New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1915-01-29

ing the last year. Mr.. Cutting hesitated
10 do a bit of figuring and then an
swered: 81 think that the Rockefeller
Foundation contributed more than ]
last year Mrs. L. II. Hartman IS also
one Of the supporters
The visitor recalled having been IN
vited TO meet Mr. Rockefeller at a
luncheon on April 10. at which the 9TH
ers present were trustees Of the re
search bureau. Commissioner Walsh
failed to establish. however, that the
conference was called to discuss the
attitude toward their organization
taken BY the report of the General Edu-
cation Board.
"llr. Rockefeller said at the luncheon
that he would like to contribute 100000
toward the support of the bureau" ad-
mitted Mr.. Cutting. "but he objected to
the work done outside the state by the
investigators and 10 all interference
with technical pedagogical procedure.
Yet he did not suggest the scope, form
and organization of the Bureau OF Mu-
ncipal Research"
Aid Given ConditiOnally.
In the previous year, he said. the
foundation had given only $1,000, and
"
TO accent the new offer OF $4,000. be
cause the work planned could not have
been attempted on the amount then IN
the treasury. There were conditions
set on the gift, and they mad been put
i'm writing and could be found IN the
files for the commission.
"But the changes referred to- insist
ed Mr.. Cutting, "the trustees already
had decided upon before the day OF the
luncheon. II was already planned tnat
the outside work should be discontIn-
ued and put into the hands OF sepa-
rate institution. As a matter OF TACT,
however. | might say that that is
condition that has not been realized
yet-the bureau is now, as formerly,
doing the out-of town investigating.
Commissioner Walsh then summed
I'D the burden of this testimony. III
the views Of the trustees had not hap
pened TO agree with those Of Mr.. Rock
efeller you would not have received the
money!"
"The trustees resolved to accept no
contributions in which conditions were
made" answered Mr.. Cutting.
"Was this before or after the S2O,OOO
was accepted
"A month or so after"
Inc ulSmlSSdl VI III niith 40 -
rector of the bureau was then pro0ed.
The trustees, according TO the witness
had long been annoyed by the puollc
utterances of DR.. Allen. especially. by
those he made in regard TO technical
pedagogy-a subject with when MI;
Cutting said the trustees had found
themselves unable to cope.
ave had not approved OF DR.. Allen 5
Il no
had not acted sooner on II only OUT
Of regard for him.
"Wc objected TO it because Of its
phraseology and style. II was very
cheap and unworthy Of the Bureau Of
Municipal Research. Already we had
lost one Of the members OF our board
on account OF it.
"Other objections to Or. Allen were
his relations with public officials and
the fact that through him We we're los
ing friends and making enemies very
rapidly" ..
what would you think Of church.
asked Mr.. Garretson. that was offered
500. 1000 if Il would change its demon
nation. but spurned the offer; then
changed its denomination and accepted
the money" ,
az the members Of the church had
determined already TO change their de-
nomination il would be all right to ac-
cent" replied the witness.
Commissioner Weinstock was inter
tested in the observations made by Mr..
Cutting on the labor situation, which
he had made among his remarks on
Cooper Institute. He asked for further
opinions on the relation between the
trade unions and the trade schools, and
was told that the unions were hostile
10 them