A Brief Rejoinder

NOTHING could have been further from my intent than to ‘bespatter’ the colleges, as President Neilson terms it, or to imply any ‘betrayal of trust/ or to ‘shake public confidence’ in them. Public confidence is more likely to be impaired by the suppression of criticism than by the free expression of it. I plainly asserted my conviction that our colleges ‘are giving a high measure of service in return for the generous benefactions which they have received,’and that their trustees are ‘men of the highest ideals and probity.’ Far be it from me to desire any slackening in the flow of resources for higher education.

But when Mr. Neilson intimates that holdings of common stock can properly be listed as of no value whenever they happen to have ’no par value’ I take straight issue with the proposition that public confidence in the candor of college finance can be strengthened in that way. To say, moreover, that some colleges in the East have less than ten per cent of their funds invested in mortgages is no answer to my assertion that many other colleges in the West have a far larger percentage thus invested. As to budgets and deficits, one of the best-known college treasurers in the United States has assured me that my description exactly coincides with his own experience of many years. Another outstanding educational administrator writes, ‘I find it hard to believe that your experience was not gained on this campus, so faithful is the drawing, even to details.’ I can multiply this testimony many times over.

If my criticisms of college methods seem to be unjust, the way to meet them is not by imputing sinister motives, or by flat contradictions based on a single educator’s limited observation, or by an effulgence of Caledonian acerbity. When attention is called to the fact that many colleges have selfperpetuating trustees, and that most colleges have too many courses, it is disingenuous to evade the main issues as has been done in this instance. If Mr. Neilson believes that our colleges do not have too many administrative understrappers of the reëcho type, let him ask the American Association of University Professors. And if he really believes that honorary degrees are never inspired by a lively hope of largesse I fear that his worldly sophistication leaves something to be desired.

— WILLIAM B. MUNRO