New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1904-01-28
IDLENESS At HARVARD
Professor L01ceU Tells alumni 1t Is
Encouraged There.

The Harvard Club OF New-Yorl6 held its thirty
eighth annual dinner at Delmonicos last night
The same partisan spirit which must have marked
the alumni as undergraduates showed in the
speeches They We're willing 10 concede good points
to other institutions all for Harvard was the
general tone To make her the best. and to declare
that she was. seemed the aim Of all OF them save
Dr. Nicholas Murray Butter. who, as representative
OF rival concern. could hardly be expected 10 70
quite IN accord.
At tie presidents table sat the speakeTs-Byron
s. Hurlbut dean ~ the university; Dr. Butler Oh
Columbia; Professor n. Lawrence Lowell huI'uh1
WetGnore. George II. Sargent, Peter Is. olleS'
Evert Jansen Wendell, Edward King Charles how
land Russell Austen G.. Fox. the Rev. W. l.
Croker and Nathaniel S. Smith
President Fairchild of the club, after welcoming
the guests introduced Dean Hur!out VINO aI1e'
having a pleasant tribute to his predecessor Dean
Briggs announced his text-"The Boys They WERE
he declared. much better than previous genera
tons. particularly the older ones were at Whicn
was much groanins. They sang 'falr ItarVaru
with their hats off. which. he said, was an lhuI-
cation OF how the spirit OF ve1erauon mac begun
to strike in He paid tribute TO the men who were
90 DESTROYS Of education that they gladly worked
their way and said they were the men who seldom
came to the notice of the office unfavoraoy.
Dr.. Butler. the next speaker. declared mat the
chief work Of the American college was to teacn
the men 10 think straight and to keep their grip
on the spirit OF liberty. said he
In the cos American colleges were places where
the bows were brought into contact with one OF
exercised over the student body that gave its place
to the American college The rapid growth on lle
last forty years has not changed these cQndlllolS
save outy.a~dly. The boys under ne ln1ueice OF
the man who has just spoken are IN receipt ul ="
liberal education. The problem which conirolts
Us Is not to lose being great because We re DIS.
There is danger in size. but il is possible 10 couh-
teract these dangers il they're taken In time. There
Is no Inherent advantage in the small college; the
inherent advantage lies in the great collcge, DIG
or small. The college with ideals ana tr2dluols'
with time and energy and thought to spend on us
EtQuenlS Is tilI Elrol -At'iie-. N'''NSN'
There is one aspect for the latter DAY work
which gives me some concern. am not enamoured
of speca lization educational influence. rear
we bring the influence and atmosphere OF the nigh
" specialized education too early 10 pear on the
growing intellect. "
Contact with breadth gives breadth. and It IS in
curnbent on 5 American educators to hold up
bef thu -OunE the idea that Symn1thetc
training is the foundation Of broad and useful edu-
ca lion. We dare not satisfy ourselves with the
production Of the narrow and technical scholar, we
have a care that modern methods deprive us not OF
some influence in these vital respects.
A Lawrence Lowell professor OF government at
Harvard talked about the life, social and intelec-
tual in colleges. He declared that Harvard rather
encouraged an idle life. because of the many rich
young men VINO were there; that college life was
real the social side no less than the intellectual
There was one great fault with the modern scheme
OF student life in Harvard. he maintaned-the
division into small sets and cliques because there
were not great dormitories which could accommo-
date all the students. Other colleges had walked
up TO the necessity of properly housing their stu
dents, he said and Harvard must do the same The
tine was in sight when Harvard would have five
thousand undergraduates. he declared.