratory work incident to the care of such patients, provided, however, that the University will havethe right to make a reasonable charge to patients able to pay for such services. Nothing in the agreement is understood as denying the right of the individual members ofthe staff of the hospital to care for their own private patients in the hospital and tomake reasonable and customary charges therefor.The outlying dispensaries are to continue in operation, the University to have the same freedom in the utilization of clinical material forpurposes of investigation and clinical instruction as in the case of patients in the hospital buildings.In order to secure the proper co-ordination of all hospitals in thegroup of University clinics, all of the hospitals will be under the generaadministrative supervision of the Director of University Hospitals, oisome other officer exercising similar powers, whom the University wilappoint. The University will have adequate representation on the Boarcof Directors of the Hospital. The agreement also provides for a lease oUniversity property for hospital purposes in order to carry forward thobjects of the agreement.During the time necessary for carrying out the building program coi]templated by the agreement, the Hospital will give the University ever;reasonable opportunity of making use of the present facilities of the Ho<pital in its present location, for the development of its Department cObstetrics and Gynecology and for the inauguration of teaching and irvestigation by the department.HARRISON B. BARNARDRecently Elected Trustee of the UniversityNEW TRUSTEES OF THEUNIVERSITYIn the year 1926 the fundamental Articles of Incorporation of theUniversity, commonly referred to as the "charter," were amended, andthe number of Trustees was increased from twenty-five to thirty, the proportion of Baptists and non-Baptists being maintained meanwhile. Fourof these proposed additional Trustees have been elected. The electionof Mr. Sewell L. Avery was reported in the January number of the University Record. At the meeting of the Board held February 10, 1927,three additional Trustees were chosen. Two of these three are alumni,making nine (including one graduate of the Old University) members ofthe Board who were former students of the University of Chicago. Theelection of these new Trustees adds more than numbers to the presentmembership. Each has demontrated his fitness for the service to education for which he has been selected. Experienced men of affairs, theywill bring to the University's counsels a reputation for good judgmentand experience of a practical sort.HARRISON B. BARNARDMr. Harrison B. Barnard was graduated from the University withthe degree A.B. in the class of 1895. He was born in Seville, Ohio, in1872. His residence is in Engiewood, Chicago. He is head of a well-established business of building contracting. At present he is constructing the group of buildings at the corner of Fifty-eighth Street and University Avenue to be occupied by the Chicago Theological Seminary (Congregational), affiliated with the University. This group includes theprominent tower named after Victor Lawson, whose noble bequest madepossible the expansion of the Seminary's building project. Mr. Barnardwas an active member of the building committee which had in charge theerection of the modern skyscraper clubhouse of the Union League Club.He is a vice-president and director of the Builders and Manufacturers Mutual Casualty Company. His social and philanthropic activities are evidenced by his membership in the Y.M.C.A. hotel board, in that of the798o THE UNIVERSITY RECORDBeverly Country Club, and in that of the governors of the Union LeagueClub, not to record other affiliations. He is a member of the EnglewoodBaptist Church.FRANK McNAIRWhen, under the leadership of the late President Burton and withthe guidance of a committee of the Board of Trustees, a widespread effort was made to develop the resources of the University, the co-operationand help of the alumni were distinct assets — assets of inspiration andassets in money. In this movement among the most helpful in promotingthe success which eventually crowned the labors of the loyal alumni wasMr. Frank McNair, a member of the class of 1903, now elected one ofthe new Trustees of his alma mater. One who was associated with him inthis and previous efforts recently wrote: "He has long been known as oneof the most dependable of alumni workers and it was under his chairmanship that the Alumni Council began to do its most effective work. He putit on a dependable basis of regular meetings and careful adherence tobusiness principles, which it had theretofore lacked. In addition, heheaded the first alumni drive which resulted in securing more than $100,-000 for endowment funds owned by the alumni, which put the alumni ona self-supporting, self-respecting, and independent basis."Mr. McNair was born in Greenvillage, Pennsylvania, January 8,1 88 1. He attended public school, later the Chambersburg (Pennsylvania)Academy, and eventually was matriculated at the University, whencehe was graduated with the degree of Ph.B. Immediately after graduation he was employed by the Harris Trust and Savings Bank, in whichinstitution he has steadily advanced until in 1920 he was made vice-president. He is a member of the Board of Trustees of Rush Medical College.He lives near the University.Mr. McNair believes in the gospel of outdoor activity and is a member of two country clubs. He is also a member of the Quadrangle, University, Attic, and Mid-day clubs. His intimate knowledge of investmentand banking affairs will have scope for usefulness as he assumes the newtrust.EUGENE M. STEVENSThe University had long had close relations with the Corn ExchangeBank, which eventually was merged into the Illinois Merchants TrustCompany. On February 4, 1927, Mr. Eugene M. Stevens was electedpresident of the latter bank. In 190 1 he organized the investment firm ofFRANK McNAIRRecently Elected Trustee of the UniversityEUGENE M. STEVENSRecently Elected Trustee of the UniversityNEW TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY SiEugene M. Stevens & Company, of Minneapolis, having been engagedin different business enterprises prior to that time. In 191 7 he came toChicago as vice-president of the Illinois Trust and Savings Bank, andafter its merger with the Merchants Loan and Trust Company was elected president of the bank thus constituted — the Illinois Merchants TrustCompany. He is a director of the Diamond Match Company and of Wilson '& Company.Mr. Stevens is a man of wide sympathies as well as a man of business. He loves art, plays golf, and enjoys the thrill of a spinning fishing-rod reel. When in Minneapolis he was interested in civic and philanthropic enterprises, and was one of the original members of the Board ofDirectors of the Minneapolis Symphony Orchestral Association, stateY.M.C.A. committee, and welfare boards. He is a member of the Chicago,Attic, Glen View, and Minneapolis clubs and of the Recess Club of NewYork. Like three of his fellow-Trustees, he lives in Evanston.All these new Trustees surely will become useful members of a Boardwhich one of its members has described as a fraternity as well as a unionof business men devoted to the progress of the University.THE NEW DIRECTOR OF LIBRA-RIES-M. LLEWELLYN RANEYThe late President Burton, it may be remembered, was appointedDirector of University Libraries in 1910, an office he filled with conspicuous usefulness until his lamented death. He planned the building, theWilliam Rainey Harper Library; he practically organized the staff; hesuperintended its activities; he directed the seemingly interminable taskof recataloguing the library, the work so efficiently carried out by thepresent Acting Director, Mr. J. C. M. Hanson. When it became necessary to find a successor to the only Director who ever had presided overthe libraries, a committee of members of the University faculties turnedto Johns Hopkins Library, where McKendree Llewellyn Raney hadearned for himself a deserved reputation. The committee's investigationsled its members to recommend the appointment of Mr. Raney as Dr.Burton's successor, and he was elected at the meeting of the Board ofTrustees held January 13, 1927.Dr. Raney was born in Stanford, Kentucky, was graduated fromCentre College, Kentucky, in 1897, when twenty years of age, and subsequently received his Ph.D. from Johns Hopkins University in 1904.He taught the classics and then was appointed Assistant Librarian of hisalma mater, and in 1908 became Librarian.In university circles perhaps Dr. Raney is best known as the authorof the unique Gilman Hall Library plan. This can be best described asthe first apartment house among libraries. It is in form a hollow square,with stacks on the inside, and offices and seminar rooms on the outside,with a corridor between. The various subjects are so shelved as to fallimmediately opposite the departments concerned with them, at any givenlevel. Unusually generous working space for students is provided in thestacks. This means that on each floor the students of a subject, the booksthey are working in, their professors, and their seminar rooms are groupedtogether to form an apartment. The building can be controlled at asingle point. It has had marked influence on subsequent structures, noneof which, ever, any more, shows a closed stack.82McKENDREE LLEWELLYN RANEYRecently Appointed Director of University LibrariesTHE NEW DIRECTOR OF LIBRARIES 83Of this plan, the editor of the Library Journal has written as follows:The problem of the building for a university library has been solved in an original and very striking manner in connection with the new buildings of Johns HopkinsUniversity, where the library is to be a central feature of a splendid group of buildings on a noble and worthy site. Dr. Raney not only proposes to build from withinoutward, which is the proper way to build everything except monuments, but to startfrom the guiding thought of the seminar and its library as the nucleus or unit. Byclever development of this thought, he has worked out a scheme for a university library as a collection of special libraries, each of the latter in juxtaposition with the classroom or study-room for that subject. The result is something so new that the actual construction and operation of this library building will be watched with thegreatest interest, and possibly it will form a model for university libraries of the future here and abroad. The plans which we present in this number should be carefully studied by those who have to do with the development of library buildings foreducational institutions of any kind. When finished, Gilman Hall, in which is perpetuated the honored name of President Gilman, who was one of the participants inthe library conference of 1853, will be a place of pilgrimage to library visitors fromabroad, as well as of interest to American librarians.In two other directions, beside steady contribution to professionalperiodicals, Dr. Raney 's service has been of national character: first, inwar; and second, in Washington. In the great conflict, two importanttasks were assigned him. He was the first spokesman for the AmericanLibrary Association overseas. After a survey of the field, his plan ofbook service to the armed forces of the nation, on both land and sea, presented in person to General Pershing and Admiral Sims, was immediately accepted, and proper tonnage assigned. In the second place, hewas assigned by the State Department, War Trade, and Censorshipboards, in the name of the American Library Association, the task of arranging for the receipt, by educational institutions here, of appropriateenemy publications. His plan was accepted by the British and Frenchgovernments, when presented at their foreign offices, and so successfullydid this tonnage move, under government seal and his management, thatduring the armistice he was given complete power to examine shipmentsimpounded in foreign harbors and admit or exclude them, according tohis judgment. For this work he received high praise in Washington, andit is to that service our universities owe the continuity of their Germanperiodical files during the war period.In Washington, he has, for many years, been education's spokesmanbefore Congress in legislation concerning science and scholarship. Hemade the successful defense in the book sections when the present tariffact was being framed, and he is now engaged in warding off attacks onthe public's copyright privileges, while endeavoring to have the United84 THE UNIVERSITY RECORDStates qualify for membership in the International Copyright Union. Hehas taken a lively interest in the civic affairs of Baltimore, especially itsschool program and the effort to operate a zoning law.Dr. Raney will begin service at the University next October and willdevote the first period of his work to a thorough survey of the whole library situation. He comes to Chicago because of his conviction that, ofall educational institutions in the United States, the University of Chicago offers the best opportunity for outstanding accomplishment in his field.DR. FRANK BILLINGSTHE FRANK BILLINGS MEDICALCLINICThe following is an excerpt from a pamphlet recently issued by the Universityon the life and service of Dr. Frank Billings. The pamphlet is being used by thefriends of Dr. Billings in their endeavor to endow the Medical Clinic in the new hospital in his honor. This excerpt is printed in order that the many friends of Dr.Billings in the University community may learn of the proposed effort, which hasalready received significant approval.Dr. Billings' record as a public-spirited citizen of Chicago is a longone, and the important projects furthered by his efforts are many. Theyare concerned chiefly with medicine and medical education and withbringing about higher standards in these fields. The new Rush MedicalCollege, the enlarged and remodeled Presbyterian Hospital, the new Hospital and Medical School at the University of Chicago, the John Mc-Cormick Institute for Infectious Diseases, the Sprague Institute, all bearwitness to his vision and power of co-operation with others. The waryears also found him high in the medical councils of state and nation. -At the University of Chicago he will be remembered, not only forthese things, but also for his twenty-five years of service as Dean of theFaculty and Professor of Medicine at Rush, for his long efforts to raisethe standards of medical education and research, and for his great servicein making possible the development of the hospital on the Midway andthe medical school which adjoins it.HIS INTEREST IN MEDICAL SCIENCEHis first interest was in teaching, in better teaching; but it did notstop there. He realized that the practitioner of the future would need tobe well grounded in research method, would have to use instruments ofprecision, would want all the help which a scientific background couldgive. These things he wanted for others, "better than he had had them."And his interest in the advancement of medical science was not accidental. Indeed, his whole clinical success was founded on what was essentially a scientific method of careful inductions drawn from a minutestudy of facts. Further, he was himself an important contributor to thatscience.In the medical Hall of Fame at the University of Cincinnati the an-8586 THE UNIVERSITY RECORDcient Chinese physician, Huang-ti, heads the list of one hundred fiftynames. Frank Billings' name ends the roll, and it is there by virtue ofoutstanding performance in the field of clinical medicine. His principleof foci of infection in teeth and tonsils as causative factors in many obscure diseases shed a new light into regions where before were darknessand ignorance. He proved, what had before been vaguely suspected, thattonsils and teeth may be sources of infection for the whole body andthereby removed from the medical dictionary many diseases whose causeswere undefined. Through this principle the science of medicine made anew advance.DEVELOPMENTS OF 1917In 19 1 7 the city of Chicago was ready for a new advance in teaching and research in medicine. The old methods of part-time teachingand part-time research were inadequate. With hundreds of questionmarks facing students of disease in every field, it was no longer possiblefor practitioners merely "to practice the errors of their forefathers," orfor medical schools to pass on to each student the hoard of exact knowledge which had been accumulated in the past. The teaching of medicine,and the practice of medicine, must be vitalized by research methods; wemust have not only practitioners, but scientists in disease who use themethods of science, and who see in each new case a problem in the studyof disease phenomena. To this new need Frank Billings was alive.A plan was matured to build a great hospital on the Midway, closeto the scientific departments of the University, where all the co-operativeefforts of scientific knowledge could be brought to bear at one point onthe study of disease; where full-time teaching and research, founded onthe broad base of the exact sciences, could be brought to the cutting edgein the laboratories and wards of the hospital itself; where the studentmight grow, not only as the most effective of practitioners, but also intomembership in that scientifically minded community to which we oweall advances in the science of medicine.This opportunity for the city of Chicago to become one of the world'sleaders in medical education and research was to Dr. Billings, as to thecity, a challenge and a responsibility which could not be refused. Toomuch cannot be said for the energy and enthusiasm which he threw intothe work of raising the funds to assure this hospital and to make possiblethis leadership for Chicago. Suffice that he gave time unsparingly, contributed liberally himself, and was largely responsible for the successfuloutcome of the effort.THE FRANK BILLINGS MEDICAL CLINIC 87THE FRANK BILLINGS MEDICAL CLINICWith these facts in mind, it is understandable that when the proposal was made to name and endow the medical clinic in this hospital as"The Frank Billings Medical Clinic," the project received an enthusiasticresponse from Trustees and Faculty. With the same enthusiasm thisproject was met by the friends of Dr. Billings as the one most suitable tothe perpetuation of his name and influence in that field in which hisgreat work was done. They propose to endow in his honor the teachingand research activity in internal medicine, the field which has been and isnow foremost in his interest.The project seems highly appropriate. It is indeed a rare thing thata prophet is honored in his own land, in his own lifetime, and while thelove of his friends will still bring him satisfaction. It is a happy circumstance that those who honor him have an opportunity to make knowntheir regard for him while his personality is a living and moving forceamong them.THE SYMBOLIC SCULPTURE OFTHE UNIVERSITY CHAPELThe University Chapel, now under construction, is to be richlyadorned with sculptured figures. The great free-standing figures, whichare to form a frieze along the south gable, are not yet designed, but someof the demifigures, which are to adorn the exterior buttresses, have already been modeled.In the angles between the tops of the great buttresses, which separate the bays of the nave, will appear figures representing the Artist, thePhilosopher, the Scientist, and the Statesman, conceived in the ancientmanner and each attended by the symbols of his vocation. The greatbuttresses on the south front will be flanked near their summits with thefigures of the Evangelists — Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John — each bearing his traditional emblem, the Angel, the Lion, the Ox, and the Eagle.At the spring of the arch of the great south window, there will betwo demifigures, representing St. Monica, the mother of Augustine,symbolizing devotion, and St. Cecilia, symbolizing music. The graceof these figures will somewhat relieve the austerity of the most of thesculpture of this facade. The pairs of figures below in the jambs of thegreat window will represent the movement of the Te Deum, the GloriousCompany of the Apostles, the Goodly Fellowship of the Prophets, andthe Noble Army of Martyrs, while above them the great frieze of figureswill represent the march of religion from Abraham and Moses throughthe Hebrew prophets, Zoroaster, and Plato, to Christ at the summit, thencontinuing through the Apostles, Fathers, Saints, and Reformers, endingwith Luther and Calvin.To bring out our own continuity with this great religious past, theeast and west doorways will support figures representative of modernAmerican university life, including at least two of our departed Presidents— Harper and Burton.Photographs of the plaster models of two groups of these sculpturedfigures are reproduced in accompanying illustrations.88THE PHILOSOPHER IIP KTHE STATESMANST. MARK THE ARTISTSCULPTURE FIGURES ON THE UNIVERSITY CHAPEL(Modeled by U. H. Ellerhusen)5lauH>aaHcHy,oaHoO¦S)aooiH;/".¦THE GRADUATE STUDENTS5CLUBHOUSEIn 1924 the deans of the Graduate Schools were casting about forsome means whereby to effect a closer association of graduate students ofthe various departments of the University, something to correspond to theGraduate Women's Club, but to include the whole graduate student body,men and women. Miss Marion Talbot, the late Miss Leila Houghteling,who had secured the signatures of many hundreds of graduate students toa petition requesting the formation of a graduate students' club and aclubhouse, and others began a movement, heartily approved by Presidents Burton and Mason, which subsequently resulted in securing bothclub and clubhouse.It so happened that at this time the University authorities heard thatthe Chicago Theological Seminary intended to have the large house atFifty-eighth Street and University Avenue destroyed in order to makeroom for a new and larger building. As a result of negotiations an agreement was reached by which the University received the house as a gift,provided it would move it to another location. This was done and thebuilding now is located at 5727 University Avenue, next south of theQuadrangle Club.In the fall of 1926, after meetings of University fellows with President Mason and Dean Laing, an active Fellows' Club was formed, withMr. D. L. Wickens as its first president. Following further efforts a permanent graduate council was elected by the graduate students at a massmeeting held on October 19 in Harper Library.By November 15, 1926, the first Graduate Council was ready tofunction. It consisted of ten members, to be replaced or thereafterelected annually, of whom two are representatives of the departments ofthe Graduate School of Arts and Literature, two of the Ogden GraduateSchool of Science, and one each of the following professional schools:Divinity, Medicine, Law, Education, Commerce and Administration, andSocial Service Administration.The Graduate Council, continuing the work of the temporary council, secured student opinion in regard to the new clubhouse. After havingthoroughly discussed and formulated these opinions and suggestions,89go THE UNIVERSITY RECORDmembers of the council presented them to the Faculty Committee of Ten,in charge of the new clubhouse. The Faculty Committee finally presentedits recommendations to the University authorities. The project and mostof the plans submitted by the Graduate Council were approved by theUniversity authorities, who voted to grant a sum sufficient to cover thecost of the initial alterations and repairs and in addition an endowmentfund to pay for a large part of the annual expenditures.The house, which was built by Professor William Gardner Hale, is sowell adapted to its new uses as a clubhouse that it seems almost to havebeen planned for the purpose. It has been newly equipped and furnishedthroughout. The first floor contains a reception hall, a lounge, a parlor,a special parlor for women, a kitchen, and an office. The second floor isgiven over entirely to dining purposes, with dumb-waiter service fromthe kitchen below. It provides accommodations for approximately 120persons at one time, including one large dining-room and three smallerdining-rooms. The third floor contains a library and study room, twocommittee or conference rooms, and a living-room and bedroom for thecaretaker and his wife. There is a large room with high ceiling in thebasement for use as a billiard room.The Graduate Clubhouse was opened February 23, 1927, by a reception to which all graduate students were invited. Nearly 600 personsattended the reception and were enthusiastic over the attractiveness andthe suitability of the building for is clubhouse purpose. Beginning February 24, 1927, luncheons and dinners were to be served each day exceptSunday.All graduate students are eligible to use the clubhouse without feesor dues of any sort. It is the confident hope that the clubhouse will serveto develop greater acquaintance among the graduate students of the University and provide them a headquarters both for dining and for socialpurposes which will contribute much to their happiness.J2_3u3'A -3W 3Q °H §t/j ga eNEW PHASES OF CHAMBERLIN'SPLANETESIMAL HYPOTHESISIn his last annual report to the Carnegie Institution of Washington,just issued, and in a recent address before the Geological Society of America, Professor Emeritus Thomas Chrowder Chamberlin applied the principles of the planetesimal hypothesis to the growth of the earth and tothe explanation of its peculiarities, of which he gave a long list. Amongthese are two great groups that have long stood without satisfactory explanation. The first group lies back of the distinction between the "landhemisphere" and the "water hemisphere." The "land hemisphere" is thelighter and more protrusive, while the "water hemisphere" is denser anddisposed to recede into basins, into which the larger part of the water-mantle is gathered. The center of the earth's gravity is adjusted to thesedifferences and emphasizes them by adjusting the water-mantle to them.But strange as these differences of constitution and form on such a largescale may seem, stranger still is the fact that these hemispheres do notcoincide with the rotational hemispheres, that have an equatorial bulgeand polar flattening. Their axis seems to lie in the ecliptic (the plane ofthe earth's revolution) and so to be at an angle of sixty-odd degrees tothe present axis of rotation. Besides this strange obliquity of axis, thesestructural hemispheres have their bulkiest part in the mid-latitudes of oneof the hemispheres and their densest part in the mid-latitudes of the otherhemisphere (instead of being simply bulged at their equator), and theyhave other strange features which make them very peculiar.The second group of peculiarities is equally singular but very different from this first group. They seem to be built upon the first group un-conformably, as though there were a change in the mode of growth in themidst of the growing process. This second group includes the continentalembossments and the oceanic basins. These are arranged in north-southpairs and alternate with one another, as, for example, North and SouthPacific, North and South America, North and South Atlantic. In theOrient the pairs have grown together, and that adds a peculiarity to beexplained. In the large view, however, the pairing is quite marked, andthe alternation of the pairs gives the earth a north-south ribbed aspect.In his recent studies Professor Chamberlin has tested the planetesi-9192 THE UNIVERSITY RECORDmal hypothesis of the earth's origin by following it logically to see whether it would lead to all these peculiar features and elucidate them.The planetesimal hypothesis starts from the very simple assumptionthat a star approached our sun near enough to stimulate, by tidal action,the solar eruptivity and projectivity sufficiently to cause it to projectsuitable small masses of sun-substance so far toward the passing starthat it drew them in the direction of its own motion and gave them revo-lutional motion about the sun. The recent studies of Professor Chamberlin have made it clear that these projections would rotate on their ownaxes much as a shell does when shot from a rifled cannon. This rotationwould aid in the dispersion of the bolts thus shot out into scattered isolated little bodies revolving about the sun like minute planets (henceplanetesiriials), leaving only a small residue of the heaviest and slowestof the bolt-material still under the control of its own gravity. The scattering not only involved the cooling of the dispersed matter, but gave itan orbital state. Practically all gases were dispersed, because their molecules would be too light and too swift to be held under control by thebolt or its residue. A further conclusion of Dr. Chamberlin is that the recollection of these small bodies in orbits, after the dispersing process wasover, would be too slow to heat the earth to a molten condition exceptperhaps at the little spots where the small bodies fell, and these of coursewould quickly cool. The earth would therefore grow up very slowly in asolid state, and so the effects of the growth would be permanent except assuch solid structures would modify themselves as they grew. This is akey point, for if the globe were liquid the differences would disappear andthe whole globe be very symmetrical and free from peculiarities. Thecrux of the studies of Professor Chamberlin, therefore, lies in the different rates and types of growth and in their fitness to explain the puzzlingpeculiarities actually presented by the adult earth.The way in which the earth-bolt was shot out gave it a rotation inthe plane of its own revolution, the ecliptic, and this explains at once whythe axis of the first stage of growth that formed the oblique structural(land and water) hemispheres lay in the ecliptic. But why was the earlygrowth composed of heavy material at one end of the axis and light atthe other? Professor Chamberlin finds the explanation in the drag effectbetween the escaping earth-bolt and the adjacent matter of the sun.Some such drag effect was inevitable under such conditions. Drag effectsof this kind are shown in the outrolling-inrolling motions in volcanic eruptions commonly known as "cauliflower-like" motions, and in "boiling"clouds on a hot, moist day. This drag effect caused the outer part of theNEW PHASES OF PLANETESIMAL HYPOTHESIS 93bolt to fall into the rear and run in toward the core forming within thebolt and favor its growth. The outrunning movement at the front endwas obviously less favorable to growth. At the same time there was assortment and aggregation. The converging currents were likely to causethe heavy, less elastic constituents, particularly the metallic ones, to weld,and take courses more directly toward the core. The lighter, more elasticand brittle constituents would rebound and be less likely to hit the nearend of the core. So, too, they were more likely to bound and roll on ifthe stroke was oblique. Thus one end of the core would have more heavymaterial than the other, and this peculiarity is explained.This leaves the change of axis to be explained. The first growthcame mainly from the heavy, more or less metallic aggregates that didnot escape from the earth-bolt but remained as a swarm. As these wereexhausted, the growth came mainly from the plane tesimals, and the ingathering of these shifted the axis toward a position at right angles totheir plane of revolution, but they were exhausted before the position atright angles was fully reached; hence the present obliquity of the axis.At first the earth would be unable to hold an atmosphere, but whena good working atmosphere had been collected and had developed dryareas and humid areas, there was, according to Professor Chamberlin, anew differentiation of growth, due to the selective action of moisture incollecting on the planetesimal dust and bringing it down in the. humidareas more than in the dry areas. All the planetesimals then had toplunge through the atmosphere, and in doing this their outer parts wouldbe vaporized and soon after cooled to a fine dust. This fine dust would notfully settle in the dry, turbulent areas, particularly the "permanenthighs," but would float until brought down in the humid regions wheredust collects moisture and is brought to the ground. In this way thehumid tracts grew most and became continents,* and their average material would be lightest, while in the dry regions the growth would bescantier and heavier and basins would be formed. As the atmospheremoved between the warm and cold regions, the differences in growth dueto it took on a meridional ribbed aspect, as the pairs of continents andsea-troughs are seen to do.LEILA HOUGHTELING1889— 1927The University opened the Winter Quarter of 1927 in the shadow ofa community loss. Leila Houghteling, one of the younger members ofthe Faculty, died on New Year's day at the early age of thirty-seven.Miss Houghteling was born in Chicago, April 24, 1889, the daughter ofthe late James L. Houghteling and Lucretia (Peabody) Houghteling. Shecame of an old Chicago family, well known through three generations forthe generosity and public spirit of its members.She was educated at Miss Spence's School in New York and at BrynMawr College, where she was graduated in 191 1. Almost immediatelyafter she left college she became interested in social work and the challenging life of the great city which she loved and to which she belonged.She became a student in the old School of Civics and Philanthropy (nowthe School of Social Service Administration of the University), and thenworked for the Woman's. City Club, when Miss Amelia Sears was its civicsecretary. In 1924 she took the civil service examinations and became amember of the staff of the newly created County Bureau of Public Welfare, working again under Miss Sears, who had become director of thenew bureau which had been established by the reform administrationwhen the late Alexander A. McCormick was president of the CountyBoard. She became especially interested in the great county poorhouseat Oak Forest, where James Mullenbach was acting as superintendentand trying to humanize the gaunt and cheerless place. Later, when politics changed the character of the county work, she was appointed a probation officer of the juvenile court, again as a result of a civil service examination, and she served for nearly five years in this capacity. Shegrew increasingly interested in the work of the United Charities andfinally became superintendent of Haymarket, one of the largest and poorest of the West Side districts. Later she became a member of the boardof the Charities and served for a time as its secretary. She was one of thefounders of the Bryn Mawr Summer School for Working Women; shewas a member of the board of the Immigrants' Protective League and shewas identified with the work of the Chicago Council of Social Agencies.She was a charter member of the Chicago branch of the American Asso-94THE LATE LEILA HOUGHTELINGLEILA HOUGHTELING 95ciation of Social Workers and served on. several of its committees. Shewas an active and devoted member of the Young Women's Christian Association and was chairman last year of its industrial committee. She wasalso identified with the work of the American Association of UniversityWomen and spoke last year at a special meeting on "The Road to Research," setting out the opportunities and the need of a research fund tohelp the younger women who were devoting themselves to research work.This brief chronicle of her professional social work gives a very inadequate picture of her varied interests and her intelligent and sympathetic understanding of the social problems with which society has todeal. It was perhaps her instinct for thoroughness and her desire to "seethings whole" that led her to the University in the autumn of 1922. Shewanted time, she said, to "think things through," and she soon became aserious and interested student, taking work in political science, economics, and law, as well as the social service courses. She acquired new interests, but she lost none of the old. She neither forgot her old friends norlost interest in their work. She seemed to find the active work more interesting as she saw it in its larger relationships.From 1922 until the time of her death she was connected with theUniversity, first as a graduate student and fellow and later as a memberof the Faculty of the Graduate School of Social Service Administrationand Dean in the Colleges of Arts, Literature, and Science. She took thePh.D. degree in March, 1926, submitting as her thesis an admirable pieceof research on the "Income and Standards of Living of the Unskilled Laborer in Chicago." This study is being published by the University Pressas one of the "Local Community Research Series," and will appear thisspring.She had acquired by really laborious work a sure and fine masteryof her field, and she had entered upon her work on the University Faculty full of enthusiasm and interest for the possibilities of service that itoffered. In an issue of the Social Service Review, there appeared an articleon "The Budget of the Unskilled Laborer," which shows her clear understanding of one of the most fundamental of all social problems and herfrank and direct method of work.Although Miss Houghteling had only recently begun her work as instructor and dean, she had been very prominent in the life and work ofthe graduate schools for the last four and a half years and had mademany warm friends, not only in the School of Social Service, but amongstudents and members of the Faculty in the social science departmentsas well. She had been president of the Graduate Women's Club and she96 THE UNIVERSITY RECORDwas one of the organizers of the present Graduate Club, which includesboth men and women, and the Fellows' Club. She felt keenly the lack ofopportunities for social life among the graduate students and the intellectual growth that comes with it, and she was one of the most activemembers of the group of graduate students who petitioned in the year1923-24 for a clubhouse for graduate students. She came over from theNorth Side on a bitter cold and stormy day in the winter of 1924 to layon President Burton's desk a petition signed by more than seven hundred graduate men and women, asking that the University set aside somebuilding with clubhouse facilities for the exclusive use of graduate students. Those who knew her will not forget her great delight last summerwhen she returned from a three months' vacation in Europe to find thatthe Graduate Clubhouse was almost an accomplished fact.At a memorial meeting of the Chicago Branch of the American Association of Social Workers, of which she was a charter member, Mr.Joel D. Hunter, of the United Charities, spoke of her dominating characteristic as sincerity. He thought her the most sincerely disinterestedperson he had ever known. Miss Breckinridge, speaking for the University at the same meeting, thought a love of truth had been one of hermost shining qualities. She was fundamentally honest in her thinkingand her writing as well as in her personal relationships.At the same meeting an attempt was made to set out in the form ofa resolution some of the qualities which so endeared her to her friendsand co-workers. This resolution, which was made a part of the record ofthe Association, is given below:We will delight to hold in memory her generous and sympathetic companionship, the objective and courageous way in which she attacked both theoretical questions and definite and arduous tasks, her keen and refreshing humor, and her patience and courage in the face of difficult situations.We deplore especially the interruption of the new work in teaching and researchon which she had just entered, for which she had so amply qualified herself, to whichher friends and associates looked forward with confidence as offering peculiar opportunities for leadership in programs of social reconstruction.We hope that through some adequate record those who come after can knowof all these achievements and of her swift response to need, whether the need was forpersonal service or material help.On the day after Miss Houghteling's death, the Chicago Tribune, inan article describing her work, spoke of her as the "Friend of the Friendless," and on the following day the Chicago Evening Post printed as itsleading editorial the following tribute :LEILA HOUGHTELING 97Life was a beautiful thing for Miss Leila Houghteling, who died last Saturdayevening after a brief illness. She had made it beautiful by kindness. She had won thename of the "Friend of the Friendless" by her unselfish devotion to the cause of thosewho needed friends. Daughter of one of Chicago's first families, born to wealth andluxury, she had given herself unsparingly to the service of others. Ministering withunderstanding sympathy to the poor of this big city, Miss Houghteling found theworth and the wonder of life in seeking to make it richer and happier for others.There will be many to grieve over her going, and the grief is the more poignant because the years of her life were comparatively few, and youth was still hers, and thespirit for service still strong in her breast. But she had made those years golden. Shehad stored them with treasure incalculable. And the path she chose to follow is thepath which gives to life a charm and significance, which brings to the soul a sense ofsatisfaction such as is to be had in no other way.Those who take this path are not found complaining that life is "barren and futile" ; they do not grow weary of it. They have discovered where its real and abidingvalues lie. They have learned the secret of living joyously. "Friend of the Friendless" — it is a lovely and a great name of be remembered by.The University of Chicago is proud of Leila Houghteling, and thereare many who will treasure the memories of the years she spent here;but our pride is shared in all humility with the great city which gave herthe wide opportunity for service that she used so gloriously.THE HARRIS FOUNDATION ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONSBy QUINCY WRIGHT, Executive SecretaryThe Norman Wait Harris Memorial Foundation was established atthe University of Chicago on January 27, 1923, through a gift of $150,-000 by the heirs of Norman Wait Harris and Emma Gale Harris, Norman Wait Harris, who died on July 15, 1916, had distinguished himselfin the business and banking life of Chicago for many years; had takenan interest in the cultural institutions of the city, to several of which hehad given large benefactions; and had been for years a member of theInternational Committee of the Y.M.C.A., a contributor to foreign missionary work, and a traveler in Europe, Africa, and other parts of theworld. It is thus entirely appropriate that a foundation with the objectof "promoting a better understanding on the part of American citizensof the other peoples of the world" should be founded in his honor. Hischildren, Albert W. Harris, Norman Dwight Harris, Mrs. Pearl HarrisMacLean, Hay den B. Harris, and Stanley G. Harris, have been equallyinterested in this objective and have continued to take a helpful interest in the work of the foundation during the succeeding years. NormanDwight Harris is himself professor of diplomacy at Northwestern University, while other members of the family, through their connection withthe Harris Trust and Savings Bank and its varied interests in international finance, have come in contact with problems of international relations.DEMOCRACY AND FOREIGN RELATIONSIt is coming to be recognized that the problem of adjusting democracy to the control of foreign relations is a matter of no small difficulty.The few who in times past have controlled foreign policy at least knewthe conditions within the countries with which they dealt and the realattitudes of the governments of those countries. Thus, while they mighthave selfish or imperialistic motives, they at least were able to estimatethe probable consequences of policies which they might propose. Withpopular control, however, the case is quite different. The masses of thepeople have little direct knowledge of foreign countries and of foreignstatesmen. They are dependent upon sources of information which may98NORMAN WAIT HARRISHARRIS FOUNDATION ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS 99be biased; thus they may insist upon policies with little knowledge of theconsequences. For this reason it is of major importance that peopleshould know the facts, be forewarned against propaganda and demagogy,and be prepared to support policies which may be safely pursued. TheFoundation is designed to meet precisely this condition. The letter ofgift contains the following statement :It is apparent that a knowledge of world-affairs was never of more importanceto Americans than today. The spirit of distrust which pervades the Old World is notwithout its effect upon our own country. How to combat this disintegrating tendency is a problem worthy of the most serious thought. Perhaps one of the best methods is the promotion of a better understanding of other nations through wisely directed educational methods.The purpose of the Foundation shall be the promotion of a better understandingon the part of American citizens of the other peoples of the world, thus establishinga basis for improved international relations and a more enlightened world-order. Theaim shall always be to give accurate information, not to propagate opinion.THE ANNUAL INSTITUTESThe administration of the Foundation has been put into the handsof a committee of the Faculty representative of the various social science departments, appointed by the President of the University. Thiscommittee has thought that the objects of the Foundation could best beachieved by annual institutes at which some phase of international relations of current interest would be discussed by persons thoroughly familiar with the conditions and the state of public opinion in the area ofthe world under consideration. It was decided that these institutes shouldhave the dual objective of reaching the general public and leaders ofpublic opinion. Thus, on the one hand they have included lectures atMandel Hall to which the public is invited and which are subsequentlypublished in the series of Harris Foundation lectures by the Universityof Chicago Press; and on the other hand provision has been made forround-table conferences to which a limited number of educators and leaders of public opinion have been invited. It is expected that the personsattending these round tables will already have a considerable background and that a more detailed discussion of the current problems willthus be made possible.Three lecturers from abroad have usually been invited to the institutes, which have taken place in the latter part of June and the first twoweeks of July. At the round tables, representatives of the interested departments at Washington and scholars familiar with the subject haveIOO THE UNIVERSITY RECORDparticipated, as well as the visiting lecturers and invited guests fromChicago.The first institute, in the summer of 1924, dealt with problems ofEurope; and the lectures were given by Sir Valentine Chirol, of England,Professor Charles De Visscher, of Belgium, and Professor Herbert Kraus,of Germany. At the second institute, in the summer of 1925, lectures onFar Eastern problems were given by Count Michimasa Soyeshima, of theJapanese House of Peers; President P. W. Kuo of Southeastern University, Nanking, China; H. G. W. Woodhead, C.B.E., editor of the Pekingand Tientsin Times; Mr. Julean Arnold, American commercial attacheat Peking; and Mr. Henry Kittredge Norton, who has traveled in Chinaand Siberia. The third institute, on Mexican problems, during the summer of 1926, offered the opportunity to hear Honorable Jose Vasconcelos,former Secretary of Education of Mexico; the Honorable Manual Gamio,former director of the Bureau of Anthropology and subsecretary of Education of Mexico; the Honorable Moises Saenz, subsecretary of Education of Mexico; and Professor Herbert I. Priestly, of the University ofCalifornia. In November of 1926 a special course of lectures on Indiawas given by Sir Frederick Whyte, first president of the legislative assembly of India.THE INSTITUTE OF THE SUMMER OF 1 92 7During the summer of 1927 the institute will be devoted to problems of the British Empire. Among the lecturers will be Sir Cecil Hurst,the legal adviser of the British Foreign Office; Sir W. Harrison Moore,of the University of Melbourne and formerly legal adviser of the Australian Government; A. W. Dafoe, editor of the Manitoba Free Pressand a leading interpreter of Canadian opinion; and the Honorable Timothy P. Smiddy, Minister of the Irish Free State at Washington. Theinstitute will consider the present structure of the British Empire and thestatus of the dominions as recognized by the Imperial Conference of lastfall. The particular problems and divergencies in the point of view of thevarious dominions will also be considered, as will the peculiar problemscaused by the independent membership of the dominions in the League ofNations and the independent diplomatic relations entertained by someof them with the United States and other countries. The close relationsof the United States with Canada make these problems of especial interest and importance to Americans. The institute will extend from June 2 1to July 8; and, as in the past, the lectures will be given at Mandel Hallat four-thirty in the afternoon. The lectures are open to the public.THE LATE NATHANIEL BUTLERDEATH OF NATHANIEL BUTLERThe death of Dr. Nathaniel Butler on March 3, 1927, closed the active career of one of the men who came to the University at the very beginning of its history. He remained through the administration of threeof its Presidents and was one of those who under President Mason was anassistant, not only by reason of official appointment, but by his ever-present willingness to help. He could not but be helpful, for his wholelife was dominated by the spirit of friendliness and co-operation — twocharacteristics among the many which endeared him both to Universitycolleagues and students and to all with whom he came in contact. Hisfriends were scattered from his beloved Maine to the Pacific and the Gulf.Mr. Butler's first connection with the University was with the University Extension Division in 1892, of which he became Director in 1894.Elected president of Colby College in 1895, he remained in Waterville,Maine, its seat, until 1901, when he returned to the University as Professor of Education and Director of Co-operation with Secondary Schools.Subsequently he served as Dean of the College of Education (1905-9),as Examiner for the Colleges (1910-11), as Director of the UniversityLecture Association (1912-23), and as Dean of Uniyersity College(1916-23). He retired from instructional service and from the moreburdensome activities of administration in 1924, at which time PresidentBurton called him to be an assistant to the President, the duties of whichposition he carried until his physical weakness compelled him to relinquish most of them about January 1, 1927. It was like him to be busyuntil his voice faltered and his heart ceased effectively to function.Like President Judson, whose death followed that of Mr. Butler, thelatter was the son of a Baptist minister. He was born during his father'spastorate in Eastport, Maine, on May 22, 1853. He was graduated fromColby College in 1873, his alma mater subsequently conferring upon himthe honorary degrees of D.D. and LL.D. He was ordained to the Baptistministry but never became pastor of a church. He taught in several institutions in Chicago and vicinity before he accepted a professorship ofrhetoric and English literature in the old University of Chicago. Therehe remained until it closed its doors in 1886, when he was called to theUniversity of Illinois. He taught at Champaign until the new Universityof Chicago promptly recognized his ability. He gave to other institutions101102 THE UNIVERSITY RECORDof learning the benefit of his experience and of his tactful methods of administration. This aid was extended to numerous secondary schools:while he was University director of co-operation with this group of institutions and while he was a member of the boards of trustees of MonticelloSeminary at Godfrey, Illinois, and of Frances Shimer School at MountCarroll, Illinois. Of the latter board he was president. He was a frequentcontributor to educational journals. He was heartily welcomed as a representative of the University by alumni groups and by innumerable other audiences. He was a delightful toastmaster. He was twice married,his first wife dying in 1902. He leaves a widow, five sons, and a daughter. Funeral services were held in the Hyde Park Baptist Church onMarch 5, 1927. His body was cremated.Mr. Butler combined the kindliness, sweetness, and friendliness ofa Christian gentleman with the ability and efficiency of the teacher. Headministered the tasks entrusted to him without the hardness and severity which at times characterize efficient men. It was always easy "to dobusiness" with him. An every ready smile, a good story, an apt quotation,or a remembered incident, one or all, oiled the bearings of interofficedrudgery. There are many — colleagues, students, friends, although allmay be included under the last designation — who mourn the passing ofNathaniel Butler.Funeral services for Dr. Butler were held in the Hyde Park BaptistChurch on Saturday afternoon, March 5, 1927. Rev. Norris L. Tibbettswas in charge. Addresses were delivered by Vice-President F. C. Woodward, Dean Shailer Mathews, and Dr. Charles W. Gilkey. These threetributes to Dr. Butler's life and character are here reproduced:DR. BUTLER AND THE UNIVERSITYBy Frederic C. WoodwardDr. Butler was identified with the University of Chicago from itsfoundation. Professor of rhetoric and English literature in the Old University, and thereafter for six years a professor in the University of Illinois, he joined Dr. Harper's small but distinguished company of scholarsin 1892, the first year of the new University. He was then but thirty-nine years of age, and except for an interval of six years, from 1895 to1 90 1, during which he was the president of his alma mater, Colby College, he devoted the service of the long remainder of his life to the University of Chicago. As Associate Professor of English in the extensiondivision, as Director of the extension division, as Professor of education,as Dean of the College of Education, as Examiner in the colleges, as Di-DEATH OF NATHANIEL BUTLER 103rector of the University Lecture Association, as Dean of University College, and as Assistant to the President— in all these various capacities heplayed a worthy and an important part in the building of the institutionwhich was so near to his heart. He saw it grow from small things togreat; its growth was a source of the deepest happiness to him. TheUniversity is to him, as to his fellow-pioneers, a noble monument.My own intimate acquaintance with Dr. Butler began when I joinedthe administrative staff less than a year ago. Prior to that time, his widereputation as an educator, as a witty and effective public speaker, andas a friendly, warm-hearted man was familiar to me. Since that time Ilearned of the unaffected modesty, the inborn courtesy, the kindly humor,the generous loyalty which united to make him so lovable a man. Perhaps his most salient characteristic, at least as revealed to me, was hisself-sacrificing and devoted loyalty to the University. He was alwayscheerfully willing, regardless of his own comfort and his own health, toaccept any task, however difficult or however unpleasant, if it seemed tobe in the interest of the University; and when his physical strength obviously began to fail, he stuck courageously to his post. Even when itwas impossible for him longer to come to his office he insisted that hisdaily work should be taken to his home. Often have I heard the President of the University express the warmest appreciation of his devotion,and I know that I speak not only for the President, but for the Board ofTrustees and for the faculties, when I say that we mourn with heavyhearts his passing. Today we pay grateful homage to his memory. Tothe end of our days we shall not forget the brave and kindly spirit thatwas Dr. Butler.NATHANIEL BUTLERBy Shailer MathewsIt is a strange coincidence that two of the three men who, with President Harper, constituted the first Faculty of the University of Chicagoshould have died at the same time. Harry Pratt Judson and NathanielButler have built themselves into the future in many ways, but mostlythrough their relation to the same institution. Yet at this moment I findmyself thinking mostly of the two men personally. For a generation Ishared in their friendship, and came to know the fine, loyal personalitythat lay beneath the official demeanor of both.Nathaniel Butler lived a singularly useful and symmetrical life. Hewas a teacher and an administrator, a preacher and a lecturer; but he wasalso a man among men, a friend of associations of commerce, and an ideal104 THE UNIVERSITY RECORDspeaker at banquets. He could make an admirable address at a commencement and could tell a story as can few men. He lived in the worldof ideals, but he could manage the details of the office of a college president. It seems almost sacrilegious to speak of this symmetry as versatility,for that word too often covers a multitude of superficialities, but versatile he was in the sense of touching life in many of its divergent interests.I think most of us who knew him these many years were struck byhis perennial youth. In a way he was as we wished to be. When duringthe last few months he seemed about to capitulate with time, it was as ifone of the guaranties of our own victory over the years was threatened.Yet there was no undevelopment in his character, and there was maturityin his spirit. Some men affect youthfulness by imitating the habits oftheir juniors, pathetically endeavoring to camouflage their years by boyish indiscretions. Nathaniel Butler not only was a favorite of nature inhis physical vigor and appearance, but he possessed his own fountain ofperennial youth in his devotion to that which is becoming rather than thatwhich has become. His memory was stored with the annals of half a century of teaching, but he never strayed into the quicksands of reminiscence. He lived always in a productive present. Strike his interests atany point and there gushed forth the enthusiasm and hopefulness of thosewho were to live long enough to enjoy the fulfilment of their hopes. Anold man he never became.He had a delightful sense of humor. Perhaps that was one reasonhe so defied the passing years. He could be serious without taking himselftoo seriously. For that reason, if for no other, he could be progressivewithout being radical. For radicals seem incapable of humor. Among usall there was no more charming table-companion. As a conversationalisthe had few equals; but in all the years I knew him I cannot recall everhaving heard him say a bitter or a cutting word. He could be intense inhis opposition to what he did not believe to be fair and wise, but his shaftsof criticism were never feathered with ridicule. He respected even goodpeople who seemed to him to lack good sense.This fineness of spirit was rooted in a sincere religious faith. He wasnot a protagonist of any dogma. He sympathized with those who bystress of circumstance have been forced into theological controversy thattruth may set men free, but he was not a controversialist. Religion to himwas simple and final — an attitude of soul, an idealism which he desiredto have institutionalized, but the elements of which he would not enforceupon others.I believe the basal quality of his life was loyalty — loyalty to family,DEATH OF NATHANIEL BUTLER i°5to friends, to institutions, to God, and to kindliness. He lived in a worldwhich he hoped to see, and in some measure helped to make, better. Thushoping and loyal, he was faithful to the multitude of great and small duties which resulted from his many contacts in life. He died as he lived,mature in his youthfulness, many sided in his interests, unassuming in hisloyalties, Christian in his hope and service.DR. BUTLER AND THE COMMUNITYBy Charles W. GilkeyThis community has been very fortunate during the last thirty-fiveyears in that there has been so little sense of separation, much less oftension, between town and gown. Those of us who know what deep gulfsand high walls divide some other college communities have a keen senseof our cause for gratitude in this regard. Our good fortune is in no smallmeasure due to certain community institutions, like the Quadrangle Cluband the churches, where folk from both town and gown meet and workand play and worship together; but it is even more due, I suspect, to theinfluence of many individuals on both sides, from both town and gown,who have exemplified the neighborly and co-operative spirit. Most ofall, perhaps, is it due to that little group — F. J. Miller used always tocall them the "aborigines" — who came here thirty-five years ago to makethe new University. They set its standards. They shared and communicated its spirit. They have bequeathed both to the community and tothe University in this regard part of their most precious heritage. Conspicuous among these civic and spiritual benefactors for a full generationhas been Nathaniel Butler.Through all these years he has been one of the closest links — livinglinks — between the University and the city. Ten and fifteen years ago,when the Association of Commerce was sending delegations of Chicagobusiness men to various parts of the country, he went along year afteryear to represent the University; and I was often told that, with his keenwit and inexhaustible store of stories, he was the life of the party. Ofwhat company was he not the life? One of the things we shall rememberlongest and most gratefully about his sparkling sense of humor was thefact that he could both get and give so much delight in telling his stories.With such spontaneous freshness and vigor and contagious enthusiasm —no wonder he was the life of any party!We in this Hyde Park church owe Nathaniel Butler a debt thatwords can never reckon, much less pay. His gift to us these thirty-fiveyears has been made in the costly coin of personal loyalty and service.io6 THE UNIVERSITY RECORDHe has held at one time or another most of the important offices in thelife of this church: deacon and chairman of the board of deacons, superintendent of the church school, and, of late years, chairman of our advisory committee, in which our church organization heads up. In thislast capacity he has presided over and done much to shape the decisionsthat have led to the building of our new church house and the adoptionof our new single basis of inclusive membership. He has thus been intimately associated with the two great forward movements in the recentlife of this church. I have heard him say more than once that his association with the board of deacons of this church had brought him as muchsatisfaction, if not more, than his relationship to any group of men withwhom he had ever worked. In that modest acknowledgment he was giving unwitting evidence of the contribution which he himself always madeto that relationship.Dr. Butler always was on terms of unusual intimacy with the younger life of this church. It was no accident that our first successful youngmen's class, years ago, was taught by him and named for him. There aresome young men here today who will hold long in grateful memory thename of the Butler Class. Nor was it any accident that year after yearafter year the young people of this church would ask him to be the toast-master at their annual banquets. They knew that no one else could morefully share and sympathize with the spirit of perennial youth than did he.But his relationship to this church, active as it has been throughthirty-five years — and he has been one of a comparatively small groupof men and women who have made this church whatever it is — his relationship to this church has never been merely official. In the deepest andtruest sense he has shared its religious life and contributed to that life.I remember vividly what he said at two meetings more than sixteenyears ago, the first two meetings I ever attended as a member of thischurch; and that active participation in its religious experience he hascontinued for much more than sixteen years. How many times we haveheard him say in the devotional meetings of the church: "We do notfully understand how our prayer can avail for ourselves or for those welove or for those causes we cherish; but that it does so avail we havedeep assurance for believing." Then he himself would pray. This lastweek, out of his physical weakness and anxiety, he has sent to me awritten message of a single sentence, containing one memorable phrase,fresh as personal religion is always fresh, and telling us more than thewords of third parties can ever say about the real power of vital religionto meet and overcome weakness and anxiety and pain. Let me sharewith you that phrase to cherish and remember as a revelation of his owndeep faith: "Good thoughts and the peace of God."THE LATE WALLACE HECKMANDEATH OF WALLACE HECKMANWithin five days during the Winter Quarter the University sufferedthe loss by death of three men whose lives had been bone and sinew,heart and brain, of the institution. Nathaniel Butler, Harry Pratt Judson, and Wallace Heckman, each in a different sphere, each in a differentway, built themselves into the University. The first was teacher and educational administrator, the second added to these functions the duties ofPresident, and the third, in a sense, made possible the work of the others.Without the care and good judgment of Wallace Heckman the pecuniaryresources of the institution would not have produced in so large degreethe income essential to steady growth.Mr. Heckman, at the urgent solicitation of President Harper, forsook the profession of the; law, in which he had achieved success, and atsome personal sacrifice in 1903 became Counsel and Business Managerof the University, and remained in office until 1924. He quickly reorganized the business office; he systemized its methods; improved theregulations governing the collection of fees. The entire department feltthe influence of his sense of order and of his good business sense. As theresolutions adopted by the Board of Trustees declared at the time whenhis resignation was accepted:The care and thoroughness which he has devoted to the protection of the University's resources, the zeal of his efforts to increase the capital and the income of itsinvestments, are outstanding evidence of the spirit in which he has carried on themultifarious responsibilities of the institution centered in its downtown offices;When Mr^ Heckman became Business Manager and Counsel, the University'sassets amounted to something like $18,000,000. As he leaves the position he has filledwith such evident faithfulness and conscientiousness, the Auditor reports that thesehave increased to $53,000,000. His ability to meet the demands made upon him bythis notable increase of the University's capital which must be continuously at work,by the ever changing conditions of business and finance, and particularly during thetrying years of the war period, has kept pace steadily with the demand for progressand broader facilities.Mr. Heckman, however, was more than a conserver of Universityproperty, more than a conservative investor of its funds. He looked uponhimself as a part of the entire University. He sympathized with departmental needs for buildings and equipment. He made it his duty to aidthe facilities for research. He regarded himself as a co-operator with the107io8 THE UNIVERSITY RECORDmembers of the faculties, not as one who doles out precious income. Hismore than twenty years of service for the University endeared him bothto associates in business, and to the teaching staff.Mr. Heckman was born in Morgan County, Ohio, May 22, 185 1.In his youth his parents moved to a farm near Kingston, DeKalb County,Illinois. There he followed the plow, and received those lasting benefitswhich come to the farmer boy who is blessed with such parents as his:incentives to right living, right thinking, and right doing. Such environment led him to seek college training. He entered Hillsdale College,Hillsdale, Michigan, from which he was graduated, and of which he subsequently became a trustee. He studied law in a Chicago law office, wasadmitted to the bar, and built up a large and lucrative practice. Unquestionably he could have been elected judge, or member of Congress; buthe preferred to accept the position at the University with its intellectualinspiration. Like all busy men, he had time for helpful assistance togood causes. He was president of the Illinois Civil Service Reform Association, president of the Union League Club, a member of the executivecommittee of the Municipal Voters League, president of the Central ArtAssociation, trustee of Frances Shimer School. In all these associations,in the University, in business, in the clubs of which he was a member, heincarnated the spirit of friendliness. When called upon to arbitrate disputed causes he exemplified the love of fair dealing.At his funeral, held in the Joseph Bond Chapel, March 8, 1927, Dr.Charles W. Gilkey paid tribute to his work and his character, to hisachievements as lawyer and as University administrator, to his love ofnature and to his loyal friendship:Wallace Heckman, a country boy fresh from a Michigan college, came to Chicago to "read law," and soon displayed those qualities that marked him for conspicuous success. These were not simply his gifts as a business administrator It isa tribute both to President Harper and to Wallace Heckman that one should havelocated him and the other should have come. He gave the best of his life to an educational institution. He was always clearing vistas. .... He had a genius for appreciating life. He lived abundantly. His last words were : "I have had a pleasantlife ; I am happy."V- <4M//>- v. / >_Hiim*' -' '¦ -^V* rModeled by Leonard CrunelleTABLET IN MEMORY OF PRESIDENT EMERITUSHARRY PRATT JUDSONIn Mandel CorridorDEATH OF PRESIDENT EMERITUSJUDSONWhen President Judson in 1923 resigned the office which he had heldand honored since 1907, his friends were confident that there remainedfor him many years of useful occupation. After more than half a century devoted to the vexations and joys of teaching, to the anxieties andtriumphs of administration, he could, with clear conscience and mind atease, pursue such studies as he desired, relax the body wearied with theexactions of executive duties. He accepted this, for him, untried life ofrelease from imperative service. He traveled ; he met with his colleagueson important boards of trustees ; he worked upon the manuscripts of thebooks he long had planned to complete; his familiar figure was seenwithin the Quadrangles and in the halls of Harper Library, which hehad seen rise to memorialize his distinguished predecessor. It was, therefore, a shock when, without warning, the news spread about the University at noon on Friday, March 4, 1927, that the second president of theUniversity had died an hour before.Dr. Judson was a member of the first group of men who, at the callof President Harper, came to the new institution which Mr. Rockefeller'salmost unprecedented gifts had just founded. Indeed, before a singleone of its buildings had been completed or a 'single student had beenregistered, he gave to the first President the benefit of his experience andhis judgment in the selection of the first members of the faculty yet to be.How well these two planned, in the University office In the Chamber ofCommerce Building, is well known. The first teaching staff, of whom sofew remain in active service, was composed of men who speedily gave tothe new institution its reputation for scholarly achievement. It was theirnames and accomplishment which drew students to Chicago from allparts of the land.Elected President in 1907, Dr. Judson served with distinction forexactly sixteen years. Beginning his administration in his fifty-eighthyear, with years of experience as teacher and administrator, experienceacquired in previous service in the University of Minnesota and otherinstitutions as well as in the University of Chicago, he was admirablyfitted for the duties which confronted him. How successfully he met109no THE UNIVERSITY RECORDemergencies as they arose; how conservatively his care guided the University through the period when it was necessary to watch every expenditure to avoid bewildering deficits, those who shared with him the perplexities of those days well recall. This fear of a deadening debt enabledthe University to pass through the strain of war with receipts more thanexpenditures, while other institutions staggered under financial burdens.Undoubtedly, as Dr. T. W. Goodspeed suggests on another page, thiscourse, difficult as it was to follow, was at least one reason for subsequentgenerous gifts which came to the University. At least one contribution tothe University's endowment, now valued at more than $3,000,000, wasmade because the donor, at the time unknown by anyone connected withthe University, declared he had learned that here was one institution ofhigher learning which managed its financial affairs with commendableeconomy and care.While Dr. Judson's administration, as has been said, was characterized by conservatism, it was likewise marked by kindliness, good judgment, and a thoughtful regard for those who served in the several faculties. A chairman of one of the departments remarked on the day ofDr. Judson's death, one who had been a student in the earlier days ofthe late President's connection with the University: "He was the bestfriend I ever had." He was not merely careful to conform to budget limitations; he also was wise in his choice of administrative helpers andmindful of their feelings. His good judgment was recognized when hewas sent to China by the Rockefeller Foundation to make a survey ofChina's needs, and especially of that country's needs for reform in matters of health. The recommendations contained in his report of the results of his investigations were all adopted and have formed the basis ofthe expanding work of the China Medical Board, which has been continually growing in magnitude. So, too, when he went to the Near East,during the European war, as representative of the American Relief Commission to Syria and Armenia, he not only brought help to the sufferingin that stricken region, but was able to aid the cause of the Allies at atime when that cause greatly needed assistance.Dr. Judson was a son of a Baptist parsonage. He was born at Jamestown, New York, on December 20, 1849. He was graduated from Williams College in 1870. He was principal of the Troy, New York, highschool. He was called to the University of Minnesota, where he becameprofessor of history and where he remained until called to the Universityof Chicago. In the University he was respectively Professor of PoliticalScience and Dean of the Colleges; Professor of Political Science andDEATH OF PRESIDENT EMERITUS JUDSON IIIHead of the Department; Dean of the Faculties of Arts, Literature, andScience; Acting President, President, and President Emeritus. He wasa student of political science, of international law, and of American history. His last published work (in 1925) was a scholarly study of OurFederal Republic. Numerous institutions conferred upon him honorarydegrees.Funeral services were held in Leon Mandel Hall on Monday, March7. These services were simple, dignified, without eulogies which mightso easily have been delivered. Professor Hugh Black, of Union Theological Seminary, New York, read the Scriptures, and Dr. Charles W. Gilkey,pastor of the Hyde Park Baptist Church, of which Dr. Judson was amember, offered prayer.It is expected that at some later date a service will be held at theUniversity at which suitable tribute will be paid to Dr. Judson's workand character, a tribute which may be made only in part and in brief atthis time and in this place.AMONG THE DEPARTMENTSTHE DEPARTMENT OF ORIENTAL LANGUAGESAND LITERATURESBy J. M. Powis SmithThe interests of this Department, of which Professor Breasted ischairman, include the study of everything connected with the geographical area extending from the Tigris-Euphrates River to the Mediterranean and known as the "fertile crescent," as well as the Nile Valley. Thismeans that the Department concerns itself with the history and literatureof the Hebrews, the Assyrians, the Babylonians, the Egyptians, the Ethiopians, the Hittites, the Persians, the Arabs, and the peoples of Syria andPalestine. The Arabs and the Jews still live and play no inconsiderablepart upon the stage of the world. Hence the Department must keep intouch with modern movements in the life and thought of the Orient.The teaching work of the staff is carried by seven regular members,with the aid of one or two visiting professors each summer. The responsibility for the Old Testament rests upon J. M. Powis Smith, Herbert L.Willett, and William C. Graham. Professor Willett divides his time between the Divinity School and the Colleges. The work in Egyptian language and literature is assigned to T. G. Allen1; that in Babylonian andAssyrian, to D. D. Luckenbill, who also teaches ancient oriental history;that in Arabic language and literature, including the history of Mohammedanism, to Martin Sprengling; and that in post-biblical Judaism toRabbi Mann. All of this work is done in accordance with the best scientific principles and standards both in the field of linguistics and in that ofhistory. This wide range of historical background enables the membersof the Old Testament section of the Department to give their work a richand colorful background. The immense range of time covered, viz., from4000 b.c. down to the present day, also compels a sense of perspective.SURVIVALS OF THE ANCIENT ORIENTAL WORLDThe work of the Department is housed in Haskell Oriental Museum.Here is installed a constantly increasing amount of the material survivalsof the civilization of the ancient oriental world. The day is close at handwhen the museum will be hopelessly outgrown, as the results of the De-112AMONG THE DEPARTMENTS "3partment's excavations and purchases come in with increasing volume.Among the objects of interest in the museum are a perfectly preservedcylinder of the Annals of Sennacherib, upon which is his account of hissiege of Jerusalem, a portion of a Tel-el-Amarna letter from pre-IsraeliteCanaan, and an altogether unique outfit from the equipment of a Palestinian king's tomb belonging to the period prior to Abraham, ca. 1800 B.C.Professor Breasted is director of the museum, and the secretary is Mrs.Edith W. Ware.An important interest of the Department is represented by theAmerican Journal 0} Semitic Languages and Literatures, edited by members of the Department, with J. M. Powis Smith in charge. This furnishesan outlet for the scholarly productions of the staff and, being the onlyjournal in English covering this whole field, it renders invaluable serviceas a medium for exchange of views among the scholars of the world.A new translation of the Old Testament is being prepared under theeditorship of J. M. Powis Smith with the aid of Professors Meek, of theUniversity of Toronto, and Waterman, of the University of Michigan,both Doctors of this Department, and also Professor Alex R. Gordon, ofMontreal. A sample of this, The Psalms, has just appeared from the University of Chicago Press. The entire work should appear in the autumnof 1927. Professor Smith is to be Annual Professor in the AmericanSchool of Archaeology at Jerusalem for the academic year 1927-28.RESEARCH UNDER THE DEPARTMENTThe Department is organized as an Oriental Institute for the purposeof the better progress of certain lines of research. The Director of the Institute is Professor Breasted, and its Secretary, Dr. T. George Allen.Professor Breasted has been freed from responsibility for formal classwork that he may devote himself freely to research and to the larger interests of the Institute. He spends approximately half of his time in thefield supervising the work of the Institute in its various enterprisesabroad. These enterprises, all of which are financed and maintained bymeans placed at its disposal by generous friends interested in its work,may be enumerated as follows:The Coffin-Texts Project. — This is a plan to collect, edit, and translate textswritten on Egyptian coffins of the twenty-third to the eighteenth centuries, B.C.These texts, ancestors of the Book of the Dead, portray man's earliest democratization of the hereafter and his dawning consciousness of moral requirements for futureblessedness. This work is being done under the editorship of Professor Alan H.Gardiner, a research professor in the Department, who spends part of each year inH4 THE UNIVERSITY RECORDthe Cairo Museum. He is assisted in copying these texts by Dr. A. de Buck. Dr.T. G. Allen, of the Department, is associate editor of this project.The Medical Papyrus. — Professor Breasted himself is now seeing through thepress the first translation of an ancient Egyptian medical papyrus, constituting theoldest known scientific medical text in the world.The Egyptian Epigraphic Expedition. — This is in charge of Harold H. Nelson, aPh.D. of the Department, and now one of its research professors. He is assisted inthis work by Dr. William F. Edgerton, Dr. Caroline Ransom Williams, and Dr. JohnA. Wilson, also PhJD.'s of the Department. This expedition is housed in its ownbuilding at Luxor, Egypt. The purpose of the expedition is to make accurate andpermanent record Of existing monuments in the Nile Valley, that they may be savedfrom the ravages of time, weather, and man. The expedition is now working uponthe Medinet Habu temple of King Rameses III.The Assyrian Dictionary Project. — This is a great undertaking being carried onunder the editorial leadership of Professor D. D. Luckenbill. It involves the readingof all known cuneiform texts and the listing of every new word with its content upona new card. So far something over 600,000 cards have been filled out. Out of thesethe dictionary will arise. It will constitute the first complete dictionary of the Assyrian and Babylonian language. Co-operating in this heavy task are Professor LeroyWaterman, of the University of Michigan, Professor T. J. Meek, of the University ofToronto, and Dr. John A. Maynard, of New York, all three Ph.D.'s of this Department.The Kalila and Dimna Studies. — This is an endeavor to reconstruct the earliesttext of those stories which are the ancestors of the "Uncle Remus" stories of theSouth. They exist in many manuscripts, Persian and Arabic, scattered over the oriental world. These manuscripts must be photographed and studied comparatively inorder that a definitive text may be laid down. It is a task calling for time and patience.The Peshitta Project. — Professors Sprengling and Graham are at work upon thetext of Bar Hebraeus, a Syrian of the thirteenth century, a.d., who wrote in Syriac abrief commentary upon the entire Old Testament. He based his work upon the Syriac Bible, the Peshitta of his time. The first task is to establish the text of Bar Hebraeus himself from the various existing manuscripts of his work. The next step is todiscover from his citations of the Peshitta how the Syriac text of the Old Testamentthat lay before him read. Using this Bar Hebraeus material and other materials gathered from early Syriac writings, the editors will proceed to establish a critically basedtext of the Peshitta. This will make a valuable contribution toward the restoration ofthe Hebrew text itself.The Hittite Project. — A preliminary expedition through the center of the ancientHittite Empire has just been completed by Mr. H. H. von der Osten. One of his results was the discovery of fifty-five hitherto unknown Hittite sites. Another was thefinding of a Middle Egyptian statuette, proving the fact of relations between the Hit-tites and Egyptians about 4,000 years ago. A second visit to these same regions isnow being planned, that Mr. Von der Osten may give further study to Hittite textsand sites in the hope of shedding some light upon the Hittite problem.The Megiddo Expedition. — One of the most significant things being done by theInstitute is the excavation of the site of Megiddo on the Plain of Esdraelon. Thisexcavation is being made under the leadership of Clarence S. Fisher, field director.AMONG THE DEPARTMENTS USIt has already unearthed a monument which demonstrates the fact that Shishak ofEgypt was at Megiddo in the days of Jeroboam I of Israel. This fact corroboratesthe Old Testament narrative at that point. Megiddo was a strategic point on thegreat highway between the Northeast arid Southwest and was the campaign headquarters in Palestine of many successive powers. TJie excavations should yield muchmaterial* of the greatest value for the recovery of the course of history in AncientPalestine.The Pre-Historic Survey.— In December, 1926, Dr. K. S. Sandford, a leadingEnglish palaeologist, joined the Institute and began a survey of the traces of theearliest Stone Age man in both Egypt and Western Asia. If this survey is successfulwe should be able to retrace the course of man from the earliest geologic beginningsof the historic period.The Archives Project. — Under the direction of Dr. T. G. Allen an encyclopediccatalogue is being compiled of the available sources, facts, and data in the area represented by the Institute. This material is being filed in the library of the Departmentin Haskell Oriental Museum and will there Ibe available in the preparation of a history of early civilization which it is the aim of the Institute to realize.PUBLICATION PROGRAMThe following three series of publications have already in each casebeen begun, and it is the expectation to push them with all possible speed.Funds for several of those yet unpublished are already available.FIRST SERIES— ORIENTAL INSTITUTE COMMUNICATIONSAll volumes marked with * have already been issued; the others are in preparation.Popular, illustrated reports of Institute projects in the form of preliminary bul-rletins for general readers :No. 1. The Oriental institute 0$ the University of Chicago: A Beginning and aProgram* By James H. Breasted. JCJniversity of Chicago Press, 1922.No. 2. Explorations in Hittite Asia Minor (manuscript ready December, 1926).By H. H. von der Osten. 1 volume.No. 3. The Excavation of Armageddon. By Clarence S. Fisher. 1 volume.No. 4. The Temple of Medinet Habu. By Harold H. Nelson. 1 volume.No. 5. Prehistoric Investigations in Egypt and Western Asia. By K. S. Sand-ford. 1 volume.SECOND SERIES— ANCIENT RECORDSEnglish translations of the historical documents of the ancient oriental world,especially Egypt, Babylonia, Assyria, and the Hittites, in octavo volumes :Volumes I-V. Ancient Records of Egypt* By James H. Breasted. Universityof Chicago Press, 1906-7. 5 volumes.Volumes VI-VII. Ancient Records of Assyria* By D. D. Luckenbill. University of Chicago Press, 1926. 2 volumes.Volumes VHI-XII. Ancient Records of Babylonia, etc. By D. D. Luckenbill.5 volumes.n6 THE UNIVERSITY RECORDTHIRD SERIES — ORIENTAL INSTITUTE PUBLICATIONSScientific and technical results and materials, especially original sources anddocuments, in folio volumes :Volume I. Oriental Forerunners of Byzantine Painting* By James H. Breasted.University of Chicago Press, 1924.Volume II. The Annals of Sennacherib* By D. D. Luckenbill. University ofChicago Press, 1924.Volumes HI-IV. The Edwin Smith Surgical Papyrus (manuscript ready January 1, 1927). By James H. Breasted. 2 volumes.Volume V. Hittite Studies. By H. H. von der Osten (manuscript ready January,1927). 1 volume.Volumes VI-X. Temple Inscriptions of Medinet Habu (first volume readyspring of 1927). By Harold H. Nelson and Associates. 5 volumes.Volumes XI-XH. The Egyptian Coffin Texts: The Ancestors of the Book ofthe Dead. By Alan H. Gardiner and A. de Buck. 2 volumes.Volume XIH. The Egyptian Monuments of Haskell Oriental Museum. ByT. G. Allen and Associates. 1 volume.Volume XIV. Prehistoric Survey of Egypt and Western Asia. By K. S. Sand-ford. 1 volume.Volumes XV-XVII. The Excavation of Armageddon. By Clarence S. Fisherand Associates. 3 volumes.Volumes XVIII-XIX. The Assyrian Dictionary. By D. D. Luckenbill and Associates. 2 volumes.Volumes XX-XXI. • The Babylonian Collections of Haskell Oriental Museum.By D. D. Luckenbill and Associates. 2 volumes.The work of the Department of Oriental Languages and Literatures,it is at once clear, concerns itself with a wide and varied field of humanexperience. The student who joins this group finds himself in touch withopportunities for research and cultural enrichment equaled but in fewcenters, if indeed anywhere. The great need in these days of opportunityis for young scholars willing and able to enter upon these great tasks andto carry them on to a successful issue.HASKELL ORIENTAL MUSEUMBy Edith Williams WareThe Haskell Oriental Museum is to be considered mainly as a storehouse for materials illustrating the history of the ancient Near East.These materials consist of original objects, the survivals from the richcivilizations which flourished along the Nile, the Euphrates, and the Jordan. The archives of Haskell Museum are well stocked with casts andphotographs, reproductions of originals in other museums and privatecollections; while, for purposes of comparative study, there are storedaway in the Museum such interesting related specimens as valuable Chi-8RgPwu<a,wreoH'-Jwa .o oQ a:a «Q 5no fcCQ WsgCJoXw:/.oHJHOw< 3CO<wOiJHWx<wAMONG THE DEPARTMENTS 1*7nese coins, which, compared to the ancient Babylonian weight, will illuminate the question of coinage; American flints with a beautiful "desertvarnish," which can be placed by prehistoric Egyptian flints possessing marvelous patinas painted by the eons; or pottery types from Mediterranean islands where the influence of Orient and classical world alikewas felt.CLASSIFICATION OF MUSEUM MATERIALIn order to care for this vast amount of material in a satisfactorymanner, Professor T. George Allen, of the Oriental Institute, has perfected a system of classification and registration. With the use of thissystem three scientific assistants loaned by the Oriental Institute to theMuseum are gradually converting into accessible form all data concerning the treasures of the Museum. It is hoped that when this work is completed, a card catalogue and explanatory literature may be preparedwhich will present a picture of the most ancient Oriental world from thematerials now preserved in Haskell Museum in such a way that the publicwith only the slightest exertion may become entirely familiar with theearliest history of cultural origins.Meantime, while these people work behind the scenes for future accomplishment, exhibition rooms on the first and third floors of the museum building are open to all who are interested. In 1926, the DivinitySchool, which had shared our building for over thirty years, moved intoits beautiful new home. Now Haskell contains, besides the exhibition andstorage rooms, only the offices of the Department of Oriental Languagesand Literatures and of the Oriental Institute.The first floor of the Museum was rearranged to display the antiquities of ancient Egypt. The plans for this rearrangement were submitted by Miss Louise Cross, who was registrar of the Oriental Instituteat that time. With a true understanding of artistic value, Miss Crossselected as the background for these objects a wall of neutral shade,splattered with such tones of color as were used by ancient Egyptian artists. It has been attempted to carry out the ideas of museum arrangement which Professor J. H. Breasted originated many years ago. According to these ideas, the north museum room has been designed to tellthe story of early Egypt, while the south museum room contrives to painta picture of ancient life in that fascinating country.Work on the exhibition rooms began in July, 1926; and that theobjects were all in place and properly arranged by December, 1926,seems nothing short of a miracle. That this was accomplished in so limited a time was due to the efforts of Mr. H. P. Burtch, preparator of then8 THE UNIVERSITY RECORDMuseum, who was ably assisted by Miss Asgerd Skjonsberg and Mr. H.W. Cartwright, students in Egyptology. For five months these youngscientists were occupied in the actual manual labor and wearisome handwork involved in the mounting of large stone slabs or the restringingof thousands of tiny beads. It must be remembered that painful meticu-losity and unerring calculation are necessary in installations of such objects as fragile ivories carved thousands of years ago, carnelian beadsof delicate bore, or limestones weakened by the action of destructivesalts. However, the work was accomplished and, on December 10, 1926,the formal opening of the exhibition rooms of the Museum was held."THE STORY OF EGYPT"Placed directly inside the door of the north museum room is a casecontaining the restoration of a predynastic burial. The body and its mortuary furnishings of pots and slate palette are direct products of differentexcavations in Egypt. The grave itself and the present artificial combination of the real antiquities represent the beginning of the fulfilment ofa long-cherished desire of Professor Breasted to exhibit such restorationsin order to illustrate life and customs in the ancient world. Of Coursethis device has been much used in museums of natural history.The predynastic grave introduces the visitor to the first section ofthe north museum room, or "The Story of Egypt" room. This section isfilled with antiquities dating from predynastic and early dynastic times.Beginning with a handsomely cut jar of King Menes, who may have united Egypt about 3400 B.C., one may examine sundry personal effects ofmost of the early kings, concluding with a set of copper vessels from thetomb of King Khasekhemui, of the Second Dynasty (before 3000 B.C.).Studies of the earliest glazes, stone vessels, and pottery types are exhibited for the delight of the artist; while beautifully chipped flint knives andstone maces of interesting forms intrigue either the erudite archaeologistor the young visitor.The story of Egypt is continued with the next section, where, amongthe reliefs and alabasters on the left side, one may see the name of Khufu,the builder of the great Pyramid (about 2900 b.c), or of Pepi II, whoenjoyed) the longest reign in history (over ninety years, ending about2470 b.c.) ; while on the right side of this section are located cases containing, among other things, beautifully cut beads with small bores andfigures of genre tendency, dating from the time of the Middle Kingdomof ancient Egypt (2 160-1788 B.C.).In the third section, history of the period after 1580 b.c. is tracedggJUJ. - - - - -a- MWWWMg' ' '•'_^fw^ -^#3^2^CHICAGO HOUSE: LIBRARY. OFFICES, AND LIVING QUARTERS OF EPIGRAPHICEXPEDITION AT LUXORTHE GREAT MOUND OF ARMAGEDDON (OR MEGIDDO)¦LhlJ 'l*^HASKELL ORIENTAL MUSEUM, HEADQUARTERS OF THE ORIENTAL INSTITUTEAMONG THE DEPARTMENTS ,"9through the dynasties by objects inscribed with the names of the pha-raohs. Representative of the Eighteenth Dynasty, may be mentioned ablue glazed vase belonging to the Hercules of Egypt, King AmenhotepII; while the actual handiwork of poor little King Tutenkhamon is shownin an astronomical instrument. The international situation during theNineteenth Dynasty is recalled to the observer by a, relief showing theHittite king presenting his daughter as wife to Ramses II. An ostrakongiving the details of a lawsuit actually fixes the dates of Ramses III andIV, of the Twentieth Dynasty; while a sistrum bearing the name of KingAmasis (569-525 b.c.) brings the story of Egypt down to the Twenty-sixth, or last native Egyptian, Dynasty.METHODS — JEWELRYThe south museum room also is divided into three sections. It wasdesired that the first section of this room should deal with methods.One is given, among other things, a glimpse into the studio of the sculptor, while the paraphernalia of the scribe are shown in detail. The materials conquered by the Egyptian craftsmen and worked into useful orartistic objects are pointed out in the cases of alabaster, metal, woodwork,glaze, and glassware in the left side of the second section; while moreintimate details from the life of the Egyptians are considered on the rightside of this section. Here the costume of these people is illustrated byexamples of linen cloth, as well as by small statuettes wearing the mostusual types of garments.Jewelry, that important accessory of the toilet among ancient peoples, occupies one whole case; while toilet articles and cosmetics areshown in another. Examples of the kind of furniture found in the homesand the sort of games with which the people amused themselves furnishmaterial for reconstruction of the social life of the Egyptian. The studyof the mortuary objects which fill the third section of the south room isparticularly important because of the detailed consideration given to thepyramid texts, coffin texts, and Book of the Dead — -the religious literatureof ancient Egypt. Here too the interesting arrangement of amulets isattractive to trie person who has always had a sneaking desire to own theleft hind foot of a rabbit.The appropriate background and beautiful cases which enhance theartistic values of the Egyptian antiquities on the first floor will in time beduplicated on the third floor of Haskell Museum, which is to be devotedto the antiquities of Western Asia. At present, in spite of the use of oldstock cases and the scarcity of material, the antiquities of Mesopotamia,120 THE UNIVERSITY RECORDSyria, and Asia Minor are fairly well displayed. The pleasant arrangement is due to the genius of Miss Marion F. Williams, who is the newOriental Institute specialist in the archaeology of this section.The central room on the third floor is planned to give the visitor someidea of the life and culture of the Babylonians and Assyrians. Here areexhibited bits of sculpture illustrating the racial types which made upthe polyglot population of Mesopotamia. Handwork in stone, pottery,and bronze bespeak the skill of the artisans; while the movements of ancient peoples, the sovereignty of a mighty king, and the rich tribute of aconquering army are recalled when one considers the stone prism recording the annals of King Sennacherib of Assyria (705-681 B.C.) — one ofthe finest monuments in Haskell.AN ANCIENT BABYLONIAN DICTIONARYIn the south room the ever fascinating story of cuneiform writing istold, illustrated by original documents. Among these, particularly interesting are the copybook of a Babylonian scholar and a Babylonian dictionary of ancient Sumerian words. Then, in continuation, through eleven sections the history of the Mesopotamian Valley is related and illuminated by actual clay tablets, inscribed stones, or brick-stamps, bearingsuch illustrious names as King Mesilim of Kish, the Akkadian Naramsin,Gudea of Lagash, Dungi of Ur, King Rimsin of Larsa, King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon, or Antiochus Epiphanes.The interrelational aspects of the ancient Near East are to be illustrated in the north room of the third floor. The results of the excavationsat Megiddo will be shown here. Egyptian scarabs, Canaanite pottery,Hittite bronzes, and Roman glass will tell of the luxuries found in thecamps of the great armies who met at this most ancient of battle grounds.At present it is possible to give only slight glimpses of the mixing ofthese ancient cultures. In the case containing antiquities of Asia Minororigin, clay tablets of Assyrian colonists and terra cottas of Greek character rest beside objects of Hittite manufacture. From Syria-Palestineare examples of religious literature in Samaritan, Syriac, and Hebrew.Arabic and Persian manuscripts indicate certain interchanges of thoughtamong oriental peoples.Thus it may be seen that this room will in time become a veritablegathering place for the antiquities of the nations. It is, indeed, the key-room to the whole collection. Here the threads of the story will be tiedand the concluding chapters of the rise of civilization in the ancient NearEast illustrated.-XIMitoitlfJmA GOLDEN PECTORAL SHOWING A GODDESS IN COW FORM NURSING THE PHARAOHAMENEMHET III DATES FROM ABOUT 1800 B.C.EXCAVATIONS IN THE HIGHEST STRATA OF THE MOUND OF ARMAGEDDONAMONG TEE DEPARTMENTS 121THE DEPARTMENT OF ROMANCELANGUAGESBy W. A. Nitze and T. A. JenkinsLike most other departments in the University, the Romance Department has a twofold aim: (i) to pursue research in the field of Romance languages and literatures (French, Italian, Spanish, and Proven-gal), and (2) to disseminate knowledge of the same by teaching and bypublication.When President Harper called to Chicago William I. Knapp, thenStreet Professor of Modern Languages at Yale, he made it plain that inhis mind the Romance languages were among the major fields of humanistic study. As the new department was getting under way, there camethe war with Spain, the development of closer relations with South America, and, later, the world-war: all these, by focusing public attentionupon Europe and upon European, civilization, greatly stimulated the demand for knowledge of the languages and literatures of the Neo-Latinpeoples. The following table reflects the growth in the number of Romance registrations by decades :Autumn Quarter 1896 1906 1916 1926French ... 155 294 399 630Spanish . . . 11 20 210 325Italian ... 8 12 28 83In this development the department has tried to follow sound pedagogical theory; it has stressed those interests which college and universitystudents should legitimately have, and it has encouraged the secondaryschools in their endeavor to teach the elementary stages of modern foreign languages. Accordingly in 1920, elementary instruction in Frenchand Spanish was transferred, at the suggestion of President Judson, tothe University High School, where it has been carried on with conspicuous success. The series of interesting textbooks by Professors A. G.Bovee and Otto F. Bond are a further testimony to this fact.DEPARTMENT HEADSSince the retirement of Professor Knapp, the headship of the department has been held in turn by James D. Bruner (1894-96), George C.Howland (1896-1900), Karl Pietsch (1900-1908), and William A.Nitze (1908 to date). At present the staff numbers eight professors, fourassociate professors, six assistant professors, and four instructors. Thestanding of the department, in the country at large, may be judged from122 THE UNIVERSITY RECORDthe Hughes report. Early in 1925, on the initiative of President Hughesof Miami University, an informal opinion was sought from two juries ofRomance colleagues (with twenty-five members for French, thirty-onefor Spanish; Italian not being included) on the question "Which of theuniversities of the country are doing the best graduate work in Frenchand in Spanish ?" In both these subjects Chicago ranked first on the list— a position which it behooves us, if possible, to maintain.It seems needless to add that the department has won this prestigethrough the reputation of its graduates, through its publications (somefour hundred titles), and through other services it has rendered. It hasgranted forty doctorates, the holders of which occupy posts of responsibility in various universities: California (three), Iowa (two), Minnesota(two), Toronto (two), Stanford, Indiana, Texas, Oklahoma, Missouri,North Dakota, Georgia, West Virginia, Marquette, and Chicago (six).Others are teachers in colleges of excellent standing: Dartmouth, Swarth-more, Trinity (North Carolina), Wheaton, Oberlin, Case School, andWooster. The Master's degree has been conferred 124 times; these graduates also are teaching the Romance languages, mostly in the MiddleWest and the South.PUBLICATIONS OF THE STAFFAs for the publications of the staff, these have centered mainly onOld Spanish (Pietsch's Disticha Catonis, 1903; Spanish Grail Fragments, 1924-25), Classical Spanish literature (Northup's and Buchanan's studies on Calderon; Keniston's Garcilaso de la Vega, 1922-25),Renaissance literature (Wilkins' Genealogia Deorum of Boccaccio, 1923-27, his articles on Dante and Petrarch; Merrill's Platonism of DuBellay, 1923; Parmenter's studies on Marot and Pelletier), Old French(Jenkins' Eructavit, 1909, and his Chanson de Roland, 1924; Nitze'sstudies in Arthurian Romance, since 1899), Modern French literature(Dargan's studies on Balzac, Coleman's on Flaubert, David's on Gautier,and Vigneron's on Stendhal). Of a more popular character are Nitze andDargan's History of French Literature, 1922; Northup's Introduction toSpanish Literature, 1925; and Wilkins' forthcoming History of ItalianLiterature, not to mention numerous textbooks — especially the "ItalianSeries" — which the department has put forth.ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICEDeserving of mention in any account of the department are the administrative services of Professors Wallace and Wilkins, the latter actingAMONG THE DEPARTMENTS 123as Dean of the Colleges during 1923-26. As chairman of "CommitteeG" of the American Association of University Professors, he is also responsible for an impressive series of reports having to do with the intellectual interests of undergraduates. In 1923-24 Professor Colemanacted as director of the Continental Division of the American UniversityUnion, with offices in Paris. At present he is serving as one of the three"special investigators" of the survey of foreign modern language instruction inaugurated by the Carnegie Corporation, in 1924. On the committee of direction of this survey were Professors Nitze, Keniston (secretary), Wilkins (later resigned), and Babcock (Ph.D., 1915).Finally, we may note that in 19 16 members of the department aidedin the foundation of the Modern Language Journal (for teachers), ofwhich, during three years, Professor Coleman was managing editor; fivemembers are now serving on the editorial board of Modern Philology, ofwhich Professor Nitze is managing editor; Professor Altrocchi holds thesame position for Italica, the journal of the American Association ofTeachers of Italian, while Professor Espinosa (Ph.D., 1909) edited untilrecently Hispania, a similar journal devoted to the teaching of Spanish.In 1926 Professor Jenkins served as president of the Modern LanguageAssociation of America.LARGER ASPECTS OF RESEARCHSince the late war, the political and cultural world has drawn together. America, unused to close contacts with Europe, is feeling her way, conscious of the fact that she is involved in a new set of responsibilities. Thedepartment hopes to do its share in interpreting these, in so far as theyconcern the language, literature, and art of the Romance peoples. In orderto do so effectively, it must, with the co-operation of other departmentsof learning, address itself to some of the larger aspects of humanistic research. It must investigate freely and interpret broadly and wisely. Itsstaff, composed of leaders in specific but important fields, should havetime for research, the opportunity to associate promising students withthem in their work, and adequate library facilities to make that workpossible — for the library is the "laboratory" of the humanities. In thesedirections the University of Chicago has made an excellent beginning;let us hope that it will continue to give both encouragement and supportto the enterprise, to the end of attaining the humanistic ideal: Nihil hu~mani a me alienum puto .A BALZAC ACQUISITIONBy E. PRESTON DARGANThrough the efforts of Professors Manly and Nitze, a unique treasure has recently been secured for the University Library. This consistsof a volume of printer's proofs corrected by the hand of Honore de Balzac. The proofs cover the second and the third chapters of that part ofSur Catherine de Medicis then called Le Secret des Ruggieri. There arethree sets of proofs for the second chapter and four for the third. Theyare covered with numerous corrections and additions, running in one caseto the inclusion of four fresh manuscript pages. The fly-leaf bears Balzac's dedication of the volume to a former schoolmate, Albert Marchand,of Tours, and there is included an autograph letter notifying Marchandof the presentation. This unique possession seems to have remained inTours until 1920, when it was sold to a Parisian editor. It was purchasedlately by Mr. Gabriel Wells, the well-known dealer and connoisseur, andwas acquired for the University of Chicago through the generosity ofMiss Shirley Farr and others.The appearance of the volume is extraordinary. On each set ofproofs, and there are seven in all, it would seem that Balzac began againhis labor of Sisyphus. He is eternally rolling uphill a heavy and recalcitrant stone; every slip, every fresh start is noted in these marginal records; and the total amount of the annotations is too large to estimate.There are fifty-two pages of mingled proof and fresh manuscript. Nopage is without corrections; while in many cases the corrections bulklarger than the original page. One is safe in saying that at least one-third of the story, as finally printed, was gradually accreted through theseveral series of manuscript additions. They are newspaper proofs, inpreparation for the publication of these two chapters in the Chronique deParis, December 11 and 18, 1836. When Le Secret des Ruggieri was published in book form, early in the following year, few changes were madefrom the newspaper or feuilleton redaction. The reason is evident —Balzac had already exhausted even his revising power; Sisyphus hadfinally rolled the stone to the very top of the hill.The volume interests the collector because of the author'3 handwriting — a bold, characteristic scrawl, more legible here than elsewhere. But124A BALZAC ACQUISITION 125it interests the student because of the light that it throws on Balzac'shabits and processes of composition. He claims in a letter to Madame deHanska (his Egeria) that he wrote Le Secret des Ruggieri in a singlenight. What he probably meant was that he wrote the first rough and incomplete draft, knowing well that he would supplement this in his usualfashion by elaborations in successive proofs. The great Lovenjoul Collection at Chantilly possesses about two dozen sets of proofs of various novels, in which workers have found the same characteristics visible here.Our proofs contain some omissions, but more substitutions and still moreadditions of fresh material. The changes consist mainly of the elaboration of the historical and philosophical views familiar to students of thenovelist. He emphasizes, in connection with Catherine de Medici, thenecessity of an absolute governing power, which may be Machiavellianin its politics. He indulges, in connection with the two sorcerers calledthe Ruggieri, in additional speculations about the creation and transmission of life. There are also changes in a realistic direction, including thesubstitution of more direct, concrete, or forceful terms in description.The heavier portions of the Etude are enlivened by intercalations of dialogue. Transitions are reworked; frequent are the successive elaborationsof some one passage in consecutive proofs; and as usual the bulk of thechanges are found toward the latter half of each "revise." Four solidmanuscript pages constitute the actual end of the story, which could not,therefore, have been written "in a single night."The aspect of certain pages is so complicated, the loops or "bottles"Inclosing additions are so numerous, that we are not surprised at the perpetual dismay of the compositors or at the "delirious reporter" who thusdescribed a typical Balzacian proof:From every printed word shoots out a skyrocket, which bursts on the margininto a bouquet of phrases, epithets, substantives, underscorings, erasures, superpositions. It is a dazzling manifestation! Imagine four or five hundred of these arabesques, twisting and twining from margin to margin and from North to South. Imagine twelve superposed maps, or all the hieroglyphs of the Pharaoh dynasty, or theintermingled fire-works of twenty celebrations ! . . . .A disciple of Balzac's once declared that the sight of a proof acted as aspur to the master's Pegasus. It is well known that the profits from anovel were often absorbed beforehand by the author's excessive and expensive alterations in the proof.Yet we are grateful to him for this literary lavishness. The resultfor posterity is that we are able, to a greater degree than with any otherauthor, to determine the steps in his processes. We pass with him into his126 THE UNIVERSITY RECORDfictional laboratory. We watch the slow heating of the furnace. We seethe sorcerer, himself like one of the Ruggieri, surrounded by his crucibles.We follow his experiments, as he chooses and rejects his materials, triesthis vial and that, incorporates fresh ingredients in the glowing mass,records the experiment, and finally blots the record for our admiration.The University of Chicago is fortunate in possessing this record, asit was fortunate to acquire a few years ago the Croue Collection of Balzac.That collection consists of nearly sixty stories of the Comedie humainein their very early editions. To this has just been added the first editionof the notable Scenes de la vie privee (1830). The value of all this material is approximately the same: from manuscript to final edition, itoffers unparalleled opportunities for studying the method of the man whotransformed modern fiction. Henry James called Balzac "the master ofus all"; his mastery is more than ever apparent when we ponder over thestages of his achievement. A good deal of research (dissertations, monographs, and articles) has already been done from the resources of theCroue Collection. It is hoped that the work may go forward with freshstrides from the stimulus given by those two most recent acquisitions.THE TRUSTEES' ANNUAL DINNERTO MEMBERS OF THEFACULTIESThe Trustees of the University from the beginning have endeavoredto maintain close and sympathetic relations with the teaching staff. Theyrealize, no matter if, according to its articles of incorporation, the Boardof Trustees is "The University of Chicago," that the men and womenwho teach and guide its students are, after all, the essential University.In order to most steady progress and greatest achievement, these teachers must realize that their work is known and appreciated. One meansto this desirable end is the Annual Dinner given by the Trustees to allmembers of the Faculties of rank higher than "Assistant." The firstof these functions was that of 1920. Every year since then such adinner has been given with the Trustees as hosts and the members of theFaculties as guests. As the number of the teaching staff has grown, especially since the merging of Rush Medical College into the University, theattendance has grown so that it has been necessary to abandon Hutchinson Hall and Ida Noyes Refectory and hold the dinner in the gymnasiumof the latter building. Here on Wednesday, January 12, 1927, the Seventh Annual Dinner was served.After dinner, with Mr. Harold H. Swift, President of the Board ofTrustees, presiding, the several speakers of the evening were happily introduced. Before the addresses Mr. Swift presented Mr. L. R. Steere, therecently appointed Vice-President and Business Manager: "He comes tous as a lawyer; he comes to us a trained banker; and he comes to us witha vast experience in an important estate in this city."DR. FRANK BILLINGS SPEAKSIn introducing Dr. Frank Billings, Mr. Swift said:In this coming year we are going to talk medicine a great deal, but one can nomore talk of medicine at the University of Chicago without mentioning one certainname than he can talk of the early days of the University without mentioning "Harper." Just as "Harper" is synonymous with the early days of the University, so isthis name synonymous with medical development, not only in Rush Medical Collegeand the University of Chicago, but in the city of Chicago. Some fifty years ago ayoung man came to this city from Wisconsin. He came to Northwestern University127128 THE UNIVERSITY RECORDand took his M.D. degree there in 1881. In 1898, he became a member of the RushMedical Faculty, and in 1900 he became Dean of the Faculty. His name is synonymous with public spirit and with public service in the city of Chicago. He was theoutstanding factor in our campaign for funds in 191 7, when we went out to raise$5,300,000. It is hard to know whether he or President Judson was the more activeor the more influential, but they both gave their all. Recognizing that situation, themost the University could do, and in my opinion the least the University could do,was to name the medical clinic after him; and I present to you that great man ofmedical history of this city, who is with us tonight as our guest of honor, Dr. FrankBillings.In the course of his remarks Dr. Billings said:If I have done anything for this community of Chicago, it has been with thespirit of service. I think none of us can go wrong if we hold that as our mark. Thegreat development out here at the University, of course, is one of the greatest pleasures to me. I want to say that the wonderful development of medicine in Chicago,and particularly here at the University of Chicago, we owe fundamentally and firstof all to William R. Harper, for his imagination, his ideals, and his wonderful broad-minded conception of education as a whole made the program possible.MEDICAL DEVELOPMENT AT THE UNIVERSITYThe presiding officer, in asking Dr. Franklin C. McLean, Professorof Medicine, to speak on the situation and functions of the medical schoolsand particularly of the uses of the group of medical buildings now approaching completion, said:I cannot help congratulating you and us on the flying start that it seems to mewe are getting on our Pre-ciinical Medical Department. When we think that we arecompleting the hospital, that we are soon to take patients, and that we have a splendid staff of men equipped and ready to go along with us, I think we are to be congratulated. With Dr. McLean heading up the Clinical Medicine Department, withable assistants, with Miss Wolf ready and waiting to start the nursing work and theschool of nursing in connection with the clinical medical work, I am sure that youwill agree with me that we are heartily to be congratulated.Dr. McLean spoke as follows:In taking up the question of the development of medicine in the University, Ishall have to restrict my remarks to the development on the South Side and shall notattempt to develop this subject in an orderly manner. It has occurred to me thatpossibly the best way to present the subject to this group is to answer the sort ofquestions that are being asked of me almost every day around the round table in theQuadrangle Club. I take it that this sample of the Faculty that I meet is a fairsampling of the entire Faculty, and that if I answer the questions that are asked ofme there, I shall have told the Faculty as a group the things that they really want toknow about the medical school. The first question, and one, I think, that all of youare interested in, is the relationship of medicine to the rest of the University.TRUSTEES' DINNER TO MEMBERS OF THE FACULTIES 129THE INTEGRATION" 01" MEDICINE IN THE UNIVERSITYOur task, as I see it, is the incorporation of medicine scientifically, educationally,administratively, and physically within the University. In order to appreciate thesignificance of what is being attempted in the University of Chicago, it is necessary togo back a few years in the history of medical education in America. Those of youwho are at all familiar with medical education in America know that, both in America and also in England, it has grown up independently of, and outside of, the universities; and that it is only within the past few years, relatively speaking, thatmedicine has begun to come into the universities. It has not come in all at once, andif we look around the various medical schools in the country, we find all sorts ofvarying degrees of association with the universities, most of them based on an affiliation or a union of two previously existing institutions, and with a certain amount ofindependence of the two institutions retained. Rarely, and almost entirely lacking mAmerica, at least, we find an actual integration of medicine in the university. That isnot true in Continental Europe, particularly in Germany. In Germany, althoughmedicine occupies a place in the universities not exactly similar to that which it willhave in the University of Chicago, medicine, from the founding of the German universities, has had equal rank in the universities with the other faculties. It may besaid that so far as the German universities are concerned, the medical faculty is inthe university on exactly the same basis as the other faculties. In many cases themedical faculty was one of the earliest faculties to be established in the founding ofthe German universities. Physical union with the rest of the university of the medical faculty in Germany is not so common, due to the fact that the medical school hashad to be built up in connection with existing hospital facilities. Even today we find,as a rule, the medical faculty living, having its being, and carrying out its duties atsome distance from the university.In planning the medical project here on the Midway, long before I came onthe scene, the intention was to ride over all of the imperfections and conditions thatexisted in medical education in America, so far as it could be done ; and to establishmedicine in the University of Chicago as we probably would start it if the Universitywere starting de novo with the Medical Faculty as one of its faculties. That is whatI referred to when I spoke of the incorporation of medicine scientifically, educationally, administratively, and physically within the University. Of course, physical incorporation is necessary for the rest. Even the slightest distance from the rest of theUniversity acts upon the Medical Faculty in such a way as to make it withdraw fromthe rest of the Faculty and form its own group. That was recognized at the timethat the preliminary plans for the medical school south of the Midway were abandoned and the decision was reached to place the medical school north of the Midway.The bringing of the medical buildings north of the Midway has made possible areal integration of medicine in the Faculties of the University. This integration hasgone so far that the University does not now have, nor will it have in the future, anyadministrative unit known as the "medical school." The University will have, asnow, a Medical Faculty. That Faculty is entirely in the Ogden Graduate School ofScience, and the members of that Faculty are also members of the Faculty of theOgden Graduate School of Science, which is the larger body incorporating the Medical Faculty. So far as administrative units are concerned, there will be no "dean ofthe medical school." There is no office which represents the medical school as awhole. Medicine will extend into every part of the University and carry on functions130 THE UNIVERSITY RECORDin every part of the University. We have a true administrative integration. I amnot sure that as a permanent policy that would be a wise thing to do. It is an experiment, and it is an experiment which we are carrying on in an attempt to emphasize this very integration of which we are speaking.THE DEPARTMENTS OF MEDICINE AND SURGERYWe are not organizing on the campus of the University of Chicago a medicalschool. We are at present organizing two new departments in the University, functioning mainly in the Ogden Graduate School of Science. These are the Departmentof Medicine and the Department of Surgery. The University of Chicago has beenfortunate in having had for the past twenty-five years, approximately, departmentsfunctioning in the Ogden Graduate School of Science and also giving medical coursestoward the degree of Doctor of Medicine. The departmental and University organization recognizes pathology and physiology and the other subjects concerned asbranches of human knowledge worthy of the same sort of study that the Universitydevotes to the study of the arts and to the study of the sciences. It does not seemsuch a long step to conceive the idea that medicine, the subject which deals withdisease in the living human being, might also be a branch of human knowledge worthyof the same type of university recognition and worthy of the same type of devotionand study that Latin and Greek deserve in a university. It does seem remarkablethat in American medicine the step of giving this recognition has been so long a timein being reached.I think I am perfectly safe in saying that our Clinical Departments which arebeing established are the first similar departments in the history of American medicine that have been given the same type of recognition in the organization of the university that is given as a matter of course to the department of Greek or of Romancelanguages. Surely the subject is of importance to the human race, at least as important as the study of the stars. This puts upon us a great responsibility. We mustlive up to it, and it puts upon us the burden of demonstrating that medicine andsurgery are worthy of this type of recognition ; and all of us, I am sure, who are inthe Medical Faculty and who are intimately concerned with the new Clinical Departments feel this responsibility very keenly. We feel not only the responsibility for thecare of our patients — this responsibility we accept as a matter of course — but we feelthe responsibility of demonstrating the right of medicine and surgery to full academic and university recognition.One of our reasons for not attempting to organize at the present time a fullyrounded medical school with a fully rounded curriculum is our desire to avoid creating at the University of Chicago a makeshift which would of its own weight failin meeting this obligation put upon us by the University. We have, therefore, thedefinite conviction that we should not attempt to organize any further subjects inthe University of Chicago Quadrangles until we are in a position to organize thesesubjects as new departments on the same basis on which the Department of Medicineand the Department of Surgery are now being organized. Happily we have now theprospect of early realization of a dream of a Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology. Most of you have read the announcement of the arrangement which has beenmade between the University of Chicago and the Chicago Lying-in Hospital, bywhich the latter will be rebuilt among the Quadrangles and become the University'sClinic of Obstetrics and Gynecology.TRUSTEES' DINNER TO MEMBERS OF THE FACULTIES 131We have other irons in the fire, some of which may be realized shortly, some ofwhich may take a long time ; but the prospect at the moment is for a rapid development, perhaps too rapid, of the Clinical Departments. I think I need not say moreregarding my conception of the University Clinical Departments than I have said.We shall be proud and well satisfied with our project if our own departments achieve,in the course of time, the same distinction that the other departments in the OgdenGraduate School have already achieved ; and if we achieve it for the same reasons.THE TECHNIQUE OF FUTURE DEVELOPMENTSThere are many questions with regard to the technique of the developments.Many of these questions we are not yet prepared to answer. Many of them must beexperimental. We shall have to try many new things and we shall have to discardthose things that do not appear to be feasible. We hope that we are starting unhampered by traditions; we feel that we are. And we hope that we shall not lettraditions arise in the early years of the development which will hamper the reachingof our aim, and that we shall keep in mind our aims and not our technique.Another question I am frequently asked comes near to you in another way. Iam frequently asked about what the Hospital is going to do and particularly whatthe Hospital is going to do for the University community. I have heard many wildrumors. Apparently a year or so ago there was a feeling that the Hospital was goingto be a sort of community hospital for the care of the ailments of the members ofthe Faculty and their families. Apparently this rumor was overcorrected ; becausethe latest rumors that I have heard, and I have heard this from a number of sources,have been to the effect that the atmosphere of the Hospital is to be so rarefied thatno member of the Faculty can get in under any circumstances. Somewhere betweenthese two lies the truth.We have not arrived at a definite statement of policy for the Hospital. This is adifficult question and one which will probably not be decided in full even by the timeof the opening of the Hospital. I think I may say, however, and say safely, that theHospital, will be open to Faculty members and without the severe restrictions aboutwhich I have heard, such as having the right disease at the right time. In amplification of this, I can simply say that the program of the Hospital and its policies mustnecessarily be determined from the educational and investigative point of view, andnot from the point of view of the needs of the community. That is, there will besome points in the organization of our service in the Hospital which may not appealto members of the Faculty and to their families, and they may elect to go elsewhere.These regulations, these details of program, will not be adopted, however, for thatreason. They will be adopted to meet the educational and scientific needs of theClinical Departments, which is, after all, the basis of the whole development on theMidway. I think you may take it for granted that the Hospital will have some ofthe interests of humanity, if not of the staff, at heart.MEDICAL SCHOOL FUNDSAnother question that I am frequently asked is with regard to the absorption ofall of the University funds by the medical school. That is not surprising when wehear of enormous sums for medical education. I have no doubt that there still existsin the minds of some of you a feeling that the medical school is absorbing large sumsat present from the general funds and thus retarding the growth of other parts of the132 THE UNIVERSITY RECORDUniversity. I may say that to the best of my knowledge and belief no money whatsoever has been taken from the general funds of the University for the support ofstrictly medical projects, nor is it expected that any such funds will be taken fromgeneral funds for the medical project. There are naturally expansions in some departments of the University due to the presence of the medical school which it hasnot been possible to budget as coming from funds given strictly for medical purposes.These expenses, chiefly in the business offices, are expected to be met by increases intuition fees, all of which are paid into the general funds of the University. For thefirst time, I believe, in the administration of this University, the medical buildings asa group are being charged for heat, light, and power and other services from thepower-house, not counting certain incidental expenses. In so far as possible it hasbeen desired by everyone connected with the medical project to avoid any use ofgeneral University funds for the development of the medical program, and I sincerelyhope that that policy will be continued.I have only one more point to touch. That is one to which I referred indirectlya few minutes ago, the question of technique. We have heard a great deal about fulltime, and we still hear a good deal about it wherever medical education is discussed.We regard full time, as it is called, as an important, perhaps necessary step in thepresent development of clinical teaching in America ; but we regard it, not as an endin itself, but as a means, as a technique of reaching the sort of performance that wehope to bring about.FROM THE TRUSTEES' POINT OF VIEW: MR. ARNETT's ADDRESS"Probably no living man knows as much about the University ofChicago, past and present, as the next speaker," said Mr. Swift. "Although he has left us, we still have him always in spirit and frequently inbody. It is rather difficult to tell whether you of the Faculty have agreater claim upon him or whether we of the Trustees. You had him firstand for a longer time, and we had him more recently; and we have alllearned from tried experience that whenever he can be prevailed upon totalk, both sides may listen with interest and with profit."Mr. Trevor Arnett's address follows:As I stand here to-night, I look back to that day thirty years ago when on aSunday afternoon I went to Morgan Park to visit President Harper, who had retiredthere for a short time with his secretary to concentrate on a commentary which hewas writing on one of the books of the Old Testament. The object of my visit was toconfer with him about coming to the University to finish my undergraduate workand becoming, as he termed it, the President's auditor.LOOKING BACKThat day began an intimate association with President Harper which continuedand grew until the end of his life, during which time I had the great privilege of seeing him unfold his vision of what the University should be, and of making my smallcontribution as an administrative officer toward the realization of his ideals. As theyears pass, the greatness of his service to the University and to the cause of highereducation stands out in bolder and bolder relief. I could speak of the able way inTRUSTEES' DINNER TO MEMBERS OF THE FACULTIES 133which he developed many of his plans for the upbuilding of the University, as seenfrom the inside, but this is not the appropriate occasion.Since that Sunday afternoon in 1896, 1 have had many relations with the University — as an undergraduate, a fellow, an alumnus, an executive officer, a memberof the Faculty, and a member of the Board of Trustees. Thus has been afforded mea view of it from every possible angle. Besides my acquaintance with President Harper, it has been my good fortune to have known and been closely associated with allthe presidents of the University who have succeeded him. I have watched the growthof the splendid tradition of the institution living within its income which PresidentJudson promptly launched on assuming office, and which has continued uninterruptedly for the twenty years since. This service will rank as one of the foremost in thehistory of the University. I saw the crusading spirit which President Burton broughtto bear on the problems of the University, and the new life and marvelous enthusiasmwhich he created. And finally I participated in initiating President Mason into themysteries of university administration and the inauguration of an era which I feelwill be as renowned as those of his distinguished predecessors.THE GROWTH OE A GENERATIONSince 1896 I have seen the University's Faculty grow from 166 to 612 ; its student body increase from 1,864 a year to its present enrolment of 14,472. The cost ofoperation has grown from $636,996.35 to $4,083,637. Practically all the magnificentbuildings which now grace the Quadrangles have risen since that day. The materialresources have reached the sum of nearly $70,000,000 from one- tenth of that amountin 1896. I remember being with President Harper on one occasion in New York whenhe was asked what sum in his opinion was needed to round out the work of the University. After a night's work he produced a well-thought-out scheme which wouldrequire $50,000,000 to put into effect. Measured by previous standards, we live acentury in a few years now, so that when President Burton faced the same questionthree years ago which confronted President Harper twenty-five years before, notwithstanding the fact that the University's assets had reached over $50,000,000, he feltthat at least $50,000,000 more were needed, and that within fifteen years.But large resources and a host of students may not in themselves be an indication of true progress unless the resources are used wisely for good purposes and thestudents become better men and women because of their sojourn at the University.Lord Palmerston is said to have remarked when he was informed that a large delegation of citizens was waiting to see him, "I know what they are — they are many butnot much."I, for one, would be deeply disappointed if the accomplishments of our University could be described quantitatively only and we could not point with pride to itsachievements from the standpoint of quality. Fortunately, there have been and aremany objective evidences that the growth of the University has not been deficient inscholarly performance and worthy training. As an evidence of its reputation mention need only be made of the report by President Hughes, of Miami University, inwhich the graduate work of the University of Chicago is given the highest rank. It isalso my good fortune to meet distinguished university educators both from our owncountry and from abroad who have added their testimony to the worth of the workcarried on by our University.The function of a historian is an important one — for a knowledge of the pastand an understanding of its underlying philosophy and the lessons it teaches for the134 THE UNIVERSITY RECORDfuture are indispensable to true progress. However, it is not in the role of historianthat I am speaking to you this evening, but as a Trustee who with my colleaguesbears the responsibility of using in the best manner the funds which have been intrusted to us. What chiefly concerns us is the part which this University should takein the field of higher education and how it may function most effectively and usefullyto make its largest contribution. We should then see to it that the resources of theUniversity are devoted to that end, and the best Faculty possible secured, given thelargest freedom in seeking that objective, and paid adequate salaries.LOOKING EORWARDIn these days of rapid changes in economic, social, and political conditions, itmay well be that the educational obligation resting on the University is of a differentnature from what it was in the past, and that the time is now ripe for a careful inquiry among ourselves, with such assistance as we may wish to secure from others, toascertain whether the University is now rendering the educational service for whichit is best fitted and which is most needed. In the "Decennial Publications" of theUniversity, President Harper, reviewing the accomplishments of the first decade, remarked that the institution should take careful stock of its progress and program atleast every ten years, so that it might discard that which was no longer useful andassume that which the new conditions demanded. He said : "I desire at this point toexpress the hope that a similar report may be made by the officials of the Universityin connection with each decade of its progress. In these modern times ten years countfor as much as one hundred years did formerly. It is worth the while of those engaged in any important undertaking, educational or otherwise, to sum up the resultsof the work accomplished in ten years, to consider the policies which have prevailed,and to decide whether, in view of all the facts, these policies have been correct andhave secured the results desired. Moreover, it is to be remembered that many policies, at least those of minor importance, may wisely be changed from time to timeeven under the same administration ; for a policy which may have been the best fora certain period may not be the best for another period. It has been customary ineducational administration to wait for the change of an administration before introducing or adopting new policies. This is a mistake. The institution is thus too frequently compelled to wait a longer period than is wise. It may, of course, be difficultfor an administration to adapt itself from time to time to changes, but, however difficult this may be, it would seem to be upon the whole a wise policy."In the last analysis, however, I think you will agree with me that whatever theobjective of the University may be, hearty co-operation and mutual understandingand confidence on the part of the Trustees and the Faculty are absolutely essential toits realization. The success of the University in the past has largely resulted from itsfine esprit de corps and will depend on it in an increasing measure in the future.Since I have been at one time or another, as mentioned before, a member of bothUniversity groups concerned, and thus have had a chance to become acquainted withtheir points of view, it may not be amiss for me to indicate where I think this spiritof co-operation may be made even better.CO-OPERATION ESSENTIALThe Trustees are active men of affairs, who, as I know from experience, devotemuch of their time, thought, and money to the welfare of the University. While theyare responsible for both the financial and educational administration of the institu-TRUSTEES' DINNER TO MEMBERS OF THE FACULTIES 135tion, it has been their custom to concentrate chiefly on the financial and leave largelyto the President and Faculty matters educational. The tendency of this has been toplace the financial and educational apparently in two somewhat separate compartments, and to develop the feeling that the Trustees alone are concerned with the material resources of the University, and that the Faculty has no interest in the matterother than perhaps a selfish one. This feeling is not true in fact nor good in theory.The Trustees are deeply interested in the real work of the University; and a properknowledge of the financial resources and condition of the University on the part ofthe Faculty is essential if they are to realize the justice of the budget appropriations.Some of the Faculty have vague notions of the wealth of the University and feel thatthe Trustees are unduly watchful in preventing the departments from getting whatthey desire.This might be obviated, I think, if an afternoon or evening session were held atthe University once a year or oftener, at which the Trustees and administrative officers would present to the Faculty the financial situation of the University and answerquestions regarding any phases of it which might not be clear. Such conferences, ifconducted with frankness and good will on both sides, would, I feel sure, be of muchbenefit to all concerned, by removing many possibilities of misunderstanding and cultivating mutual confidence.The Trustees try to keep in touch with the educational work of the Universityand informed of what is going on. However, since so much of their time is taken upwith caring for the University's property, and as their own offices are in the Loop,the meetings of the Board are more conveniently held down town. Some years ago itwas suggested that one or two of the regular monthly meetings of the Board shouldtake place at the University and opportunity be given to the Trustees to visit theQuadrangles. At these meetings certain members of the Faculty were invited to bepresent to explain to the Trustees what they were trying to do in their departments.This was an effort in the right direction, but the dockets for the meetings are so full ofregular business and the extent of the work at the University is so great that little ofthe field has been covered.I offer a further suggestion in the interest of fuller co-operation and mutual understanding : that at least once a year the President of the University and the Facultyinvite the Trustees to a meeting to present to the Trustees a report of what, in theirjudgment, is most significant in the work of the University, and what they feel shouldbe the next step in its development; and that opportunity be afforded for frank andfree discussion.My final suggestion relates to the personnel of the Board of Trustees. At present the members are, as previously mentioned, men of affairs, thoroughly competentto manage the funds of the University wisely. With this growing need for further cooperation between the financial and the educational aspects, it would seem to methat some persons might well be elected to the Board because of their wide experiencein university education, men so conversant with the theory and practice of highereducation, that they would be able to reinforce the President in presenting the educational policies and plans to the Board of Trustees.There are now among the alumni many who occupy positions of responsibilityand dignity as presidents of universities, colleges, institutes of research, and in faculties of institutions of higher learning, from whom selection might be made. TJieywould bring to the counsels of the Board not only their own experience and judgment, but could acquaint it with the experiences of other universities.136 THE UNIVERSITY RECORDIn conclusion I would say that we have reason to be proud of the amazing record which the University of Chicago has made in the brief period of its existence. Icherish the hope and confident expectation that what it will accomplish in the decades and centuries to come will likewise exceed the highest flights of our imagination.With unity of aim and purpose and with Trustees, Faculty, and students all workingin harmony and good will, there is no limit to the magnificent service which such agroup devoted to high ideals can accomplish, and which I for one feel sure it willachieve.PRESIDENT MASON SPEAKSAt the University of Wisconsin, where I came from, the students have a quainthabit of forming traditions by majority vote and abolishing them in a similar way.We have heard the phrase "hampering tradition" several times this evening, and Ifind a tradition hampering : that one by virtue of which the President of the Trustees introduces the speakers in such a way as to inhibit them from any possibility ofspeaking for several moments after the introduction. I should like to move and declare the vote passed that this tradition be declared obsolete.I was much interested in everything that Mr. Arnett said, and cordially welcomeany suggestion — and I am sure the Faculty will — tending to keep from insulationthe different groups that constitute this remarkable family. We are so frank, sofriendly, so entirely in accord, that any lack of complete understanding is due to onething only : to the fact that we are all so busy that we sometimes do not take thepains to see that we are in contact one with another as much as we should like to be.Certainly the Faculty-Trustee contact is one to be promoted, and I second Mr. Arnett 's remarks with enthusiasm. Within the Faculty we have divisions, and wemust think of some means by which we may keep the contacts fresh and stop theinsulation which results from our absorption in our own fields. One thing we needis a centralization of offices of administration. Another thing I would suggest is anannual meeting of each department or of each group of departments which now meettogether. We have the monthly meetings, the journal clubs, those groups in whichscientific discussion is carried on throughout the academic year. I am wondering ifit would not be a wholesome thing if one of these meetings a year were turned intoan annual meeting, and within that group it should be a stock-taking meeting. Thework of the past year would be surveyed and the work of the year to come would beoutlined as far as that is possible. I know with what eagerness I should welcome —and I am sure all of the administrative officers of the University would welcome — anopportunity to attend such a group meeting as that. I feel that it would satisfy asound and wholesome internal need, the need of self -direction. Even in so small agroup as a department, once a year is none too often to survey what has been doneand to plan for the future. We have a great group of productive scholars within theUniversity, and they must direct their own efforts. They cannot be directed, butthey must direct their efforts in such a way that the maximum advance of knowledgewill come from their activity. Chicago always has been, and always must remain, apioneer, a pathfinder. That is the reason for its existence, and we can see more clearlyinto the wilderness by group co-operation.I was much interested in Dr. McLean's presentation of the medical program.Years ago I was discussing a problem in medical education with Doctor Birge, president of the University of Wisconsin, and when we had finished the talk Doctor Birgesaid to me : "I have often thought of something that a university president said tome ten years ago. We were talking at a meeting of the American Association of StateTRUSTEES' DINNER TO MEMBERS OF THE FACULTIES 137Universities, and I was complaining rather bitterly of some of my problems. Thispresident turned to me and said, 'Birge, you don't know what trouble is. Wait tillyou start your medical school.' " Well, I was prepared after that for the worst, andI am very glad to testify that such grave difficulties as were indicated by that statement of President Birge's, if existent at Chicago, have been cared for before theyreached my office.We have an inspiring program in medicine. In that program the new medicaldepartments within the University on the South Side are to act as the cutting edgefor the broader base furnished by the preclinical scientific departments. We have onthe South Side the University type of program, and we have on the West Side thepracticing physician's and surgeon's type of program. We hope to see great achievements in both of these. It is fine to think that we have this dual program of attack,the clinical departments on the South Side in close connection with the scientificwork of the University, manned in the full-time spirit, and the post-graduate schoolof medicine in which eminent practitioners have an opportunity for further service inpursuing research and in teaching.Our problem for the immediate future is consolidation and intensification ofeffort rather than further expansion. Opportunities for service continually arisewhich imply broadening our field. I often think, when these opportunities occur, ofthe first time that my brother and myself ever went to a hotel to dinner. It was atthe Dells, at some little country hotel. The waiter came in before dessert and said,"Apple pie, mince pie, raspberry pie, custard pie"; my brother looked up at him witha grin from ear to ear and said, "Yes." It is very hard to say "No" when everythingsounds good, but we cannot do everything in the world. If we are to do that type ofwork which is characteristic of Chicago, we cannot take on any new undertakingsunless they dovetail entirely with our present effort.Chicago is the pioneer. It must be outstanding or nothing. There is no reasonfor its existence as just another university. We do not desire to do things that arenew just because they are new, but to be unafraid and to do things that are new ifthey are for the best interests of research and education in America. There are noobstacles to such a program. I am deeply impressed by the truth of that statement.I was told it when I came. I have learned it in a new sense every week. I think thatthere is no other institution of anything like the magnitude of this University whichin its component parts is so wonderfully unified, in spirit of performance and indirection of purpose. This great instrument is easily directed. We have the abilitywithin this group to direct it, and if we will study our problems together with freshviewpoints, with the feeling that we are literally unhampered by tradition, there isnothing impossible in research and education for this institution.We must experiment. However carefully we may plan, we shall make mistakes,but we must keep trying. We are a fresh, young, vigorous group, with the inspiration of President Harper's genius as our tradition — a tradition to be without crystallized policies, a tradition of fresh vision, of new methods, and of courage.There is plenty of research in American institutions. There is not enough reallysignificant research. There are plenty of graduate schools in America, and the attendance in them is growing by leaps and bounds. Where lies our special function inresearch and graduate work ? Evidently in a willingness to discount the mediocre, tohave no interest in numbers of graduate students for the sake of numbers, to haveno interest in amount of publication of the Faculty for the sake of the amount, butto have every interest in seeing that the best work of which the Faculty is capable is138 THE UNIVERSITY RECORDencouraged, is really produced, and is brought to its proper influence in America.We must see that the quality of our graduate school improves regardless of itsquantity of students.One of the greatest duties that we have to perform is to create in the Universityof Chicago a university in which scholarship is sought and appreciated by the undergraduate body. Because of the research activity of this institution there seems to beclearly indicated a type of performance in education which it is our duty to try :education by participation in research. We cannot drive that to the limit. Studentsmust obtain the technique for that participation, and there must be means for obtaining general information. Provided that the goal of participation in some reallyvital research problem appears as a reward to undergraduate students for successful performance in their work, they will become a part of our general program ina wholly new spirit. I am reminded of a true tale that was told me a short time agoabout a little boy who, a great many years ago, when bread was five cents a loaf,was given five cents with which to buy anything that he wanted. He went downtown with his mother, and he looked over everything. It took him a long time, andafter all of his shopping, after he had studied everything in the stores for an hour, heended up by buying a loaf of exactly the same bread that they served every day onthe table and which he had up to that time been very unwilling to eat. A rathersurprising thing for a youngster to do. He bought it, put it under his arm, and tookit home. He sat down for supper, and he said, "No, I don't want any of the othersupper. I want my bread"; and he ate his bread and nothing else. "My," he said,"isn't that good bread?" I think there is a good moral in that story. That spark ofinterest will lead our undergraduate students further ahead than any other methodwhich we can devise, and it is in keeping with our program.Now how shall we work it out ? Mr. Swift said I had plans for this University.I have lots of problems in connection with this University, but we must all work outthe plans together. I believe there is more than a mere visionary desire in the statement that we can make this to a greater degree than heretofore a university in whichtraining and education occur by participation in the performance to which the Faculty is devoting its life. Students should share with the Faculty our advances ofknowledge. I do not mean that a Junior can take a research problem in Celtic or incalculus of variations. I know very well he cannot. But I do know how much itmeans to the youngster to be around a group doing real things; and if he does nothing more than carry a bucket of water for a man who is performing an experimentin physics, if he does nothing more than help typewrite or arrange sheets or photostats, he gets the spirit of scholarship and can be left to his own devices to satisfy hiscuriosity. The methods in the colleges, to a very great extent, are those of many decades ago, when it was difficult to obtain the information which constituted a collegeeducation. Today you can hardly turn without seeing some very good means bywhich a man who wishes to educate himself can do so. Libraries are at every turn,self-helps, correspondence schools ; there is no need now to furnish merely the helpsto education, and there is certainly no reason for the continuance in an undergraduate college of methods which dull the edge of curiosity. I am convinced that studentscome to the University of Chicago from the high schools with far higher ideals thanwe give them credit for ; that many of them are looking toward the experience as anintellectual adventure. They are easily deflected. They are young. We do not holdas many of them as we might, and I hope that we can hold more. The answer is notin using the college as an instrument to dull curiosity. The answer is in using theTRUSTEES' DINNER TO MEMBERS OF THE FACULTIES 139college as an instrument to stimulate and feed curiosity and interest; then we cansafely leave the rest to the youngsters themselves. If we can work in that direction,we can accomplish an infinite amount of good in American education.We lack here the economic urge which makes necessary good performance inscholarship in Europe. It is the tradition of America that the able youngster canmake good. He does not need his training. Those days may pass soon. We are nolonger a pioneer country, and the need for guidance by the men versed in the technique of their subjects is becoming greater and greater; but the economic urge willnot be present with us for some time to come, and I believe we must make up for itin some way. America needs more than anything else appreciation for the life ofscholarship, and that involves us in quite a turn of events. It means that we shallhave to be sympathetic with youngsters who have not had that spark of enthusiasm,that we shall not limit our interest to those who show an early interest in scholarship.I am not sure that the normal boy can be expected under present conditions to planto be a productive scholar for a profession on entering the University, but we shallget a good many of the best men in the world if we can make our methods moreinteresting to them. Here are normal, wholesome, sound, American youths with interest in everything from athletics to music. We must make our work more theirwork, and hold out to them through an honor system such a performance in lateryears as will throw them certainly and definitely into daily participation with greatscholars whose names perhaps they already know and from whom they can obtainthat spark of interest that will make it unnecessary for anybody to teach them.They will teach themselves.Education by participation in research. It is not too much to hope for. It isnot too much to study to see how far we can go, and as I have talked with somemembers of the Faculty I have been startled to find to what an extent that is alreadyin existence in various departments of the University. Our true program, it seems tome, is an intensification of the program we have always had : the research work ofthe faculty centered in the most vital problems which they can find. We must cutthe lines of departments when necessary, in centering groups of men in commoneffort on a problem — for the problem is the real thing, the department the artificialthing. We need a set of problems of vital importance under solution co-operativelyby this great group of men, with graduate students as many in number as can well,enthusiastically, and ably co-operate in that problem of research performance, far lesscourse-giving and course-taking than is at present the habit. The curse of the American student is taking courses, and the difficulty for the Faculty is giving courses. Ispeak, naturally, in exaggeration and very extremely when I say that I believe halfof the energy of the Faculty can be saved from course-giving if we allow participation, but I believe that that is not very wild as a guess — not for tomorrow, but whenwe learn this game a little vbetter— and I believe that the students will profit from it.I have talked at length about the undergraduate training tonight because it isthe worst thing we do. We do not wish to do graduate work, research, and undergraduate work as a whole and do any of it poorly. I think we all agree that theundergraduate work has been done more poorly than anything else here at the University. Now that is not because it is done poorly by comparison with work in otherinstitutions, but because the graduate work has been done in such a wonderfullyoutstanding way. I am appealing to you, then, frankly for an interest in our wholeproblem in the spirit in which Mr. Arnett spoke: That all of the work of the University is important; that we can bring to this institution well-qualified, responsible140 THE UNIVERSITY RECORDyoungsters of good personality ; that we can make scholarship attractive to them bygiving them posts for responsible work as rapidly as we can ; that we can merge intoa program of productive scholarship a program of graduate and senior college instruction and create here in Chicago an instrument which will show the way out ofthis muddle of mediocrity that at present exists over the land in our ordinary undergraduate college.In every undergraduate body you have a substantial group of able and enthusiastic young men and women who will go out into the work of the world as ablecitizens really influenced by their college experience. But with that group is a largebody of indifferent young men and women. My thesis is that it is not necessary thatthese individuals be indifferent, and I hope that by study and by thought we canmake our research here, our spirit of productive scholarship, the leading light for oureducational method. I do not want to infer that I am more interested in undergraduate education than in any other kind; but we have that as part of our program, anddo not do it as well as the rest. Our main effort will always be for creative scholarship.Support for the work of the University is being granted in increasing measure,and I feel that there is no limit to the support if this Faculty maintains the performance of which it is capable. I believe that there lies within this Faculty the power topromote education and research even to a higher degree than in the past. There is thepower to create a university of a new kind in America, of a grade vastly differentfrom that of today. The opportunity is before us to bring back the Harper days ofpioneering and to give a second impetus to the life of scholarship in the wholecountry.The Trustees' committee of arrangements for the dinner consisted ofC. F. Axelson, chairman, C. W. Gilkey, and A. W. Sherer, Mr. J. F.Moulds caring for the manifold details under the committee's generaldirection. The Faculty committee on reception consisted of AlgernonColeman, chairman, and eleven others; that on seating consisted of H. I.Schlesinger, chairman, and fourteen others.Some idea of the difficulties overcome in preparing the dinner forthe nearly four hundred guests may be imagined when it is stated thatsome 1 60 persons were concerned in making it a success. These includedcommittees, workmen from the Buildings and Grounds Department, andemployees of the Commons department. The Commons people wereobliged to cook and prepare the food in six different places within thequadrangles and to carry it (and this meant the transportation of 612pounds of chickens, as well as other food) to the serving tables in IdaNoyes Hall, and thence to the gymnasium.Every effort was made, by draping the walls with flags and suspending lanterns from the roof girders, to improve the acoustics of the largeroom. But even then many persons, unfortunately, were unable to hearall the speakers' words. No doubt the Ida Noyes gymnasium, notwithstanding its limitations, is the best place now available for this significant annual event.THE BOARD OF TRUSTEESBy JOHN F. MOULDS, Secretary of the BoardSECRETARY OF THE UNIVERSITYThe By-laws of the Board of Trustees of the University have beenamended in order to provide for the creation of a new appointive office tobe known as that of the "Secretary of the University." To make the distinction clear in the By-laws between the "Secretary of the Board ofTrustees" and the new "Secretary of the University," the By-laws havebeen amended so that where formerly the word "Secretary" appeared,the words "Secretary of the Board" now appear. Mr. Rowland Haynes,formerly director of the Cleveland Welfare Federation, has been appointed to the new office of "Secretary of the University."ELECTION OF TRUSTEES AND OFFICERSThe following persons, two of whom are alumni of the University,have been elected Trustees of the University, in>the classes as indicated:Harrison B. Barnard, '95, in Class 3, the term expiring in 1928.Frank McNair, '03, in Class 2, the term expiring in 1927.Eugene M. Stevens, in Class 1, the term expiring in 1929.At the February 10, 1927, meeting of the Board of Trustees, JohnF. Moulds was elected Secretary of the Board, to take the place of J.Spencer Dickerson, resigned, who has been appointed CorrespondingSecretary.SPECIAL COMMITTEESA special committee on University Hospitals has been appointed.The members are: A. W. Sherer, Chairman, Max Mason, Dr. Wilber E.Post, Sewell L. Avery, and Charles W. Gilkey.ADJUSTMENT OF TUITION RATESThe Board of Trustees, at its meeting held January 13, 1927, votedto put into effect beginning with the Summer Quarter, 1927, a readjustedschedule of tuition fees in accordance with which there is substituted fora tuition fee supplemented by laboratory, materials, and other specialfees, a single fee covering tuition and all other educational service (li-141142 THE UNIVERSITY RECORDbrary, laboratory, health, materials, etc.). The new quarterly fees areas follows:a) Graduate Schools of Arts, Literature and Scienceb ) Graduate School of Social Service AdministrationGraduate students Undergraduate students . . . .c) Divinity School d) Colleges of Arts, Literature and Science .e) Unclassified students . °/) School of EducationGraduate students . . Undergraduate students g) Law School Candidates for J.S.D. degree (Graduate) .h) Medical students (including Rush Medical College)i) School of Commerce and AdministrationGraduate students Undergraduate students APPOINTMENTSThe following appointments, in addition to reappointments, weremade by the Board of Trustees during the Winter Quarter, 1927:Leonard Bloomfield, as Professor of Germanic Philology, from October 1, 1927.J. C. M. Hanson, now Associate Director of the University Libraries,as Acting Director of the University Libraries, for the year 1927-28.M. Llewellyn Raney, now Librarian of the Johns Hopkins University, as Director of the University Libraries, with the rank of Professor,from October 1,1927.Ferdinand Schevill, as non-resident Professor of Modern EuropeanHistory, from October 1, 1927.William Warren Sweet, as Professor of Church History, from October 1, 1927.William F. Ogburn, as Professor of Sociology, from July 1, 1927.Henry Nelson Wieman, as Professor of Christian Theology, fromOctober 1, 1927.William E. Dodd, as Chairman of the Department of History, forthree years from July 1, 1927.Dr. Franklin C. McLean, as Chairman of the Department of Medicine, until June 30, 1927, and then for three years.Nellie X. Hawkinson, as Associate Professor in the Department ofNursing, for fifteen months from July 1, 1927. $ 70.0070.00100.0070.00100.00100.0070.00100.00100.0070.00100.0070.00100.00THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES 143Dr. Paul C. Hodges, as Associate Professor of Roentgenology in theDepartment of Medicine, and Roentgenologist to the University Hospitals, for thirteen months from June 1,1927.Arthur E. Holt, as Professor of Social Ethics in the Divinity School,from October 1, 1926.Walter L. Bullock, as Assistant Professor of Italian for three yearsfrom October 1, 1927.Gertrude L. Banfield, as Instructor in Clinical Nursing and Supervisor of the Max Epstein Clinic, for eighteen months from April 1, 1927.Dr. Louis Bothman, as part-time Clinical Instructor in Ophthalmology in the Department of Surgery, for two years from March 1, 1927.Frederick W. Geers, as Instructor in the Department of OrientalLanguages for the Spring Quarter, 1927.Dr. Elvin Mann Hartlett, as Instructor in Ophthalmology, in the Department of Surgery, for sixteen months from March 1, 1927.Florence Imlay, as part-time Instructor in the Department of HomeEconomics, for the Winter Quarter, 1927.Perry Y. Jackson, as Instructor in the Department of Medicine forthe Spring and Summer Quarters, 1927.Faye Whiteside, as Instructor of Clinical Nursing and Supervisor ofthe Operating Rooms and Surgical Supply Rooms of the Billings Hospital for sixteenth months from June 1, 1927.H. H. von der Osten, as Field Director of the Hittite ExplorationExpedition of the Oriental Institute, for one year from March 1, 1927.Irwin T. Gilruth, as Lecturer in the Department of Economics, forthe Spring Quarter, 1927.Gail Moulton, as Special Lecturer in Petroleum Geology, for theSpring Quarter, 1927.S. Y. Chan, to give instruction in the Divinity School for the WinterQuarter, 1927.Wesley P. Clark, to give instruction in the Department of Greek, forthe Autumn Quarter, 1927, and the Winter and Spring Quarters, 1928.Francelia Stuenkel, as Special Fellow in the School of Social ServiceAdministration, for the Spring and Summer Quarters.PROMOTIONMr. Walter Bartky was promoted to an assistant professorship inthe Department of Astronomy, for three years from October 1, 1927.144 THE UNIVERSITY RECORDRETIREMENTSThe following retirements were acted upon by the Board of Trusteesduring the Winter Quarter :Francis A. Wood, as Professor in the Department of Germanic Languages and Literatures, effective June 30, 1927.Miss Elizabeth Wallace, as Professor of French Literature, effectiveSeptember 30, 1927.RESIGNATIONSThe following resignations were accepted by the Board of Trusteesduring the Winter Quarter, 1927:Andrew C. McLaughlin as Head of the Department of History, effective June 30, 1927. Mr. McLaughlin, who since 1906 has been a member of the Faculty of the University, has not resigned his professorship,but has simply relinquished the duties as Head of the Department,Major F. M. Barrows, as Professor and Head of the Department ofMilitary Science and Tactics, effective June 30, 1927.George S. Counts, as Professor of Education in the School of Education, effective June 30, 1927.F. R. Moulton, as Professor in the Department of Astronomy, effective January 13, 1927.Ferdinand Schevill, as Professor of Modern European History, effective September 30, 1927.Rudolph Altrocchi, as Assistant Professor of Romance Languages,effective September 30,1927.Mrs. Ethel Terry-McCoy, as Assistant Professor in the Departmentof Chemistry, effective with the end of the Winter Quarter, 1927.Carl F. Huth, as Secretary of the Department of History, effectiveSeptember 30, 1927.Florence Williams, as Instructor in the Department of Art, effectiveJune 30, 1927.Dr. Leo C. Clowes, as Clinical Associate in the Department of Medicine, Rush Medical College, effective February 10, 1927.John F. Norton, as Dean in the Colleges, effective January 1, 1927.Gertrude M. Clark, of the Library Staff, effective January 1, 1927.LEAVES OF ABSENCEThe following leaves of absence were granted during the WinterQuarter, 1927:THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES 145E. P. Dargan, for the Autumn Quarter, 1927, so that he may teachat Princeton during that time.D. D. Luckenbill, for the Summer and Autumn Quarters, 1927, inorder that he may spend further time in the British Museum necessary tothe completion of his research projects.A. A. Michelson, for the Winter Quarter, 1927, in order to completehis experiments in California for ascertaining the speed of light.Peter F. Smith, Assistant Professor of Spanish, for the Spring Quarter, 1927, on account of the illness of his wife.Dr. Frederic W. Burcky, Clinical Instructor in the Department ofMedicine, Rush Medical College, for one year beginning April 1, 1927,on account of ill health.Walter L. Dorn, Instructor in History, for one year from October 1,1927, so that he may carry through a research project on administrativehistory in the libraries and archives of Europe.Mrs. Florence M. Goodspeed, Director of Ida Noyes Hall, for theSpring Quarter, 1927, for rest and recuperation.DEATHSDeaths of persons connected with the University occurred during theWinter Quarter as follows:Nathaniel Butler, Assistant to the President, died March 3, 1927.Connected both with the old University of Chicago, and with the presentUniversity of Chicago since 1893.Wallace Heckman, Counsel and Business Manager of the University,from 1903 until his retirement, August 1, 1924. Died March 7, 1927.Leila Houghteling, Instructor in the Graduate School of Social Service Administration, and Dean in the Colleges from October 1, 1926, untilher death, January 1, 1927.Harry Pratt Judson, President Emeritus of the University, diedMarch 4, 1927. Connected with the University from 1892 until his retirement in 1923.Dr. Francis Lane, Clinical Professor and Vice-Chairman of the Department of Ophthalmology in Rush Medical College, from October 1,1926, until his death, February 18, 1927.Dr. W. George Lee, Assistant Clinical Professor in the Departmentof Obstetrics and Gynecology in Rush Medical College, from the takingover of Rush Medical College in June, 1924, until his death, February10, 1927.146 THE UNIVERSITY RECORDGIFTSThe Carnegie Corporation has made an appropriation of $1,700 foithe financial support of the course, "The Meaning and Value of theArts," during the Spring Quarter, 1927.A grant of $2,000 has been made by the Evaporated Milk Association to conduct an investigation in the Department of PhysiologicalChemistry of the University of the relative digestibility of raw milk, pasteurized milk, and evaporated milk.Mr. C. H. Koenitzer, an alumnus of both the old and the presentUniversity of Chicago, has given the University two stones from the oldUniversity building, which he has had in his possession for many years.It has been decided to place one of the stones in the north wall of thenarthex of the University Chapel, and the other in the passage of Wieboldt Hall, with appropriate inscriptions in each instance.The friends of Harry Ginsburg have given the sum of $2,000 as afund to be known as the Harry Ginsburg Memorial Fund. The incomefrom this sum is to be awarded annually to an undergraduate medicalstudent in the Department of Physiology, the recipient to be designatedby the Chairman of the department on the basis of industry, sincerity,and ability.A loan fund, to be known as the Elizabeth Chapin Memorial LoanFund, has been created by the gift of $300 from the Phi Delta UpsilonClub of the University of Chicago. This loan fund is for women studentsin the colleges or graduate schools.The University has received a copy of the Aldine edition of Dante'sDivine Comedy, printed in 1502, from Mr. Henry J. Patten. This is arare and valuable addition to the libraries.Mrs. W. Murray Crane has given the sum of $2,500 for the Hittiteexplorations of the Oriental Institute.Dr. Lester E. Frankenthal has given $1,195 to the University tocover the cost of the obstetrical and gynecological library of ProfessorFehling, which has been conveyed to the University.Mr. and Mrs. Frank R. Lillie have given $483.60 for the purchaseof special equipment for the Whitman Laboratory of Experimental Zoology.Mr. Carl B. Nusbaum has given the sum of $435 for the general endowment of the University, being the amount which Mr. Nusbaum received from the Noyes Scholarship Fund while a student in the LawSchool.THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES 147Mr. A. S. Peabody has given $5,000 for the general endowment ofthe University.Dr. Vernon C. David has given $100 for the use of the Departmentof Surgery of Rush Medical College.The following persons have subscribed to the Frank Billings MedicalClinic, Fund: Mr. Reuben Grigsby Chandler, Mr. and Mrs. Frank O.Lowden, Mr. Ernest A. Hamill, Mr. and Mrs. Henry E. Cook, Dr. Thomas L. Gilmer, Mrs. Joseph H. Schaffner, Mrs. William O. Goodman,James B. Waller, III, Mr. and Mrs, Slingaby C. Stall wood, Mrs. MasonBross, Mr. John A. Carroll, Mrs. W, W. Cummer, Dearborn ChemicalCompany, Dr. Frank Smithies, Mrs. Frederic W. LTpham, Mr. Fred G.Hartwell, Miss Gwethalyn Jones, Mrs. George R. Nichols, Mr. ThomasD. Jones, Mr. Oscar J. Friedman, Mr. Lucius K. Baker, Mr. James C.Hutchins, Mr. and Mrs. Howard G. Grey, Mrs, Frank H. Montgomery,Mr. and Mrs. Moise Dreyfus, and Mr. A. W. Goodrich.MISCELLANEOUSA part of the principal and the income from the gift of Mr. JuliusRosenwald to the Development Fund have been designated for use In thepurchase of equipment for the natural and biological sciences.The Board has voted that the building heretofore known as thePhysiology Building shall be officially designated the "Biology Library."At the meeting of the Board of Trustees, held March 10, 1927, William J. Mather was appointed Assistant Secretary of the Board.Professor Paul Shorey, who since 1892 has been an honored memberof the Faculty of the University, has not resigned his professorship, buthas simply relinquished the duties as Head of the Department. The notice given in the January number of the Record stated that he had resigned as Head, and while correct, the announcement did not indicatethat he still remained as a member of the Faculty.CONVOCATION STATEMENT1I. LOSSES BY DEATHIt is my sad duty at this time formally to announce the heavy losseswhich the University has suffered at the hand of death during the WinterQuarter: Harry Pratt Judson, second President of the University, and atthe time of his death President Emeritus; Wallace Heckman, formerBusiness Manager and Counsel of the University; Nathaniel Butler, Professor Emeritus of Education, and Assistant to the President; Ernest A.Hamill, a Trustee of Rush Medical College; Dr. Francis Lane, ClinicalProfessor of Ophthalmology in Rush Medical College; Dr. WilliamGeorge Lee, Assistant Clinical Professor of Obstetrics and Gynecology inRush Medical College; Miss Leila Houghteling, National Research Council Fellow and Instructor in the School of Social Service Administration;Miss Jessie L. Newlin, Assistant in Public Speaking in University College.II. NEW TRUSTEESFour new Trustees have accepted places on the Board of Trusteesduring the Quarter: Mr. Sewell L. Avery, president of the United StatesGypsum Company; Mr. Harrison B. Barnard, president of the BarnardConstruction Company; Mr. Frank McNair, vice-president of the HarrisTrust and Savings Bank; Mr. Eugene M. Stevens, president of the Illinois Merchants Trust Company.Mr. Barnard and Mr. McNair are alumni of the University, the former having been graduated in 1896, the latter in 1903.III. NEW APPOINTMENTSTo the newly created office of Secretary of the University, Mr. Rowland Haynes has been appointed. Mr. Haynes comes to us from Cleveland, where he has been director of the Cleveland Welfare Federation.Mr. John F. Moulds has been appointed Secretary of the Board ofTrustees in succession to Mr. James Spencer Dickerson, who, however, retains the duties of Corresponding Secretary.Mr. M. Llewellyn Raney, librarian of the Johns Hopkins University,1 Read at the One Hundred Forty-fifth Convocation of the University, held inLeon Mandel Assembly Hall, March 15, 1926, by the Vice-President and Dean ofFaculties, Frederic C. Woodward.148CONVOCATION STATEMENT 149has accepted an appointment as Director of the Libraries, effective October 1, 1927. Mr. Raney expects to devote the greater part of next year tothe study of problems of library administration, and Mr. J. C. M. Hanson, Associate Director, has been appointed Acting Director for the year.IV. STATISTICS OF ATTENDANCEThe attendance figures for the Winter Quarter as reported by theUniversity Recorder are as follows:On the Quadrangles and in Rush Medical College:Graduates 2,176Undergraduates . . . . .3,091Unclassified 104Total . . . . . .5,371University College:Graduates . . . . . . 695Undergraduates . . . . . 988Unclassified . . ;. . 539Total . . . . . . 2,222Total, exclusive of (63) duplicates, 7,530. In comparison with figures for the Winter Quarter of 1926, there is, on the Quadrangles and inRush Medical College, an increase of 165; in University College, a decrease of 109. The net increase for the University is 56.v. GIFTSToward the fund of $1,000,000 which is being raised by the University for the endowment of the Frank Billings Medical Clinic, $134,625has already been subscribed. Subscriptions to this fund are doubly welcome, since they are credited to the amount which the University is required to raise in order to meet the terms of the conditional gift of theGeneral Education Board for the endowment of medical education previously announced.From the alumnae and members of Phi Delta Upsilon a gift of $300has been received for the establishment of a fund to be known as the Elizabeth Chapin Memorial Loan Fund, which is to be increased by an additional annual contribution of $200. This fund is to be available for loansto women students in the colleges and graduate schools, preference beinggiven to applications from the members of Phi Delta Upsilon.From the friends of the late Harry Ginsburg, a gift of $2,000, to beknown as the Harry Ginsburg Memorial Fund, the income of which is toISO THE UNIVERSITY RECORDbe devoted to the aid of undergraduate medical students working in theDepartment of Physiology.From Mrs. W. Murray Crane, $2,500, to be applied to the Hittite explorations of the Oriental Institute.From Dr. Lester E. Frankenthal, $1,195, to cover the cost of the obstetrical and gynecological library of Professor Fehling, recently purchased by the University.From the Evaporated Milk Association, $2,000, to conduct an investigation, in the Department of Physiological Chemistry, of the relative digestibility of raw milk, pasteurized milk, and evaporated milk.VI. CONTRACT WITH THE CHICAGO LYING-IN HOSPITALA contract has been entered into between the Chicago Lying-in Hospital and the University, as a result of which it is expected that the Lying-in Hospital will erect a new hospital building in proximity to the School ofMedicine on the Midway, and the University will establish in connectiontherewith a clinic for instruction and research in obstetrics and gynecology.VII. THE NEW BUILDINGSAs a result of the unusually clement weather, good progress has beenmade on the buildings under construction. We are assured that WieboldtHall of Modern Languages will be ready for occupancy on September 1,and that the Albert Merritt Billings Hospital will open its doors beforethe end of the summer. To our eager eyes progress on the Chapel seemsslow, but I hope we shall soon be able to realize the nobility of its proportions and the beauty of its design. It is impossible at this time accuratelyto predict the date of its completion.The Graduate Clubhouse has been fully equipped and handsomelyfurnished, and is now in use. It constitutes a most attractive commonsand social center for the graduate students of the University.VIII. RETIREMENTSTwo members of the Faculty will retire at the end of their presentacademic year: Professor Francis Asbury Wood, of the Department ofGermanic Languages and Literatures, on June 30, and Professor Elizabeth Wallace, of the Department of Romance Languages and Literatures,on September 30.Professor Wood has been a member of the teaching staff since 1903;his contributions to learning in the field of Germanic philology have hadCONVOCATION STATEMENT ISIinternational recognition. Miss Wallace has served the University notonly as a teacher, but as head, first of Beecher, and then of Foster Hall,and as Dean in the Colleges. She has made many friends for the University, and thousands of students have felt the lasting influence of her gracious personality.I cannot bring my part in these exercises to a close without a word ofcongratulation and salutation to those who have received degrees, and especially to those who are leaving the University. It is difficult at such atime as this to avoid the commonplace. "Goodbye" is a commonplaceword, but we do not for that reason refrain from saying it. So I shall notrefrain from saying that we heartily congratulate you upon the accomplishment of an important stage in your education. We hope you havebeen happy here. We hope that doors in the house of truth have beenopened to you, and that you have been given the keys wherewith to openother doors beyond. We hope that each of you has experienced the quickening influence of some great scholar or teacher, and bears upon yourcharacter the indelible impress of some noble personality. We salute youas alumni of the University of Chicago, and wish you useful and happylives.BRIEF RECORDS OF THE QUARTERThe Yale University Press has become the American agent for the Su-merian Inscriptions of Gudea (ca. 2450B.C.), translated by Professor EmeritusIra M. Price and just published by Hinrichs, Leipzig, Germany, as Vol. XXVIof the Assyriologische Bibliothek, editedby Delitzsch and Haupt.Official announcements for the coming Summer Quarter, which begins June20 and ends September 2, include 700courses to be given in Arts, Literature,Science, Divinity, Law, Medicine, Education, Commerce and Administration,and Social Service Administration. Astriking feature of the last SummerQuarter was the large proportion ofgraduate students, almost 4,000 of thetotal number in residence. The total attendance for the University was 6,548.Of the regular staff of the University of Chicago Faculties, over 200 willgive instruction during the coming Summer Quarter. Of this number about 150are of professorial rank. More thanninety will come from other institutionsto give courses during the summer, andof these seventy -five are of professorialrank. Among American universities represented on the Summer Quarter Facultywill be Harvard, Yale, Columbia, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Ohio, Illinois, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Texas, Stanford,Washington, and California. Educational institutions in other countries represented on the Summer Faculty will bethe University of Grenoble, France;Brandon College, Manitoba ; Free ChurchCollege, Glasgow, Scotland; Universityof Basle, Switzerland; Berlin Handels-hochschule, Germany; and Queen's University, Canada.Summer Quarter plans are alreadyannounced by the University of ChicagoSchool of Education. All regular members of the Faculty of the College ofEducation will be in residence. In addition, thirty-six visiting instructors willbe on the staff. Among these are Chancellor Samuel Paul Capen, of the University of Buffalo, and Professor Floyd Wesley Reeves, of the University ofKentucky, who will give courses in college administration; President ThomasW. Butcher, of the State Teachers College at Emporia, Kansas, who will givecourses in the organization and administration of normal schools; Superintendent Thomas R. Cole, of Seattle, Washington, Superintendent Paul R. Spencer,of Superior, Wisconsin, and Superintendent W. W. Beatty, of Bronxville,New York, who will give courses inpublic-school administration and supervision; and Ernest J. Reece, associateprofessor of library administration, Columbia University, who will be in chargeof the Institute of Library Science. Visiting instructors who will give coursesfor the first time in the College of Education include Harold G. Blue, professorof education, Colorado State TeachersCollege ; Mary G. Kelty, professor of theteaching of history and chairman of thedepartment of history and the social sciences, State Teachers College, Oshkosh,Wisconsin; Helen Koch, associate professor of educational psychology, University of Texas; and Elga M. Shearer,supervisor of kindergarten and primarygrades, Long Beach, California.Among the lectures given in February by Professor Henry C. Cowles,Chairman of the Department of Botany,was one on the Mayo Foundation, Rochester, Minnesota, his subject being "Ecology in Human Affairs." This series oflectures given by representatives of various institutions each winter appearslater in a published volume. Other lectures by Professor Cowles during February included those at Iowa State College, the Des Moines Academy of Medicine, and the University of Minnesota,where he met the botany groups for informal conferences. At Ames, Iowa, andin Minneapolis he met also the University of Chicago alumni. He has beenpresident of the Ecological Society ofAmerica, the Association of AmericanGeographers, and the Botanical Societyof America.152BRIEF RECORDS OF THE QUARTER 153In the adjustment of the tuitionfees effective July i, laboratory fees willbe abolished; and partly to recoup theloss of revenue from that source, butmore especially to provide for a comprehensive student health service which isto be inaugurated, tuition fees will beincreased $10 a quarter. It is planned toprovide infirmary and dispensary service, and perhaps a limited amount ofhospitalization for all students. Provisionof a health service is in line with thepractice at many of the country's leadingcolleges. Laboratory fees were abolishedbecause an investigation showed that itcost practically as much to maintain thelibraries, facilities of which are usedwithout charge, as it did to maintain thelaboratories. It was felt that the pastpractice of having a $5 fee for each laboratory course constituted an inequalitythat should be eliminated. Under thenew schedule, with the health service feeadded, students taking three laboratorycourses a quarter will save $5, those taking two courses will pay no more thanformerly, while the total increased fee tostudents taking one laboratory coursewill amount to $5.The Norman Wait Harris Memorial Foundation will provide its fourth institute during the Summer Quarter ofthis year. The underlying objective ofthe Foundation is "the promotion of abetter understanding on the part ofAmerican citizens of the other peoplesof the world, thus establishing a basisfor improved international relations anda more enlightened world-order." Thesubject for the current year's session isannounced as "Problems of the BritishEmpire," a subject which cannot but beof special significance in the light of therecent London conference of premiers ofthe Empire and the political changes, consequent upon that meeting. The meetings of the institute, consisting of publiclectures and small round-table discussions, will be held during the last weekin June and the first two weeks in July.The University of Chicago has recently been the recipient of honors froman unexpected and welcome source.The Chicago branch of the AmericanAssociation of University Women hasawarded grants of money to Miss ElsaChapin, ¦ of the Department of English,and to Miss Dorritt Stumberg, of the Department of Psychology, to aid themin procuring research material for theirDoctors' theses on Sir Francis Bryan, anearly English poet, and an Experimental Study of Poetic Talent, respectively.Dean Emeritus Marion Talbot and MissMary Ross Potter, counselor for womenat Northwestern University, were theCommittee of Award.Rev. Lawrence Faucett, who received his degree of Doctor of Philosophy at the University of Chicago lastAugust with a thesis on the Teaching ofEnglish in the East, has just concluded atour of India, where he had many opportunities of discussing methods withdirectors of public instruction and othereducational authorities. He has nowbeen invited by cable to join the facultyof Yenching University at Peking for aperiod of five years, and will go on thereafter a stay of some months in the Philippines, where he will also make studiesin his special field.The long-continued studies of MaudSlye, Assistant Professor of Pathologyand member of the Otho S. A. SpragueMemorial Institute, upon the nature ofcancer have covered many years of patient and persistent research. Details ofthese investigations as they have proceeded have frequently been publishedby the Sprague Institute and have beenwidely read by other seekers after knowledge of this disease. At a recent meetingin Chicago of persons engaged in what isdescribed as an "Illinois anti-cancercampaign," an address was delivered byDr. Joseph Colt Bloodgood, of JohnsHopkins University, an outstanding authority on cancer. In the course of hisaddress he paid a tribute to Miss Slye'sservice as an investigator, saying, "Notto know Maud Slye in Chicago is likenot knowing Charlie Mayo in Rochester."After a striking summary of recentbuilding operations at the University ofChicago, President Max Mason in his recent New Year's statement concludedwith a significant announcement regarding research at the University : "But wedo not gauge our progress by buildings.Our building program is the means to anintensification of our research projects.Research workers and teachers in ourlaboratories, libraries, and classroomsiS4 THE UNIVERSITY RECORDhave pushed on to new accomplishments— perhaps inspired in no small degree bythe now crystallizing vision of more adequate physical facilities for their work.To review these many contributions toscience, letters, and education with justice would be impossible in a brief statement, but we may say with certaintythat they are excelled by no yearly record of the past, and that in 1927 weshall make still greater progress. Generous gifts have enabled us to establishnew departments, carry on investigationsin home and foreign fields with greatfacility, and to attract additional authorities on many subjects to our folds."The annual University of Chicagodinner given in connection with the Department of Superintendence of the National Education Association, which isalways largely attended, was held thisyear at the University Club, Dallas,Texas, on the evening of March 2. Themembers of the Dallas University ofChicago Club served as hosts and hostesses for the occasion. Among the speakers at the dinner were Mr. T. H. Harris,State Superintendent of Public Instruction in Louisiana ; Dean William S. Gray,College of Education, Chicago; and Director Charles Hubbard Judd, of theSchool of Education, Chicago.Katherine Hancock Goode, Convocation Orator at the University of Chicago on December 21, 1926, whose portrait and Convocation, address on "'Woman's Stake in Government" appeared inthe January number of the UniversityRecord, is the sixth woman to have thisacademic honor. Mrs. Goode, the wifeof Professor J. Paul Goode, of the Department of Geography, whose majorinterest has been in the civic educationof women, was elected in 1924 to serveas state representative in the Fifty-fourth General Assembly from Chicago,and last November she was re-elected bya greatly increased majority. Other women to give the Convocation address atthe University of Chicago have been theCountess of Aberdeen, wife of the former governor-general of Canada; JaneAddams, head of Hull-House, Chicago;Myra Reynolds, Professor of Englishand head of Foster Hall, University ofChicago; Mary E. McDowell, head ofthe University of Chicago Settlementand Commissioner of Public Welfare, Chicago ; and Marion Talbot, for manyyears Dean of Women* at the Universityof Chicago.The formal appointment of Mr.John Fryer Moulds as Secretary of theBoard of Trustees was made at theFebruary meeting of the Board of Trustees. Mr. Moulds, who has been Assistant Secretary, succeeds Mr. J. SpencerDickerson, who resigned after nearlyfourteen years of service. Mr. Mouldsis the third person to hold the office ofSecretary of the Board, the first beingDr. T. W. Goodspeed, who filled the position for many years and is now Historian of the University. Mr. Moulds, whowas graduated from the University in1907 and has been among the most loyalof the alumni, has served his alma materin many effective ways, having been secretary and treasurer of the Alumni Council, cashier of the University, AssistantSecretary of the Board of Trustees, Executive Secretary of the Committee onDevelopment, and Assistant BusinessManager at the Quadrangles.In a recent letter from ProfessorGeorge B. Cressey, of the department ofgeology of Shanghai College, who received his Doctor's degree from the University, a remarkably interesting accountis given of geological pioneering in China. Among other things, Dr. Cresseysays that "so far I am the only one ingeology, but I have one floor in a finescience building nicely equipped withlaboratories and work rooms, and ourcollections are rapidly growing. Lastyear I had nearly a hundred students inmy various courses."You may know that two years agoI took a big trip out through the northwest and into Tibet and back throughMongolia. This summer I planned onmore work in Inner Mongolia but thefighting made it impossible to get there.I changed my plans therefore to a survey of the Lwan River north of Tientsin. This gives a nice section from thetablelands of Mongolia to the Plain ofNorth China."All was going nicely until onenight about two weeks ago when I wassuddenly attacked by a gang of half adozen brigands who rather severely beatme and made way with my valuables.It was too sudden to use my guns, andas their loot of money and instrumentsBRIEF RECORDS OF THE QUARTER *55cost me about a thousand dollars, it finished all field work for the summer.Fortunately they did not carry me offfor ransom. Such is pioneer geology !Thrills a plenty, and a constant succession of unexpected discoveries."Among the new books announcedfor February publication by the University of Chicago Press were the following : A New Approach to American History, by D. C. Bailey; The Later Realism, a study of characterization in theBritish novel, by Walter L. Myers;Studies in Optics, by A. A. Michelson;and The Development of Virgil's Art, byHenry W. Prescott. New impressions included those of The Religions of theWorld, by George A. Barton; AncientRecords (five volumes), by James Henry Breasted; Wages and the Family, byPaul H. Douglas ; The Formation of theNew Testament, by Edgar J. Good-speed; and General Psychology, by Walter S. Hunter.Mrs. Kellogg Fairbank, president ofthe board of directors of the ChicagoLying-in Hospital, in speaking of themillion-dollar fund for the new building, concerning which and the recently-accomplished affiliation of the Hospitaland the University particulars are givenelsewhere in the University Record, said :"I am confident that the members ofthe Board, of which I am president, willhave no real difficulty in raising themoney necessary to build our new hospital on the Midway. The public of Chicago cannot fail to recognize the importance of this opportunity to help bothscience and humanity." Already headquarters for the campaign have beenopened in the North Michigan Avenueapartment of Major Frederic McLaughlin, who has given the use of it to thecampaign committee, of which Mrs.Parmalee McFadden is in charge. Manyof the leading men and women of Chicago are members of the committee.Through the present Lying-in Hospitaland its dispensaries, between 6,000 and7,000 cases are handled annually.The announcement of the movement to secure funds wherewith to endow the Frank Billings Medical Clinichas been received with commendation.The Chicago Tribune commenting onthe effort said : "It is unusual to honor a living man so signally, but there canbe no doubt that Dr. Billings merits thedistinction. Men and women who owetheir lives and health to his art and successful physicians who owe much to histeaching may be expected to join in creating the endowment as an expression oftheir appreciation."Dr. A. C. Noe, Associate Professorof Paleobotany, was elected chairmanfor the Chicago area of the Western Society of Engineers at its recent meetingin Chicago. The election makes Dr. Noedelegate to the national meeting of theAmerican Institute of Mining and Metallurgical Engineers in New York inFebruary. Professor Noe, who receivedhis Doctor's degree from the Universityof Chicago, is known as an authority oncoal balls, the hard nodules found incoal beds, which preserve in hardenedform the cell structure of prehistoricplants. These balls are cut with diamondsaws and ground down to about threefive-hundredths of an inch in thicknessso that the structure may be studied.The honor conferred on Dr. Noe isunique because it is usually given to apracticing engineer.In connection with the recent meeting of the Geological Society of Americaat Madison, Wisconsin, the guest of honor at a luncheon of present and formerFaculty and students of the Departmentof Geology and Paleontology at theUniversity of Chicago was ProfessorEmeritus T. C. Chamberlin, now in hiseighty-third year, who for many yearswas head of the Department at Chicagoand formerly president of the University of Wisconsin. Eighty persons werepresent, including representatives fromthe geologic staffs of sixteen universitiesand colleges and many geologists in governmental service. In introducing Professor Chamberlin Professor Edson S.Bastin, the present Chairman of the Department of Geology at Chicago, pointedout that this department was indebted tothe University of Wisconsin for its twogreatest leaders, Chamberlin and Salisbury. Ovations for Professor Chamberlin were the order of the day not only atthe Chicago luncheon but at his scientific address and at the Geological Society dinner. In his address on "WorkingConcepts Appropriate to an Earth ofPlanetesimal Origin" Professor Cham-156 THE UNIVERSITY RECORDberlin set aside entirely the Hadean ideaof the interior of the earth.Preachers for the Winter Quarterbeginning January 3, 1927, were as follows : On January 9, President ClarenceA. Barbour, of Rochester TheologicalSeminary, Rochester, New York; onJanuary 16 and 23, Dr. Albert ParkerFitch, of Carleton College, Northfield,Minnesota; on January 30, Rev. HarryEmerson Fosdick, of the Park AvenueBaptist Church, New York City. InFebruary the preachers were Dr. SamuelA. Eliot, president of the Unitarian Society. Boston, Massachusetts; Rev. CharlesW. Gordon (Ralph Connor), of Winnipeg, Canada; Dr. Chester B. Emerson,of the North Woodward CongregationalChurch, Detroit, Michigan; and Professor Hugh Black, of Union TheologicalSeminary, New York City. The lastnamed also spoke on March 6. Dr. Robert E. Speer, secretary of the Presbyterian Board of Foreign Missions, NewYork City, was the Convocation Preacher on March 13.Dr. John E. Gordon, who receivedthe degree of Doctor of Philosophy forwork in the Department of Hygiene andBacteriology in 192 1 and who has beenassistant medical superintendent of theChicago Municipal Contagious DiseaseHospital, has been made medical director of the Herman Kiefer Hospital forContagious Diseases, in Detroit. The Department of Hygiene and Bacteriologyhas once more received a grant from theMetropolitan Life Insurance Companyfor the study of respiratory diseases.At a meeting of the Lincoln Centennial Association held in Springfield,Illinois, on February 12, 1927, to commemorate the birth of the great president, Dr. William E. Dodd, LL.D., Professor of American History, of the University, delivered the principal address.In its announcement of the address theassociation said: "Dr. Dodd is one ofAmerica's foremost historians, A southerner by birth, and the biographer ofsouthern leaders of the Civil War period,he considers Lincoln one of the threereally great men who have occupied thepresidential office. His address, 'The Ordeal of Abraham Lincoln,' was a studyof Lincoln the War President."In a recent editorial the ChicagoTribune, which has of late repeatedly lent its influence to the development ofthe University, calls attention to thebenefits that might be obtained by whatit happily terms "The Benefactors'Guide." "Some men of great wealth,"it remarks, "employ philanthropic secretaries, whose job it is to advise on giving money away. That also is not aneasy thing to do well. Many men, withthe best will in the world, are dubs atphilanthropy. A critical examination ofmany of the objects of benefaction asdisclosed in the probate courts of thecountry will amply illustrate the point.This morning, and for today only, weinaugurate a new department of thisnewspaper. It is called the Benefactors'Guide, and it has this to say : Four institutions in Chicago for the study andtreatment of disease are in immediateneed of funds. They are the ChicagoLying-in Hospital, now a part of theUniversity of Chicago medical school;the Billings Clinic in internal medicine,also under the auspices of the University; the Mary Thompson Hospital forWomen and Children, and the PassavantHospital, both of which have distinguished records. Money given to any ofthese institutions will be wisely given.It will relieve suffering and help tothrow light on the cause and cure ofdisease. These institutions are admirablefor the business and professional manseeking a gilt edged object for his beneficence. We guarantee the dividends."On February 4 and 5 ProfessorAndrew C* McLaughlin, Chairman ofthe Department of History of the University, gave two significant lectures atthe University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa.The first was on "The Significance ofthe American Revolution," and the second, on "The Teaching of History."Both of these themes are subjects towhich Professor McLaughlin has givenmuch study.Mrs. Myrtle Cruzan Geyer, formany years connected with the University, has resigned her instructorship inthe English Department, the resignationto be effective September 30, 1927.Professor M. W. Jernegan, of theDepartment of History, recently lecturedat Harvard University on "NationalLeadership in the American Revolution," and before the Colonial Societyof Massachusetts, Boston, by which heBRIEF RECORDS OF THE QUARTER *57was recently elected a correspondingmember, on the subject, "Causes of theDecline of the Senate." Professor Jerne-gan will teach at Harvard UniversitySummer School this year.Dr. Herman N. Bundesen, orator atthe March Convocation, March 15, 1927,whose address appears in this issue ofthe University Record, for five years hasbeen Chicago's highly efficient and energetic Health Commissioner. He receivedhis degree of Doctor of Medicine fromNorthwestern University in 1909 andthe same degree from the United StatesArmy Medical School, Washington, D.C.,in 191 1. He was for eight years epidemiologist in the Chicago Department ofHealth, and has occupied the same position with the Illinois Central RailroadCompany since 19 15. He has been president of the Morals Commission of Chicago, trustee of the Municipal Tupercu-losis Sanitarium, and first lieutenant inthe Medical Corps of the United StatesArmy. He is also a member of the American Medical Association, the AmericanPublic Health Association, and the Association of Military Surgeons of theUnited States. The health bulletins issued from time to time by the Department of Health under Dr. Bundesen'sdirection have been of great value tothe city and state, especially in time ofemergencies.At the March Convocation degreeswere conferred as follows:In the Colleges of Arts, Literature,and Science upon 96 candidates for theBachelor's degree ; in the School of Commerce and Administration, 10; in theSchool of Social Service Administration,1; and in the College of Education, 15¦ — a total of 122. In the Divinity Schoolthere were 3 candidates for the Master'sdegree and 1 for the Bachelor's; in theLaw School, 14 for the degree of Doctor of Law (J.D.) and 2 for that ofBachelor of Laws; in Social Service Administration, 1 for the Master's degree.In the Graduate Schools of Arts, Literature, and Science there were 29 candidates for the degree of Master of Arts orScience and 6 for that of Doctor of Philosophy, a total of 35. In Rush MedicalCollege 39 candidates received the degree of Doctor of Medicine, and 65 thefour-year medical certificate, a total of104. The total number of degrees and certificates conferred at this Convocationwas 282. Among the graduates were 2Filipinos, 1 Greek, 1 Hollander, 2 Japanese, and 3 Chinese.Dr. William Fielding Ogburn, whofor eight years has been professor of sociology in Columbia University, has beenappointed to a similar position in theUniversity of Chicago. After receivinghis Doctor's degree at Columbia in 1912,he became an instructor in economicsand politics at Princeton, and later professor of sociology in Reed College, Oregon, and in the University of Washington. During the war Professor Ogburnwas examiner and head of the Cost ofLiving Department of the National Labor Board. He has been editor of theJournal of the American Statistical Association and is the author of Progressand Uniformity in Child Labor Legislation and of Social Change. ProfessorOgburn will assume his new duties atChicago on July 1.. The Board of Trustees announcesthe resignation of Ferdinand Schevill,professor of modern history at the University, in order that he may carry onstudies in which he is especially interested. He will, however, become nonresident professor at the University whenhis resignation becomes effective, October 1.Chicago's present state of development is marked by five clearly definedzones or belts which exhibit definite ratesof change in social conditions, such asforeign population, poverty, home ownership, and delinquency, as shown in astriking study of the -city by ProfessorErnest W. Burgess, of the University ofChicago. Radiating from the Loop, thecentral business zone, Professor Burgessfound next a zone of transition, the areaof first immigrant settlement; a zoneof second immigrant settlement, composed of workingmen's homes ; 'a middle-class residential district zone; andthe fifth, or higher-class residential zone.Home ownership shows a progressive increase westward; juvenile delinquencydecreases from 443 per 1,000 in thecentral district to o in the Oak Parkdistrict; and male population decreasesfrom 85.5 to 47 per cent. "The zone oftransition, immediately next to the Loop,holds the most intense and concentrated158 THE UNIVERSITY RECORDform of the social problems of Chicago,"Dr. Burgess said. "It is an area in whichflourishes all that is picturesque and arresting in the modern cities: Hobohe-mia, immigrant colonies like the Ghetto,Greektown, Little Sicily, Bohemia, aswell as the cabarets, the spiritualistichalls, and the Moody Bible Institute.It is the slum of every English andAmerican city. The skilled worker andhis family depart from this area as itdeteriorates, and build up the zone ofworkingmen's homes, not too far awayfrom the factories in which he works.The professional and clerical groups employed in the downtown offices live stillfarther out, while those who can affordit and who prize suburban life escape tothe commuter's zone. Only in this zoneof restricted neighborhood developmentdoes the American of our native traditions feel somewhat secure from the tideof immigrant invasion." Mr. Harold H. Swift, President ofthe Board of Trustees of the University,has received from the Austrian government, in recognition of his contributionsto Austrian relief and his interest in thereconstruction of Austrian university life,the golden cross of honor, which is thehighest decoration given by the AustrianRepublic. Persons previously honoredwith this decoration are PresidentThomas G. Masaryk of the Czecho-Slo-vakian Republic, and President Paul vonHindenburg of the German Republic.Associate Professor Adolf C. Noegave a lecture on paleobotany and coalresearch as pursued in the University ofChicago before the staff of the UnitedStates Bureau of Mines in Pittsburgh,Pennsylvania, on February 25. He alsolectured before the Botany Departmentof the University of Cincinnati onMarch 14.ATTENDANCE IN THE WINTER QUARTER, 192711927 1926Gain LossMen Women Total Men Women TotalI. Arts, Literature, and Science:i. Graduate Schools —Arts and Literature 383466 367104 75o57o 386461 294112 680573 70Science 3Total 84966275721 47157654733 1,3201,2381,30454 84762073716 40653659844 1,2531,1561,33560 67822. The Colleges-Senior Junior 31Unclassified 6Total 1,4402,28912710596 1,1561,62735674 2,5963,9i6162166610 1,3732,22012373210 1,1781,58438342 2,5513,804161103612 451121630Total Arts, Literature, andScience. II. Professional Schools:i. Divinity School —Graduate Unclassified Chicago Theological Seminary —Graduate Unclassified 2Total 20217211 52191 25419112 17217615T 47211 219197161 3512. Graduate Schools of Medicine —Ogden Graduate School of Science —Graduate 6Senior 15Unclassified Total 174111251254 2011481 194121391335 19213121IO42 2211192 214131321234 7101 20Rush Medical College —Post-Graduate 1Fourth-Year Third-Year Unclassified Total 265436214118562 2444152 289480229120562 24O42517895541 3253851 272478186100551 17Total Medical Schools (LessDuplicates) 3. Law School —Post-Graduate 432011Graduate Senior Candidates for LL.B. Unclassified Total 3901033 17-66284 40776317 3281226 14812112 342932318 654. College of Education —Senior 17Junior Unclassified 11Total .16I5<1551 98<-— 1217392 114571691943 20561601814 1141214422 ¦ I34681742236 205. School of Commerce and Administration —Graduate 11Senior 5Junior 29Unclassified Total 35310 70601735 423701747 401711 7o479II3 47i5410114 1673 48Graduate School of Social ServiceAdministration —Graduate Senior Junior I2 7Unclassified '. Total. 131,4133,702302 853661,99322 98i,7795,695324 91,3623,582294 703691,95335 79i,73i5,535329 1948160Total Professional Schools. . .Total University (In Quadrangles) Deduct for Duplicates 5Net Total in the Quadrangles . 3,400 i,97i 5,37i 3,288 1,918 5,206 165[Continued on page 160]159i6o THE UNIVERSITY RECORDATTENDANCE IN THE WINTER QUARTER, 1927- -Continued1927 1926GainMen Women Total Men Women Total LossUniversity College-Graduate. 25511783125 440574214414 69S691297539 240noin179 369576257523 609686368702 865Senior Junior 71Unclassified 163Total 580 1,642 2,222 640 1,725 2,365 143Grand Total in the University 3,98035 3 ,61328 7,59363 3,92861 3,64336 7,57i97 2234Net Total in the University. . 3,945 3,585 7,530 3,867 3,607 7,474 56ATTENDANCE IN THE WINTER QUARTER, 1927Graduate Undergraduate UnclassifiedArts, Literature, and Science Divinity School Graduate Schools of Medicine —% Ogden Graduate School of Science % Rush Medical College Law School College of Education . . School of Commerce and Administration ,Graduate School of Social Service Administration,Total (In the Quadrangles)Duplicates Net Total in the Quadrangles.University College Grand Total in the University .Duplicates Net Total in the University .Grand Total 1,32022819128422957702,3792032 ,1766952,8712,863 2,5421761073633,2101193,0914,o79544,0257,530 54262527371062104539643642DR. FRANK BILLINGS