網頁圖片
PDF
ePub 版

crews. It was on this triumphal occasion that the Cornell yell is said to have been invented.

The genesis of the yell is a matter of some doubt, one explanation being that it is merely an inverted form of the Yale refrain, "Eli, eli, eli, ell," the Cornell form being "Cornell, I'ell, 'ell, 'ell," which developed speedily into "Cornell, I yell, yell, yell, Cornell."

In 1876 Cornell was again successful at Saratoga in a race against five colleges, and the freshman crew in a race against two colleges. After this year the Intercollegiate Rowing Association was disbanded. In 1878 the freshman crew was successful against the Harvard crew. In 1879 the crew was sent to Saratoga, but no competitors appeared to contest the race. Since the disbanding of the Intercollegiate Rowing Association the Cornell navy has contested with various colleges at various times, and for ten years, from 1885 to 1894, it did not suffer a single defeat. In 1895 it was defeated in the races at Henley and in a race with Columbia and Pennsylvania on the Hudson. In 1896 the 'varsity crew won in a race on the Hudson over Harvard, Pennsylvania, and Columbia. In 1897 it won in a race with Harvard and Yale, and in another with Pennsylvania and Columbia. In 1898 it won over Harvard and Yale at New London, but was defeated by Pennsylvania in a race at Saratoga. Since 1888 all races have been in eights.

In baseball, football, and general athletics there have been 'varsity teams for many years.

The entire athletic interests of Cornell were united in 1889 under the corporate name of the Cornell Athletic Association. The trustees of this association, seven in number, unite with two undergraduates from the Navy, two from the baseball club, two from the football club, and two from the athletic club to constitute the athletic council. Under the direction of this council the athletic interests of the university have been centralized and systematized. The council has exercised a potent influence in the management of the finances of the association and in the control of athletic contests. Little, if any, complaint of athletic excesses has been made since the organization of this council. In 1889 William H. Sage gave to the athletic association an athletic field of nearly 10 acres, and J. J. Hagerman, of Colorado Springs, gave the necessary funds to lay out and equip the field. These grounds are known as Percy Field, in honor of one of the sons of Mr. Hagerman. There have been built upon the field a quarter-mile cinder track, a clubhouse, and a grand stand, and all contests in football, baseball, and track athletics are held there. The field has been enlarged by an added gift from Mr. Sage, and by purchase.

I. GOVERNMENT OF STUDENTS.

Government of students at Cornell has naturally presented the same problems and difficulties as at similar institutions. There has been, however, as little paternalism as possible, and the students have enjoyed the greatest liberty consistent with good order. In the

absence of dormitories it has not been necessary for the university authorities to intervene in student affairs except where there has been a flagrant breach of public order or of university regulations. The most serious difficulties have grown out of what is known as "class spirit." This has exhibited itself in cane rushes, attempts to disturb or break up class banquets, and other similar disturbances, but of late years this has disappeared.

During the first year or so most of the students were under military discipline, and comparatively little difficulty was experienced in maintaining order. Nevertheless, there seem to have been two or three outbreaks of "students' frolic," and on one occasion there was strong suspicion that students were responsible for the burning of a small building to which they had some not unreasonable objections. Probably no class ever entered a university which contained so many and different elements as the first class which entered Cornell. Some of these men had naturally acquired habits which were not in keeping with their new surroundings, and the faculty and executive committee were troubled to prevent such students from becoming a source of disturbance among the other students and a reproach to the university.

It was a part of President White's original plan that the students of the university should govern themselves, but no definite plan to this end was devised and put into practice during his administration. Matters of discipline were brought before the faculty, and after investigation action was taken by that body. The same course was pursued during the administration of President Adams. For a short period recently a plan was in operation for the government of students by a body selected by themselves and presided over by the president of the university. This self-government council investigated all matters of discipline and decided upon the guilt or innocence of the accused. In case of conviction it recommended the penalty to be inflicted, and then certified its action to the faculty. The faculty reserved the power to approve or reverse the action of the council. As a matter of fact, it never failed to approve such action. The whole question of student government seemed to be very much simplified by this experiment, and the results, while not escaping criticism in some quarters, were such as to encourage the belief that self-government was feasible. Upon the reorganization of the faculties in 1896 the scheme. dropped out of view and has never since been revived. At present discipline is in the hands of the special faculties, each exercising discipline over its own students.

VIII.

THROUGH THREE ADMINISTRATIONS.

A. THE ADMINISTRATION OF PRESIDENT WHITE.

It remains to sketch briefly the administrations of the three presidents of Cornell. Much that might be gathered under this head has

been anticipated in the preceding chapters, but many characteristic features remain to be mentioned.

President White's administration lasted from his election in October, 1866, to his resignation in June, 1885, a period a little short of nineteen years. During this time he was twice absent in Europe, first in search of health, from 1876 to 1878, and again as United States minister to Germany, from 1879 to 1881. During these absences the university was administered by the vice-president, William Channing Russel, who retired in 1881.

1. EDUCATIONAL GROWTH.

The development of the curriculum and the growth of departments have already been sketched in a preceding chapter. It will be seen from the statement there made that the founder's ideas of the union of liberal and practical education and large liberty in choice of studies were steadily and constantly developed during this period. New subjects were added and new professorships established as the funds at the disposal of the university seemed to justify. There does not seem, however, to have been any marked divergence from the general plan outlined in the report on organization. The university register for 1884-85, the last one published during President White's administration, shows that the division of courses into "general" and "special" still existed. Of the general courses there were five-arts, literature, philosophy, science, and science and letters Of the special courses there were eleven-agriculture, architecture, analytical chemistry, chemistry and physics, civil engineering, electrical engineering, mechanic arts, mathematics, natural history, medical preparatory, and history and political science. The five general courses were merely a modification and development of the five general courses recommended by President White in his original report, the main difference, as already pointed out, being that in place of one distinctively optional course each course provided for certain required studies, consistent with the general character of the course, and at the same time left a reasonable number of hours in each term, varying from three to twelve of the fifteen required, to be filled as the student should elect. This optional work was in the main confined to the junior and senior years, although in one or two courses there were some optional hours in the sophomore year. In the special courses, not so much latitude could, in the nature of the case, be expected, and for the most part the work in those courses was prescribed, save that in some there was an option among certain allied subjects, and in some, as mathematics, natural history, and history and political science, there was a moderate provision for election.

There was steady improvement also in the quality of the work at the university. This was made possible by a gradual raising of the standard of admission and by an increase in the teaching corps. The

effect of the first was to insure a body of well prepared and disciplined students, and of the second to secure to professors the leisure necessary for advanced work. In most departments having any considerable number of students one or more assistants, ranking as assistant professors or as instructors, were from time to time appointed to relieve the professor in charge from much of the routine work of the class room. The leisure thus secured was devoted to investigation in more advanced fields, into which students whose tastes lay in that direction were encouraged to enter. The introduction of seminary methods of study in literature, languages, history, political science, and like subjects, and the special and patient investigations in the field and laboratory, tended constantly, under these conditions, to strengthen and broaden the university idea.

The success of the idea of liberty of choice in university students became more and more marked as the university expanded. This is seen not only in the extension given to the policy at Cornell, but in its adoption at other institutions. Indeed, so marked was the tendency among the latter as to lead to a hasty conclusion that one of these was the originator of the idea. It is not to be claimed, of course, that the idea originated at Cornell, for President Wayland had long before suggested the need of greater liberty in college courses, and President Tappan had introduced at the University of Michigan the device of parallel courses of study, though under conditions and limitations which made the experiment far from satisfactory. The originality of President White's plan lay in its adaptation of these earlier theories and experiments to new and untried conditions. There was, first, the great division of all courses into the general and special, with an ample number of parallel courses in each division; and second, the provision, especially in the general courses, for a generous amount of purely elective work. A large liberty of choice was thus granted the student at the outset of his academic life in the choice of a course or general line of study and later in the choice of the particular branches of study wanted in the chosen course.

In one feature directly related to this liberty of choice Cornell could justly claim to be unique, and in this feature rests her claim to the leadership of the "new education." This feature was the scope and diversity of work from which the student might make his choice. It had been the aim of Mr. Cornell and Mr. White to build a university adapted to the growing needs of the nineteenth century. The union of the literary and practical courses of study upon an absolute equality with a perfect liberty of choice in either the one field or the other, or in both, had been the outcome of this purpose. This it was that rendered Cornell from the first a unique educational experiment and rallied to her support the captains of industry as well as the progressive leaders of academic thought. Hitherto the university

1 See statement in Thwing's American College, p. 20.

had seemed to exist solely for the professional and social classes. Cornell appealed equally to them, but extended her appeal to the industrial classes as well. It sought to touch every interest of the people with equal and impartial hand, bestowing upon all alike the educational benefits of the nation and the founder. It thus dignified labor, whether at the forge or at the desk, and infused into higher education the dominant democratic spirit of the age.

This bold challenge to old academic traditions did not pass unanswered. The older colleges declared the experiment foredoomed to failure, and an eminent educator, now the president of a venerable and powerful university, gave it as his deliberate judgment that the practical spirit and the literary and scholastic spirit were incompatible within the same walls.1 It has demonstrated the error of that judgment, while the rapid growth of the idea of such a union of literary and practical studies, both in this country and England, has been a fine tribute to the wisdom and courage of the leaders of the "new education."

To sum up, it may be said that the development of that curriculum and the expansion of departments during President White's administration were merely the natural growth of the founder's ideas, with such modifications as were suggested by experience or rendered necessary by existing conditions. Literary and practical studies were added as means would permit. New courses were established. Old courses were modified or extended. Larger and fuller liberty was granted in the choice of studies within the courses. Absolute and perfect equality was maintained among all departments. There was throughout a consistent purpose to reach the aim set up in the inaugural address: "The adaptation of the university to the American people, to American needs, and to our own times."

2. MATERIAL GROWTH.

The two buildings now known as Cascadilla Place and Morrill Hall soon proved wholly inadequate for the needs of the university. Early in 1869 a large wooden building was erected as a temporary expedient, but although building after building followed, this wooden structure proved a necessary refuge for more than one overcrowded department, and it was not until 1890 that it finally disappeared from the campus. In the fall of 1870 the north university building, now known as White Hall, and in architectural features the duplicate of Morrill Hall, was completed at a cost of over $80,000. In 1871 two friends of the "new education," both of whom were successful captains of industry, gave each a building as a testimonial of their interest in this effort to reach and raise the industrial classes. The first was the McGraw Building, given by John McGraw; the second, Sibley College, given by Hiram Sibley. In 1875 Sage College, the gift of Henry W. Sage, was for

1 President Eliot in the Atlantic Monthly, vol. 23, p. 215.

« 上一頁繼續 »