being heavily mortgaged for the present. After the civil war, a vast army of students entered our colleges; the fees were increased somewhat in many cases, but not in proportion to the cost, and the system of free scholarships became an important feature almost everywhere. More buildings, more and attractive grounds, were acquired and in time a large share of the income went toward mere maintenance of the property. To make matters worse, the colleges soon suffered an actual loss of income, for owing to the decreasing rates of interest, the endowments, such as they were, became less and less productive, while, in addition, the broadening of the curriculum compelled greatly increased expenditure. Fifty years ago there were institutions doing excellent work for the times with only six or seven salaried men in the faculty, averaging one instructor in some cases to forty students, whereas to-day the multiplicity of courses requires an instructor to every ten or even less students.
Increasing outgo without corresponding income must be at somebody's expense, and, in this case, that somebody is the college instructor. Not that in every case the salary of a professor has been reduced in order to pay the cost of dividing his chair, so that the college may receive twice as much work for the same money—though this is not unknown—but that a newly appointed man in many cases receives less salary than his predecessor. It is by no means rare for a college, on the retirement of a professor, to divide the chair, employing young men at salaries which, combined, amount to little more than the single salary fixed many years before. Even so, not a few of our colleges have alarming deficits at the end of each year.
No doubt this arouses astonishment and some may be disposed to ask, in view of the immense gifts for educational work made during the last twenty-five years, if such a condition of things does not prove incompetence in the business management of colleges. Not at all; the error is not in that. The financial management, in most instances, is beyond criticism, more, it deserves the highest praise, and in many institutions the trustees are not merely competent, they are devoted and conscientious, dealing with college business as with their own. As the most caustic reflections upon college management usually come from alumni, the writer may be pardoned for a slight digression.
Alumni who contribute a few dollars a year toward the support of alma mater's glee or athletic clubs are apt to take their display of affection altogether too seriously. They seem to feel convinced that by attending the college and by securing a degree, whether deserved or not, they have placed their college under such material obligation that they should have a large voice in its control. This notion, which would be grotesque were its effects not so serious, is due perhaps to the constant hunt for students and to the prevalent opinion that the success of a college is measured by the number in attendance. But the
