THE AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL SOCIETY 559
in our fellowship and in our program all the different divisions of sociologi- cal interest. That is, the few general sociologists should not say to the social technologist of any type, "We have no need of thee," or vice versa. The social psychologists should not assume to be the sociologists par excellence, to the disparagement of the Galtonites, for instance, or any of the economists or historians who are really trying to interpret any part of life by correlating it with the whole. We should look forward, not to a suppression of division of labor within the social sciences, but to large development of it, and our emphasis should always be upon the reinforce- ment that all partial knowledge of society must get from finding the actual correlations of its abstraction with the plexus of social processes.
A practical sociologist, Mr. Wallace E. Miller, of the First Social Settlement Society of Columbus, Ohio, expressed the opinion that
there is a clearly denned need for an organization of sociologists which will bring together those who are engaged in practical work. Such an organiza- tion would strengthen the work done in sociology throughout the country.
Another practical sociologist, Miss Anna Garlin Spencer, of the New York School of Philanthropy, expressed
keen interest in any effort to consolidate and make more effective the labors of those who are trying to solve social problems ,and initiate social move- ments by the light of science. I am very desirous that there shall be a "clearing-house" in the field of sociology, especially that which has focused into practical effort. I hope that applied sociology, or the new scientific philanthropy, will receive due attention in the considerations of the con- ference.
Professor F. G. Young, of the University of Oregon, wrote:
If all the men whose names are signed to the note of invitation feel the need and disposition to get together to co-ordinate views and co-operate through division of labor, your first two inquiries and the first part of the third are answered for all very positively in the affirmative. The matter of the scope of the organization is not so simple. I would suggest the advisa- bility of having three or four quite definite lines of inquiry represented in each program :
1. Fundamental problems as to postulates and methods should always be given a hearing.
2. The significance in sociological theory of new departures or tendencies in the older sciences is a matter of prime importance, and would lend itself admirably to elucidation before such an association.
3. Discussions bearing on the application of the principles of the science
