A STATE UNIVERSITY AS A CENTER OF LEARNING
Michigan's position as a state university has been strongly reflected in
its ideals and policies. It could not be otherwise. But this
relationship, the source of its strength in many aspects, has also
carried with it certain dangers. The University has a two-fold function:
it must teach the youth of the State and the Nation; but to do this
effectively, it must also aim to do its share in enlarging the field of
knowledge by encouraging scholarship and research on the part of members
of the Faculties as well as by a certain proportion of the more advanced
students. It is this latter function that is too easily overlooked in
the demand for the ordinary and more "practical" courses which
necessarily form so large a part of the modern curriculum. Yet even the
most elementary college work cannot be given properly unless the
instructor is in touch with the latest developments and discoveries in
his own field, and this familiarity only comes through research, on his
own part or by his colleagues.
But more than this the University, if it be worthy of the name, owes it
to the State to be a leader and a guide in the development of the
highest cultural standards; it should be a reservoir upon which the
people of the State can draw for truth and guidance in the difficult
problems of modern life. This cannot come without a strong emphasis on
original and productive scholarship.
It has always been one of the sources of the University's strength that
this fact was understood, almost from the first, and that the claims of
true scholarship and research have been increasingly recognized. It has
been shown that in its first years Michigan was to all intents a replica
in the West of the older and conservative colleges of the East; though
there was a certain idealism and progressive spirit that tempered even
then this recognition of long-established precedent. The West was
liberal and disposed to create its own institutions upon a new basis, so
that when the new ideals in education began to make themselves felt,
about the middle of the nineteenth century, Michigan was ready for them.
With the coming of Dr. Tappan the movement, already foreshadowed by the
Legislature in the very terms under which the University was organized,
gained a new impetus and effective guidance, and it was not long before
a remarkable series of constructive measures in the interest of higher
education began. Most of them have been mentioned elsewhere, but it may
not be amiss to suggest some of them once more; such as the emphasis on
modern science, with the parallel classical and scientific courses
within the academic department; the wide range of elections eventually
introduced; the early inauguration of professional and graduate schools;
the introduction of seminary and laboratory methods; the admission of
women; the diploma system of admission from the high schools; and the
recognition of the claims of special students.
Until within recent years also, the University had no marking system.
The students were merely "passed," "not passed," or "conditioned." This
undoubtedly stimulated interest in study and scholarship for its own
sake in the case of many students, though, in the absence of any of the
usual college honors it encouraged a certain level of mediocrity in
others. The change in the system and the introduction of the Phi Beta
Kappa Society and similar organizations after 1907 resulted in a marked
alteration in the attitude toward study and has undoubtedly raised
appreciably the general level of scholarship.
Thus, though the University throughout its whole history necessarily has
had to recognize the first claims of the students for instruction, often
of a somewhat elementary character, there have always been influences
which have kept the ideals of higher scholarship constantly in view. In
the older days the idea of research in its modern sense was hardly
understood; but as the atmosphere of European learning began to pervade
American academic life the double function of a true university came to
be more clearly recognized. Not only were facilities for research
developed, but the scientific spirit, which refused to accept the
limitations long established, and sought new truths, or new
interpretations of old principles, became the order of the day.
This was the ideal of Michigan's first President. But in his time the
need for less advanced work was too pressing, the foundations had to be
laid; though his efforts bore fruit long after he left, the victim in
part of his high ideals of scholarship. Even in his time, however,
certain steps were taken, aside from his effort to inaugurate true
graduate study, which had a vital bearing on the development of research
work in the future. These came through the establishment of the
Astronomical Observatory and the Chemical Laboratory. Dr. Brünnow, the
first Professor of Astronomy, came to Michigan inspired by a prospect of
scholarly leadership and the results of his investigations and those of
his pupil and successor, Professor Watson, gave to the University a
world-wide reputation among scholars. The same was true, though perhaps
to a lesser degree, of the Department of Chemistry, whose little
Laboratory, the first separate building for that purpose in America,
attracted advanced students from all quarters--the enrolment of special
students sometimes reaching seventy, of whom at least some were doing
work corresponding to the graduate courses of the present time. The
students of this department as a whole have had a profound influence
upon the development of the industrial and commercial resources of the
State.
With the succession of Dr. Haven to the Presidency, the emphasis was
thrown almost entirely on the immediate and practical problems of
general instruction. He was not a scholar in the modern sense, as was
Dr. Tappan, and the University's first requirement was fairly obvious.
But the higher function of the University was not forgotten by the
leading men of the Faculty. President Hutchins tells how he was drawn to
Michigan in 1867 from his hillside farm home in Vermont by the
reputation of Michigan's Faculty. He had become greatly dissatisfied
with the educational facilities offered in the East, though he did not
know exactly what he wanted to do. Just at this time his father returned
from a business trip in the West and reported that he had found the
right place for him in the University of Michigan. The young man
replied, "Oh, I know about Ann Arbor." The father was somewhat surprised
and asked how that happened. "Well," said Michigan's future President,
"I have noticed that the editor of the Virgil I study is Professor
Frieze, at Ann Arbor, and in Greek there is a Professor Boise; my French
textbooks are by Professor Fasquelle; while in mathematics my books are
by Professor Olney. It seems to me that must be a pretty good
university." So despite dire warning, from his grandmother as to the
dangers from the desperadoes of the West, to say nothing of the Indians,
he came to Michigan; drawn by the scholarly work of the men of that
early Faculty, as were hundreds of other students.
It will of course be suggested that this work on the part of the Faculty
was not "research" in the modern sense, though it was just as truly
"productive scholarship." And it was what was so regarded in those days.
Besides it was evident that the University was amply fulfilling one of
its great functions in laying the foundations for the present system of
higher education. The teachers of the secondary schools as well as the
colleges looked to these strong men for guidance and they found the
support they needed. Their books were the necessary basis for the
training of future scholars.
The gradual broadening of the University curriculum and its effect upon
graduate study has already been mentioned. There was one development,
however, which deserves special mention here. This was the inauguration
of the so-called "University System." President Tappan had laid down the
principle that a student should be able to study "what he pleases, and
to any extent he pleases," and gradually the University had made such a
course possible through the introduction of electives and the admission
of special students, a privilege that was greatly appreciated by many
students of mature years, who, after entering as special students, often
remained to take a degree. In 1882 there came a third step in the
removal of any fixed requirement as to the last two years of work. Such
students as elected to follow the new plan known as the "University
System," were permitted to select, subject to approval, the general
lines of study to be pursued during this period with a prescribed
examination at the end. This work was to be in charge of a committee
composed of the Professors in the subjects chosen, and was designed to
give the students the advantages of such specialization as was suitable,
as soon as practicable. The plan, however, did not prove popular, most
of the students preferring the credit system; but the scheme
"constituted for a time the constitutional basis of the Graduate School,
in so far as that School had any real existence." Probably the same
general purpose, as far as preparation for the professions was
concerned, was served at a later period by the combining of the literary
and medical, and later, the law courses, enabling the student to begin
his professional studies after his second year. Elsewhere such
specialization as seemed desirable was attained after 1901, through the
regular elections, when practically the whole curriculum was thrown open
to general election, subject of course to a certain sequence of courses.
The professional departments have had a marked influence upon the
University's standing as a center of learning. This is particularly true
of the Medical School, which naturally emphasized the value of scholarly
training and investigation from the first. It is probably not an
exaggeration to say that it was the impetus given by the Medical Faculty
which was responsible for the high reputation the University enjoyed
from the first, particularly in the sciences. To this fortunate
development the two recruits from the Literary Faculty, Dr. Sager, who
had been Professor of Botany and Zoölogy, and Dr. Douglas, who served as
Professor of Chemistry in both departments, contributed especially,
though the influence of the other members of the Medical Faculty, more
interested perhaps in the strictly professional aspects of their
work, cannot be overlooked. These men were alive to the value of
original investigation, their field offered too many opportunities to be
neglected by scholars of their caliber, and it was therefore in the
Medical School that the first research laboratories were developed. As
the numbers in the Medical Department and its prestige increased, this
influence grew, so that it may be said that for many years the strongest
impulse toward research and the highest scholarship, particularly in the
new fields of science, came from the men of the Medical Faculty. Nor has
this influence ever weakened, though the eventual establishment of
advanced courses and the recognition of research in all departments has
tended to make it less conspicuous than in the early days.
[Illustration: THE INTERIOR OF HILL AUDITORIUM]
[Illustration: INTERIOR OF THE MAIN READING ROOM IN THE NEW LIBRARY]
With the Law Department it was somewhat different. The old-fashioned
conception of the law as a formal body of doctrine, fixed and
unchangeable, tended in itself to limit original effort, though Judge
Cooley's great work, with its high scholarship and profound learning,
added greatly to the reputation of the University. Of recent years,
however, there has been a change in the attitude towards the teaching of
law. It has come to be recognized that our law is a changing and
developing force, and that the adaptation of fundamental legal
principles to the advancing demands of modern society, both through
legislation and through judicial decision, furnishes a field for
research and investigation which demands the highest type of scholarship
and training. The modern law student seeks the principles of his science
through a careful study of the cases themselves, and no longer accepts a
dogmatic statement of the law as laid down in textbook and lecture. This
change in the legal curriculum, which is little less than revolutionary,
is really based upon scholarship and research on the part of every
student, and is reflected in the preoccupation of every law student in
his work. Gone are the days when the Law Department was the resort of
those who could not succeed in the other departments.
In more practical and especially industrial fields the College of
Engineering has also contributed its share, though it was considered a
part of the Literary Department throughout all its early years. While
its aim is to train men in technical branches, the field of
investigation has been by no means neglected, even if the questions
studied have largely borne specifically upon such problems as railway
and steel construction, the functioning of various types of engines,
marine design, the various forms of the utilization of electrical
energy, and the many applications of science to industry undertaken by
the Department of Chemical Engineering. That this work has been
appreciated is evidenced by the increasing number of fellowships for
original research maintained by many private corporations, and by the
suggestion and tentative establishment in 1920 of a general Department
of Industrial Research maintained through co-operation by the
manufacturers of the State with the Faculty of the Engineering College.
It is specially stipulated that the results of whatever investigations
are made under these auspices are to be made public for the benefit of
the people of the State, irrespective of the source of income.
This developing spirit led to the formation of a Research Club which has
had a profound though quiet influence in the growth of scholarship in
the University. The Club meets at stated periods in the Histological
Laboratory in the Medical Building, a fact in itself significant of the
strong support the organization has always had from the Medical Faculty,
and ordinarily listens to two papers, contributed by members. The aim
is to present the problem under consideration clearly and with as little
emphasis as possible on its technical aspects, a purpose often more
successfully realized, according to some of the members, by the men who
have been especially successful in their particular fields. The
distinguishing mark of this organization is its general and inclusive
character; similar clubs elsewhere are more apt to emphasize certain
particular and related subjects, and to that extent fail to represent
effectively the united scholarly effort of the institution. Many of the
papers first read in the Research Club have formed the basis of reports
published subsequently in the proceedings of scientific bodies which
have attracted wide attention. Particularly noteworthy have been the
celebrations of the anniversaries of distinguished scholars and authors,
the significance of whose life and works has been emphasized in the
papers presented before the members. Similar in aim is the Junior
Research Club, whose membership is composed of the younger men of the
Faculties of the University.
With the reorganization of the Graduate School in 1912, there came a new
emphasis on the publication of works of scholarship by the University.
Within a short time several series of "University of Michigan Studies"
were established; and to these new volumes are continually being added,
which have contributed greatly to the University's place in the world of
learning. Though certain other universities, notably Harvard, Cornell,
and Chicago, had previously established similar series, Michigan has
been well to the fore among American universities in thus systematically
giving to the world in adequate form the results of certain aspects of
the work carried on within her walls. Particularly in certain cases she
has been peculiarly fortunate in the extraordinary value and
significance of the original material thus published.
The first series established was known as the "Humanistic Series,"
issued under the general editorial supervision of Professor Francis W.
Kelsey of the Department of Latin, who has been indefatigable in
securing material and funds for this work. The publications in the
present list of sixteen volumes include three on Roman history and
philology made up for the most part of monographs by various members of
the Faculty, or graduates of the University, two edited by Professor
Henry A. Sanders, and one by Professor C.L. Meader. Another volume deals
with "Word Formation in Provençal" and is by Professor Edward L. Adams.
Somewhat different in scope are two volumes on Greek vases, or
"Lekythoi," by Arthur Fairbanks, at one time Professor of Greek in the
University, and now Director of the Boston Museum of Fine Arts.
Five volumes in this series have dealt with various manuscripts and
objects of ancient art in the collections of the late Charles L. Freer
of Detroit. The two by Professor Sanders, dealing with four very early
biblical manuscripts, which include Deuteronomy and Joshua, the Psalms,
the four Gospels, and fragments of the Epistle of Paul, aroused
worldwide interest among scholars when they appeared, particularly as
they were accompanied by sumptuous volumes of photogravure fac-similes
prepared by Mr. Freer and distributed by the University to the leading
libraries throughout the world. As these manuscripts, which were
discovered in Egypt and are among the very earliest known, were thus
made available for study in a way heretofore almost unknown, the
University gained incalculably.
Other volumes in the series include descriptions of certain Coptic
manuscripts, documents from the Cairo Genizah, some Eastern Christian
paintings in the Freer collection, and a gold treasure found in Egypt.
Translations of ancient scientific and mathematical treatises by
Professors John G. Winter and L.C. Karpinski are also to be found in two
other volumes of this series, while certain studies in Roman Law and
administration by Professors A.E. Boak and J.H. Drake and a discussion
of "Greek Themes in Modern Musical Settings," by Professor A.A. Stanley,
bring the volumes issued down to the present time. Accompanying this
series are a number of Humanistic Papers, including a discussion and
symposium on the value of classical training in American education, and
a biography of Professor George S. Morris by Professor R.M. Wenley. Two
volumes in a scientific series have also appeared: "The Circulation and
Sleep," by Professor J.A. Shepard of the Department of Psychology, and
"Studies in Divergent Series and Summability," by Professor W.B. Ford of
the Department of Mathematics. Two volumes of the Publications of the
Astronomical Observatory, dealing with the spectroscopic investigations
for which the Observatory is now particularly well equipped, have also
appeared. Also to be noted are four numbers of a series of Publications
by the Physical Laboratory and seventy-two "Occasional Papers from the
Museum of Zoölogy," as well as four volumes in a "University of Michigan
Historical Series," including "A History of the Presidents' Cabinets,"
"The English Rule in Gascony, 1199-1259," "The Color Line in Ohio," and
"The Senate and Treaties (1789-1817)," (the last by Professor J.R.
Hayden), and two volumes in a series of Economic Studies. A "History of
the Chemical Laboratory," by Professor E.D. Campbell, should also be
mentioned.
From time to time there have been issued compilations of the
publications of members of the University Faculties. These have shown an
ever-increasing body of books, articles, and reviews which may be taken
as another concrete evidence of the activity of the members of the
Faculty in their various fields. The first two of these lists were
issued through the medium of a little informative sheet issued for the
University for some years by the Alumni Association, known as the
_News-Letter_. The data were far from complete but the published total
was not unimpressive. Later the University Library took up the work,
while the last two lists of this character were made by Dean A.H. Lloyd,
of the Graduate School, as regular University Bulletins. These cover the
period from July 1, 1909 to June 30, 1919 and include over one hundred
volumes exclusive of ordinary handbooks and textbooks. These two lists
give some 1,700 titles.
While it is impossible to mention even a small portion of the
publications of more than usual interest during the last fifteen years,
there are a few that may be mentioned as evidence of the influence of
the University in the world of letters and scholarships. These, omitting
numerous textbooks and aside from the volumes issued in the University
Humanistic Series and others, include, "The Acropolis at Athens,"
(1908), by Professor M.L. D'Ooge; "The Will to Doubt, an Essay in
Philosophy for the General Thinker," (1907), by Professor A.H. Lloyd; a
series of works on psychology by Professor W.B. Pillsbury, including
"Attention," (1908); "The Psychology of Reasoning," (1910); "The
Fundamentals of Psychology," (1916), and "The Psychology of Nationality
and Internationalism," (1919). Professor R.M. Wenley, head of the
Department of Philosophy has also written a number of books which
include, "Modern Thought and the Crisis in Belief," (1909); "Kant,"
(1910); "The Anarchist Ideal," (1913); and the "Life of George S.
Morris," (1917). Professor R.W. Sellars of the same Department has
written, "Critical Realism," (1916); "The Essentials of Logic," (1917);
"The Essentials of Philosophy," (1917); and "The Next Step in Religion,"
(1918), while Professor D.H. Parker is the author of two volumes
entitled "The Self and Nature," (1917), and "The Principles of
Æsthetics," (1920).
The Department of History includes on its Faculty a number of men whose
books have attracted more than a passing attention. Professor C.H. Van
Tyne has written among other books, including several textbooks, "The
Loyalists in the American Revolution," (1902), and "The American
Revolution," (1905); while others to be mentioned are Professor A.L.
Cross, whose "History of England and Greater Britain" appeared in 1914;
Professor U.B. Phillips, "The Life of Robert Toombs," (1913), and
"American Negro Slavery," (1918); and Professor E.R. Turner, "The Negro
in Pennsylvania," (1911), and "Ireland and England, in the Past and at
Present," (1919).
Professor Henry C. Adams has written a number of books on economics and
accounting, particularly "American Railway Accounting," (1918). It is
worthy of note that he spent two years in China installing a system of
railway accounting for the Chinese government. Other volumes which
should be noted are: "Social Problems," (1918), by Professor Charles H.
Cooley; "Characteristics of Existing Glaciers," (1911), and "Earth
Features and their Meaning," (1912), by Professor William H. Hobbs;
"The Hindu-Arabic Numerals," (1911), by Professor L.C. Karpinski, and
the "Catalogue of the Stearns Collection of Musical Instruments,"
(1919), prepared by Professor A.A. Stanley.
By far the greater portion of the publications of the Medical Faculty
take the form of monographs, articles, and reports in the various
monographic series and medical publications--Dr. Vaughan lists 73 such
items in the years between 1909 and 1918. In the Law School several
books on different subjects have been issued by members of the present
Faculty including Professors R.W. Aigler, Evans Holbrook, E.N. Durfee,
E.C. Goddard, and E.R. Sunderland. Particularly to be noted is "The
History of Contract in Early English Equity," (1914), by the late
Professor Willard T. Barbour.
Most of the books issued by the members of the Engineering Faculty have
been primarily textbooks, though many of them have been based upon
extended investigations in the subjects presented. Two volumes by
Professor Fiske Kimball, formerly of the Department of Architecture,
"Thomas Jefferson, Architect," (1916), and a "History of Architecture,"
(1917), are especially noteworthy, however.
Some of the results of the scientific investigations made by members of
the Faculties are published in the form of reports issued by the
Government or State, or by various scientific bodies. Thus we have
several volumes of reports issued by Professor E.C. Case on the results
of his work in the fossil beds of the Southwest, under the auspices of
the Carnegie Institution; several statistical reports, the work of
Professor James W. Glover, including "Highway Bonds," U.S. Department of
Agriculture, 1915, and "U.S. Life Tables," (1910) (1916), issued by the
Department of Agriculture; a "Biological Survey of the Sand Dune Region
of Saginaw Bay," by Professor Alexander Ruthven, (1910), issued by the
Michigan Geological and Biological Survey, and a number of extended
reports on the valuation of public service corporations, by Dean M.E.
Cooley and Professor H.E. Riggs, in the Transactions of the American
Societies of Civil Engineers, and various other bodies.
As has been suggested a great portion of the scientific investigations
of the members of the Faculty of the University is reported in the form
of monographs and briefer articles in various journals and special
publications, and for this reason the names of many men of national and
even international repute do not appear in the lists of those who have
published books. Many of their publications also have taken the form of
textbooks, some of them exceedingly important, but the list is so long
that it would be impossible to do justice to all in a short survey.
Of the men in the Literary College whose reports and articles are given
in the recent Bibliography a few may properly be mentioned. Thus the
work of Professor Moses Gomberg, whose researches in the chemistry of
triphenylmethyl won for him in 1914 the prize from the New York branch
of the American Chemical Society for the most distinguished work of the
year, has been given to the world since 1909 in the form of relatively
short papers, some eighteen in all. Professor E.D. Campbell, in addition
to the "History of the Chemical Laboratory of the University," has
reported his investigations, largely in the chemical composition of
steels, in eighteen papers. Professor William J. Hussey and Professor
Ralph H. Curtiss have published respectively fourteen and seventeen
papers, though many of them have been included in the 'publications' of
the Observatory. Professor Hussey has also made a number of reports in
Spanish of his work in the observatory at the South American University
of La Plata. Other members of the Literary Faculty whose total
publications might be mentioned are Professor E.C. Case, of the
Departments of Geology and Paleontology, seventeen; Professor A.F.
Shull, Zoölogy, twenty-two; Professor William H. Hobbs, Geology,
twenty-six; Professor A.H. Lloyd, Philosophy, twenty-one; Professor Fred
Newton Scott, Rhetoric, fifteen; and Professor H.H. Bartlett, Botany,
thirty-one.
Almost every member of the Medical Faculty has made many contributions
to various medical journals. The University Bibliography includes twelve
papers by Professor A.M. Barrett, eighteen by Professor C.D. Camp,
eighteen by Professor D.M. Cowie, fifteen by Professor G. Carl Huber,
eighteen by Professor F.G. Novy, twenty-two by Professor Reuben
Peterson, twenty-six by Professor U.J. Wile, and thirty-nine by
Professor A.S. Warthin.
In the Law School Dean Henry M. Bates is represented by eleven papers
and Professor Ralph W. Aigler by twenty-six.
The Dental College is represented by nineteen papers by Professor
Russell W. Bunting and eleven by Professor C.J. Lyons, while the
Homeopathic Medical School shows three books and eighteen articles by
Professor W.A. Dewey.
During the late war the abilities of such members of the Faculty as were
not in active service and the facilities of the University laboratories
for research were employed widely by the Government. The Faculty of the
Department of Chemical Engineering entered government service almost to
a man and an entirely new teaching force had to be secured. Many
technical questions, including those connected with poison gas warfare
and the development of the government nitrate plants, whose erection was
under the charge of Professor A.H. White, as Lieutenant-Colonel in the
Army, were investigated in the Chemical Laboratories. The Department of
Physics carried on extended researches in co-operation with the Bureau
of Standards in Washington. Many special problems were investigated in
the Medical Laboratories, as in the Department of Anatomy, where a study
of the repair of peripheral nerves after severance was instituted by Dr.
G. Carl Huber, first under the National Research Council, later under
the office of the Surgeon General, which sent several medical officers
to the University for purposes of instruction and to assist him. Dr.
Stacey R. Guild, instructor in Anatomy, also made some valuable
experiments in war deafness. Special investigations were carried on in
the Bacteriological Laboratories under Dr. Novy, in the Pathological
Laboratory under Dr. Warthin, and in the Psychopathic Hospital, where
Dr. Barrett, while training successive increments of medical officers
every six weeks, carried on special investigations in mental disorders
arising from the war.
As was to be expected the technical training of the professional staff
of the Engineering College and the resources of the laboratories were
employed extensively by the Government. This was particularly true of
the Department of Marine Engineering, where Professor H.C. Sadler
studied the important problem of standardized types of ships, until he
became Head of the Bureau of Design with the Shipping Board, when his
work in the Naval Tank was carried on by Professor E.M. Bragg.
It cannot be claimed of course that this record in scientific inquiry
and advanced scholarship will equal what has been done in certain other
universities, whose riper traditions and great endowments have enabled
them to carry on special investigations, establish research
professorships and support publications, which have thus far proved
impossible for a state institution, whose first obligation rests in its
relations with the people of the commonwealth. Nevertheless Michigan has
been happy in this, as in so many other respects. The liberality and
sympathetic understanding of the public opinion upon which the success
of the University rests fundamentally, have enabled it to develop
scholarly ideals and a recognition of true scholarship which have given
Michigan a high rank among American universities.
This fortunate and early recognition of the highest mission of the
University was made possible only through co-operation on the part of
the Regents, who, as the governing body, have been able on the one side
to encourage scholarly ideals in spite of the occasional lack of
appreciation of the University's aims on the part of some individual
members of the Board, and, on the other, to secure and preserve the
University's freedom, threatened by the efforts of the State Legislature
to interfere with its affairs. This relationship of the Regents to the
maintenance of the University, and to the State, has had a very
important effect upon the development of higher learning and research
and may therefore properly be outlined at some length in this place.
The University has been truly fortunate for the most part in the men who
have composed the governing body. There have been times, it is true,
when relations between the Regents and the Faculties have been far from
ideal, but it is no less true that the history of the past eighty years
will show a remarkable spirit of co-operation and harmony between the
two bodies. Otherwise the University could not have become what it is.
While the Regents for the most part have not been men primarily
interested, or trained, in educational matters, they have taken their
duties seriously and have been unselfish in their service for the
institution, with no reward for their labors save the honor inherent in
their office. They have sought earnestly to understand the problems
before them, and, in whatever measures they took, to keep always before
them the welfare of the University as a whole. With the ever increasing
numbers enrolling as students and the consequent well-nigh irresistible
pressure for elementary and the so-called "practical" courses, they have
been strong enough and wise enough, and sufficiently sympathetic with
the scholarly preoccupations of the leaders of the constantly growing
Faculties, to maintain and encourage the higher aims of the University
as a center of learning. It is true that the Board is sometimes
criticized for taking upon itself functions which might with propriety
rest with the Faculties and their administrative officers, but there is
at least a legal justification for this in the legislative provisions
upon which the powers of the Board of Regents rest. Thus in the Act of
March 18, 1837, the Regents are empowered to "enact laws for the
government of the University," and to appoint the professors and tutors
and fix their salaries. The number of professorships was specified and
fixed at thirteen; though it was provided in the first organization
that;
the Regents shall so arrange the professorships as to appoint such
a number only as the wants of the institution shall require; and to
increase them from time to time, as the income from the fund shall
warrant, and the public interests demand; _Provided, always_, That
no new professorship shall be established without the consent of
the Legislature.
The immediate government of the several departments was to rest with
their respective Faculties, but;
the Regents shall have power to regulate the course of instruction,
and prescribe, under the advice of the professorship, the books and
authorities to be used--and also to confer such degrees and grant
such diplomas as are usually conferred and granted in other
universities.
The Regents were also to have the power of removing "any professor or
tutor, or other officer connected with the institution, when in their
judgment the interests of the University shall require it." This
specification of the powers and duties of the Regents was repeated with
some modifications in the Act of April 8, 1851, which followed the
revision of the Constitution of 1850. The Constitution itself merely
stated that the Regents "shall have the general supervision of the
University and the direction and control of all expenditures from the
University interest fund."
These are the general provisions upon which the relations between the
Regents and the university body are based. In practice the Faculty has
come to have a greater degree of autonomy in certain directions than
might be suggested by a strict interpretation of these measures, while
in most cases the "advice of the professorship" is sought and followed
readily and sympathetically in so far as is warranted by the financial
situation, as it appears to the Board.
The University Faculties are organized first by Departments, with one
member as head; the Schools and Colleges are also organized under the
separate Deans to carry on their own work, while the general
organization of the whole Faculty rests in the University Senate,
composed of all members of professorial rank, including Assistant
Professors. In addition there is a smaller body, known as the Senate
Council, composed of the Deans and one other representative of the
different Schools and Colleges as well as the President, a secretary,
and the chairman of the Committee on Student affairs. To this body are
referred many questions of importance for immediate action or reference
to the Regents.
The independent position of the Board of Regents as the governing body
of the University has not gone unquestioned by the other divisions of
the state government, and a series of decisions and judicial
interpretations of the constitutional and legislative acts regarding the
University have been necessary to establish the powers of the Regents as
a separate branch of the state administration. Fortunately for the
University these are now well recognized.
The first decision arose through the efforts of the Legislature to
compel the Regents to establish a Professorship of Homeopathy in the
University, and a _mandamus_ action was brought in 1865 to compel the
University to carry out the provisions of a clause to that effect,
inserted in the Organic Act of the University in the years before. This
was unsuccessful, though not on the ground that the act was
unconstitutional but because one Elijah Drake, who brought the action,
was not connected with the University and was not, therefore, privileged
to sue for the writ. The question was brought up again in 1867, this
time by the Regents, who sought to secure the payment of the $15,000
granted to the University upon condition that they establish a
Professorship of Homeopathy, by authorizing a School of Homeopathy in
Detroit. Again the Court failed to grant the request. Two years later
the question came up once more in its first form, in an effort to compel
the Regents to establish the proposed Department. The Regents argued;
If the Legislature could require the appointment of one professor,
it could require the appointment of another, or any number of
others. If it could say what professorships should exist, it could
say what professorships should not exist, and who should fill
professors' chairs; moreover, if it could regulate the internal
affairs of the University in this regard, it could do so in others,
and thus the supervision, direction and control which the
Constitution vested in the Regents would be at an end.... Either
the Legislature had no power of the kind, or it had unlimited
power; either the Regents were the representatives of the people
who elected them, or they were servants of the Legislature.[2]
[Footnote 2: From Hinsdale, _History of the University of Michigan_, p.
143.]
Again, however, there was no decision; the constitutional status of the
University was undecided. But in 1892 a decision did establish that the
people of the State, in incorporating the University, had, by their
Constitution, conferred the entire control and management of its
property upon the Regents, and had thereby excluded all departments of
the state government from any interference with it. The property of the
University was state property it is true, but it could only be
administered by the Board of Regents as a separate division of the State
administration.
Finally in 1895 it was definitely decided that the Legislature had no
constitutional right to interfere in or dictate as to the management of
the University. The question was once more the Homeopathic issue, which
took the form of a legislative action to compel the Regents to remove
the School to Detroit. This time the Regents reversed their earlier
policy and the measure was stoutly resisted by the Board. Judge
Claudius B. Grant, '59, in delivering the opinion of the Supreme Court,
laid down the principles now accepted as governing the relations of the
University and the Legislature. The Board of Regents, he maintained, was
the only corporation whose powers were defined in the State
Constitution, whereas in the case of every other corporation established
by the Constitution it was provided that its powers should be defined by
law. "No other conclusion was, in his judgment, possible than that the
intention was to place the institution in the direct and exclusive
control of the people themselves, through a constitutional body elected
by them." Otherwise the Regents would become merely "ministerial
officers" with no other duties than to register the will of the
Legislature.
The independent status of the University has also been more firmly
established in late years by other legislative enactments and decisions.
As early as 1863 it was recognized that the Regents had power to hold
and convey real estate, though they had no authority over the land
granted by Congress for the support of the University, nor over the
principal of the fund established through the sale of that land. In 1890
such property was declared exempt from taxation, and in 1893 the Board
of Regents was declared to be alone responsible under contracts made by
it for the benefit of the University. In the new Constitution of 1908
the Regents were given the right of eminent domain, and on a number of
occasions since that time have been able to acquire "private property
for the use of the University in the manner prescribed by law." It is
difficult to see how the growth of the University during the past twelve
years with its constantly expanding building program could have taken
place without this salutary check upon the exorbitant demands of
property owners in the neighborhood of the Campus.
This financial autonomy of the Regents, once an appropriation is made by
the Legislature, has not gone unquestioned, however, particularly by the
Auditor-General. The University fund from early years has been borrowed
by the State which until 1896 paid the original interest rate of seven
percent. The Auditor-General then decided that the legal rate of six
percent should be enforced. The matter was laid before the Supreme
Court, however, and the old rate was restored. In 1900 it was definitely
ruled by the Attorney-General that "the Auditor-General has no authority
to refuse to audit and pay vouchers for real estate purchased by the
Board of Regents," and subsequently in 1911, the Supreme Court
maintained that the "judgment of the Regents as to the legality and
expediency of expenditures for the use and maintenance of the
institution" could not be considered "subordinate to that of the
Auditor-General."
The powers of the Regents have also been strengthened by other rulings
of the Attorney-Generals of the State. Thus in 1900 the power of the
Regents to determine student fees was declared not subject to
legislative control, while in 1911 the same freedom in the matter of the
determination of entrance requirements was conceded. The Board was also
declared in 1908 free from the application of an act of the previous
year providing for the approval and regulation of salaries in the
various state institutions.
The University has thus been as fortunate in the development of its
relations with the State as it has been in its internal growth. Though
there have been many critical times, the movement has always been
forward. The Regents have been careful and conservative in their
relations with the Legislature, but they have insisted upon the
independence of the University and have been sustained in this position
with increasing firmness by the Supreme Court. The Legislature has shown
an ever-increasing friendliness toward the University and has never
refused to come to the aid of the institution, whatever its views as to
the constitutional questions involved in the establishment of the
University. This was shown as never before by the 1919 Legislature,
which not only granted to the University appropriations amounting to
$2,200,000, but gave it by the unanimous vote of both houses, a thing
which had never happened before. The Legislature even included one item
for which the officers of the University had hardly dared hope to have
favorable action at that session.
With its constitutional status so well established; with the Legislature
so ready to co-operate in furthering the best interests of the
University, with its curriculum continually expanding, though wisely and
not too rapidly, and with an ever-increasing emphasis on the highest
ideals of scholarship and service, there is every promise for a future
of greater usefulness and effective service for the University. We, who
love the University of Michigan for what it has accomplished, for what
it is, and for what it may become, may well look for a development
through the coming years that shall be a fitting continuation of the
remarkable success of the great experiment involved in its
establishment.