December 3, 1921.

Dr. Beardsley Ruml,
Carnegie Corporation, 522 Fifth avenue,
New York City.

Dear Dr. Ruml:-

I have been out of town for a couple of days and so delayed
in replying to your last of no date.

I ventured some fortnight ago to intimate to both Vincent and
Flexner that, owing to my conflicts with the "powers that be" in the Corpora-
tion, you might wish to migrate in the near future to some other coast. Both
men replied promptly and encouragingly. I think it is no breach of confi-
dence in showing you the enclosed note from Flexner, which came in a few days
ago.

I think if the Spellman people make you any sort of a reasonable
offer, you had better take it. It will at least be a comfortable horizontal
transfer and may lead to very important opportunities. I am a good deal
amused at the possibilities involved in such a proposal, for Fosdick is one
of the men upon whom I think Pritchett's rather definitely fixed his eye,
and, if he should succeed me in the Corporation, your status would not be
without its amusing features.

I should bring you up here in an instant, as I think I told you
before, if there were any available job which paid well enough to make it at
all possible to consider it. A little later on something may develop,
but the only possibility now, i.e. a sort of personal assistant to me, would
not pay you enough to warrant your considering it. I could certainly keep
you busy, however, as there are at least half a dozen important pieces of
work that need to be done immediately and I have as yet failed to lay hands
on anybody satisfactory to me to undertake the job.

With kind regards to your wife, yourself and all the office
force, I am,

Yours very truly,

P.S. Will you please ask Mrs. Howard if she will look through the office
files and see if by any remote chance a paper sent me by Stetson of Oberlin
in connection with some other manuscript for the Psychological Review is in
the office. One of four constituent papers appears to have gone adrift.

December 23, 1921

My dear Robert:

I meant before this to have called your attention to the fact
that last year we subsidized, on Mr. Angell's advice, for a period of three
years with a modest appropriation, the National Bureau of Economic Research,
Incorporated. As you will note, the men who were active in setting it up
are what would be considered by most men as belonging to a somewhat radical
group. The effort is to represent apparently all factions of economic opinion
or of social interest - an effort which in my judgment is a mistake. The
active secretary is Wesley C. Mitchell of the New School for Social Research
which as you know is a fairly radical body. The distinct function of the
Bureau is that of economic research which would be a very different function
from that of the work you propose to set up. At the same time, inasmuch as
the Board of Trustees has made an appropriation for a period of two years
longer to this organization, it will have to take cognizance of that in setting
up the other. There is no difficulty in my judgment in showing the occasion
for both and in fact I think that if more trustees had entirely understood
fully who were to run the National Bureau of Economic Research, the Board
would have been a little slower to appropriate money for its use. It is
possible, however, in my judgment, to defend both proposals, but I think it
necessary to so define the function of what one might call the Institute of
Economics as to make it clear that it is something more than a purely research
institution.

Faithfully yours,

Robert Brookings, Esq.
Care, Cupples Company
St. Louis, Missouri.

P-R

List of Board of National Bureau of Econ. Research enclosed

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
CAMBRIDGE

PRESIDENT'S OFFICE

January 6, 1922

Dear Mr Angell:

What can you tell me about Beardsley Rund? He has
been suggested to me for a post in Educational Research in
our Graduate School of Education. As I see it, there is no
more important position in the School. What we want is a
man who would carry on investigations of the actual results
of different forms of teaching, etc; and to my mind, the
important thing is not the man who can apply and amplify
Pearson's methods of mathematical analysis. Those tools he
must have ability to use; but the real thing needed seems to
me to be the imagination and insight to discover the problems
to be solved. The mere solving of the problems is comparatively
easy, and anyone can learn to use the proper tools for that
purpose. What can you tell me about Mr Rund from this point
of view?

President James R. Angell

Yale University

New Haven, Conn.

January 13, 1922.

President A. Lawrence Lowell,
Harvard University,
Cambridge, Mass.

Dear Mr. Lowell:--

On my return from the West, I find your inquiry of January 6th regarding Dr. Ruml.

Ruml is a Dartmouth man who took his doctor's degree under me some years ago and was my assistant as President of the Carnegie Corporation.

Of all the young men who passed under my hand, I regard him as, on the whole, the most brilliant. I should have brought him here with me had I found it possible to find a place which would pay him a salary that would justify his giving up his New York work. He has now transferred his allegiance to Mr. John D. Rockefeller, Jr., in connection with the Rockefeller organizations, and if you succeed in getting him back into academic work, I shall be greatly delighted. I have tried several times, but without success, for he has a family with three small children to support and academic income has not seemed to him adequate for his needs.

He is a man of boundless intellectual and physical energy; he has more ideas in an hour than most men in a week; he has the power to put his ideas into practical form and the industry and energy to carry them through to a conclusion. I regard him as quite the ablest man of his age that I know. He is a fellow of the finest character and thoroughly agreeable personality. He does not regard himself as in any sense a technically trained statistician, but during his work at Chicago he took an appreciable amount of work in this direction and, as he has excellent mathematical capacity, he is quite competent to find his way about in problems involving statistical analysis. If you can secure him for the post which you have in mind, I am sure you will be extraordinarily fortunate. I should be only too glad if I could command him for a similar piece of work.

Yours very truly,

February 6, 1922.

Dr. Beardsley Ruml,
Care John D. Rockefeller, Jr., Esq.,
26 Broadway, New York City.

Dear Ruml:--

Your League of Nations letter arrives without any
indication where to address you, and I am taking a shot at young
John J. on the chance that ultimately it may hit you.

I am glad to know that Miss Lambkin and Miss Dunn will
not land immediately on the sidewalk. I had a talk with Farrand
about Mrs. Howard and sooner or later he is certain to take her on,
if she wants to go.

I know the Pittsburgh situation is rotten, but I am afraid
that matter has passed hopelessly out of our hands.

With best wishes, I am,

Yours very truly,

RAYMOND B. FOSDICK
ATTORNEY

MARK M. JONES
GEORGE J. ANDERSON
BEARDSLEY RUM

WOOLWORTH BUILDING
NEW YORK CITY

TELEPHONE
BARCLAY 5800

April 1, 1922.

Dear Dr. Angell:

I am very sorry to have to bother you with the enclosed documents, but a situation has arisen with Dr. Seashore that I do not quite know how to handle and I know that you will be able to tell me just what to do. Consequently, the temptation to write you became overpowering.

Exhibit A. will show you how it started and gives pretty vividly the attitude of the people in the Civil Service Commission toward the proposal of Dr. Seashore to have a conference between the Civil Service people and the Division of Psychology and Anthropology.

Exhibit B. is Dr. Seashore's letter calling the conference.

The situation appeared to me not only to offer very little possibility for anything of practical usefulness, but also to cross wires pretty badly with the revamped proposal of Colonel Rice and the Institute for Government Research, which proposal contemplated the setting up of a research unit within the Institute for the study of civil service technique.

I was in Washington day before yesterday and talked with Dr. Seashore at length, especially my skepticism as to the possible fruitfulness of the conference unless the Research Council has some funds in sight with which to carry on this civil service research. Dr. Seashore says there are no funds in sight, but that he hopes a project may be formulated as a result of the conference and, on the basis of the project, funds would be solicited. It seems to me improbable money could be raised, especially in view of the difficulty

Dr. Angell - 2 -

that has been encountered in getting any support for either the Personnel Research Federation or for the project of the Institute for Government Research. After some discussion, I thought that I had persuaded Dr. Seashore to use the conference as a means of discussing, on a pretty general basis, the whole civil service situation and the opportunities and obstacles therein to scientific research, with the hope that the Research Council could join with the Institute for Government Research, the Civil Service Commission and Colonel Rice's committee in making a single request for funds. If all these groups would get behind one proposition, I think that the chances are *pretty good* that money could be secured.

Yesterday I had a chance to talk with Dr. Merriam and I felt that he was quite favorably impressed with the possibilities of this program.

This morning, however, I received Exhibit C. from Dr. Seashore. The proposal that he makes seems to me wholly impractical, unless Dr. Seashore's group is willing and eager to go pretty fully into a study of what he calls the "woes and complexities of civil service". I feel that the conference would be not only negative in its results, but positively harmful, from the standpoint of the relations between the Research Council and the Civil Service Commission.

The point that I want your help on is how to behave with reference to Dr. Seashore. Should I take issue with him on the basis of his letter, and going, perhaps, to the point of declining to participate in the conference, if this extreme becomes necessary, or would it be better to ignore Dr. Seashore's plan for the conference, as stated in Exhibit C., and go right ahead as though nothing had happened? It will be possible to do this, since the Civil Service Commission will advise with me in preparing its statement to the conference and Dr. Seashore has planned to have me open the discussion of the issue.

Dr. Angell - 3 -

I hope I have given you enough information so that you will feel
that you have a basis for giving me some advice. Again, please pardon me for
bothering you with the matter, but I feel rather uncertain in my own mind as to
how to deal with Dr. Seashore and I thought perhaps you might consider this your
annual activity as a member of the Research Council's committee on Personnel Re-
search!

Things are getting along splendidly here. Some time when you
are in New York I want to tell you about them.

Very truly yours,

Dr. James R. Angell,
President, Yale University,
New Haven, Conn.

April 5, 1922.

Beardsley Ruml, Esq.,
Care Raymond B. Fosdick,
Woolworth Bldg., New York City.

Dear Dr. Ruml:-

I feel somewhat amused on seeing your name listed with our old friend Mark Jones. I discovered in a conversation I had several months ago with Mrs. William Adams Brown that Jones was doing some work for the Y.W.C.A. and I suppose that this is the avenue through which he has gotten into Fosdick's landscape.

I find the situation which you present with reference to Seashore extremely perplexing. On the one hand I should be reluctant to hurt Seashore's feelings or to do anything which he would interpret as a snub. On the other hand, it seems to me that, as I understand the situation, there is very little to be gained from such a conference as he proposes, particularly in view of the attitude of your correspondent, whose name I cannot read, but who writes on the Civil Service Commission stationery. I do not see how you can properly ignore Seashore's letter of March 31st, at least not to the extent of failing to reply to it. It would seem to me that, on the whole, the judicious thing to do is to point out to him frankly, what possibly he does not fully understand, i.e. the previous developments with which we last year had some contact in the Corporation with the developments of Colonel Rice's plans. I am quite agreed that if the necessity for government research could be hitched up with the Civil Service Commission and the Research Council, it ought to make a pretty strong team; but it is my general impression that the Civil Service Commission has already crossed the bridge and gone quite a long way up the road which which Seashore's conference would also have to travel. So far as concerns the particular job which is referred to by your Civil Service correspondent, any committee made up of such men as he mentions would undoubtedly do a respectable job, if they could be induced to devote the time to it. On the whole therefore, my general judgment would be to write Seashore a fairly frank letter dissuading him, if possible, from this mode of procedure and saying that your previous contact with the problem had left you with convictions which would debar you from entering with any enthusiasm on such a plan as he proposes. I think it you made it plain that you were keenly interested in securing the same results which he desires, but that for various reasons you were confident his proposed method of achieving these results was inexpedient, you could probably call him off. However, his own letters to the Civil Service Commission may have compromised him too seriously to permit a change of program without some embarrassment to him. Certainly I personally should have felt quite unwilling to invest any great amount of time or energy in going back to start the conference on this project when so many of the issues are already clear enough to justify direct attack.

I was sounded out not long ago regarding your willingness to take charge of personnel work in one of the big commercial concerns in New York. I don't know whether the matter has gone over your desk or not, but as described to me it sounded fairly attractive and I gave you a good send-off.

I return herewith the enclosures, as you requested.

Yours very truly,

COPY OF LETTER

April 6, 1922

Dr. C. E. Seashore, Chairman
Division of Anthropology and Psychology
National Research Council
Washington, D. C.

Dear Dr. Seashore:

Thank you for your letter of March 31st, which I have delayed
answering in order to consider carefully the issues raised therein.

I shall be very glad indeed to attend the conference which
you suggest, but I hardly feel able to open the issue, and I trust that
you will be able to find someone else to assume this responsibility.

As I said in our talk in Washington, it seems to me that the
most promising activity for the conference would be the formulation of
a project which could be supported by the National Research Council, the
Institute for Government Research, the United States Civil Service Com-
mission and Colonel Rice's Committee. I do not see how this program
can be formulated without consideration of "all the woes and complexities
of civil service". The problem is not entirely, or even primarily, a
psychological one, and it is my judgment that very little will result
from consideration of the psychological phases of the matter alone.

With personal regards,

Very sincerely yours,

h

Beardsley Ruml

COPY OF LETTER

Dr. Seashore to Dr. Ruml

National Research Council

April 10, 1922

Dr. Beardsley Ruml
Woolworth Building
New York City

My dear Ruml:

Replying to your letter of April 6, I am sorry to
find that you can not open the discussion; but, very frankly, I
repeat that this conference has nothing to do with "all the woes
and complexities of civil service." It is purely a psychological
affair - a conference for the study of technique of setting tests
of fitness for certain occupations found in civil service, business
and industry.

This conference can be held with or without civil
service representatives; but I feel certain that it would be mutually
profitable to have representation of this service, as originally
planned, share in the conference.

On account of conflict of meetings held that day, I
find it necessary to change the hour from 9 a.m. to 1:15 in the after-
noon. I shall go up to the office this morning and talk it over with
the men there.

Very cordially yours,

C. E. SEASHORE, Chairman

*sic.*

July 22, 1922.

Dr. Boardsley Ruml,
Director of the Spellman Memorial Foundation,
Care Rockefeller Foundation,
61 Broadway, New York City.

Dear Mr. Ruml:-

Mr. Angell is still unable to see any letters,
but I gave him the message which you left when you were passing
through New Haven and he was as always very pleased to have
a word from you and regretted very much that he could not have
seen you. I think that I myself must have been on route from
the house to the hospital at the time you called and doing a few
errands by the way. I am so sorry to have missed you also.
Mr. Angell is, I think, really better though matters are still
moving slowly, so slowly that the doctors do not fix any time for
his leaving the hospital.

With best wishes to Mrs. Ruml and the children,

believe me,

Yours very sincerely,

October 10, 1922.

Beardsley Ruml, Esq.,
Laura Spellman Rockefeller Memorial,
61 Broadway, New York City.

Dear Ruml:

I have yours of October 6th with the memorandum on future policy for the Memorial. I shall be greatly gratified if you are able to get your Board to adopt your program. It seems to me sufficiently flexible and at the same time sufficiently specific to try out what could be done in the general field outlined, without such commitments as would gravely embarrass the repute of the Memorial should it encounter difficulties in the execution of such a program more serious than can be contemplated in advance. There is, in my judgment, no manner of question regarding the need for work of this kind, and the universities on the whole offer, I believe, most fruitful agencies through which at present to inaugurate such a program. Oddly enough, I have myself for the last twelve months been trying to secure the funds and the personnel to make some beginning in this general direction here. I should not be surprised if your Board regards the project as too remote in its promise of producing results. It would certainly take several years to make any noticeable dent on the present situation.

If you come up on Saturday, I hope you will try and look me up. Unfortunately my Corporation meets on that day and I shall be obliged to lunch with them and possibly spend part of the afternoon in protracted sessions. If you stay after the game, I hope you will look us up and, if possible, arrange to dine with us en famille at seven o'clock. We are at 310 Prospect street, which is about a ten minute journey from the College grounds. From your point of view, I think it is a good time to come, as the chances are very large that your Iowa team will go back with the long end of the score. Four of our first string backfield men are in the hospital with no particular chance of getting in the game.

With best wishes to all your house, I am.

Sin

OFFICERS

JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER JR.
PRESIDENT
WILLARD S. RICHARDSON
SECRETARY
LOUIS G. MYERS
TREASURER
L. M. DASHIELL
ASST. TREASURER
---
BEARDSLEY RUML
DIRECTOR
EDWARD M. BARROWS

TRUSTEES

JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER JR.
GEORGE WELLWOOD MURRAY
RAYMOND B. FOSDICK
WILLARD S. RICHARDSON
CHARLES H. BRENT
ARTHUR WOODS
CLEVELAND E. DODGE

The Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial

ESTABLISHED BY JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER

61 Broadway
New York

October 6, 1922.

Dear Chief:

Here is a memorandum on the Memorial's policy for the future that I have been working on. I thought you might be interested in it, and of course I should greatly appreciate talking with you about it. If you get a chance to glance through it, I should like to run up to New Haven some time when it is convenient for you, and discuss it with you.

I was sorry not to have been in the office when you called up the other day. I hope you are feeling well and that the year will be an easy one for you. Lois sends her very best wishes.

President James R. Angell,
Yale University,
New Haven, Conn.

BR/FM.

## RESOURCES AND INCOME.

On December 31st, 1921, the book value of the capital funds of the Memorial was $73,875,457.37. During the year 1921, total income amounted to $4,192,791.87. After deducting all 1921 expenditures, and adding the unexpended income from 1920, the total unexpended income on December 31st, 1921, was $2,104,608.14.

The Treasurer in his report estimates an income during 1922 of $3,900,000. It is probable that future income will exceed this somewhat, since the securities held by the Memorial include about 61,045 shares of stock in various companies which are not paying dividends at the present time. For the purpose of studying questions of policy over a period of years, it seems reasonable to take the figure of $4,000,000. as a conservative estimative estimate of probable average future income, that is, about $100,000. greater than the Treasurer's estimate for 1922.

## UNPAID AND CONDITIONAL APPROPRIATIONS.

Against accumulated and future income must be set the unpaid and conditional appropriations of the Memorial. Question may be raised as to the propriety of including all conditional appropriations at their face value, but it seems conservative to use a maximum figure for these appropriations, making no deductions until the conditional appropriation has definitely lapsed and has been written off.

Appropriations payable in future years are as follows:

- 2 -

<table><thead><tr><th></th><th>Treasurer's Statement<br>as of Dec. 31, 1921.</th><th>Appropriation<br>to Sept. 1, 1922</th><th>Total</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Payable in 1922</td><td>$1,785,843.00</td><td>$1,561,132.00</td><td>$3,844,375.00</td></tr><tr><td>" " 1923</td><td>734,000.00</td><td>69,375.00</td><td>794,375.00</td></tr><tr><td>" " 1924</td><td>550,000.00</td><td>62,875.00</td><td>612,875.00</td></tr><tr><td>" " 1925</td><td></td><td>31,832.00</td><td>31,832.00</td></tr></tbody></table>

These commitments compare with income probably available as follows:

<table><thead><tr><th></th><th>Income</th><th>Commitments</th><th>Balance</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>To Jan. 1, 1922</td><td>$2,104,608.14</td><td></td><td>$2,104,608.14</td></tr><tr><td>1922</td><td>4,000,000.00</td><td>$3,844,375.00</td><td>655,625.00</td></tr><tr><td>1923</td><td>4,000,000.00</td><td>734,375.00</td><td>3,205,625.00</td></tr><tr><td>1924</td><td>4,000,000.00</td><td>612,875.00</td><td>3,387,125.00</td></tr><tr><td>1925</td><td>4,000,000.00</td><td>31,832.00</td><td>3,968,168.00</td></tr></tbody><tfoot><tr><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>$13,321,151.14</td></tr></tfoot></table>

Deducting the indicated balance for 1922 from this total, there remains $12,665,626.14, available for expenditure in the period for January 1, 1923, to December 31, 1925, or an average of $4,221,843.05 each year. It is therefore possible in considering future policy to ignore all unpaid and conditional commitments, and to use the round figure of $4,000,000.00 as a conservative estimate of income annually available for appropriation beginning with the year 1923.

## THE GENERAL PROBLEM

The problem before the memorial is thus the mapping out of general fields of interest, and the rough allocation of available income to these fields. First, however, it seems desirable to reserve some percentage of the income of any year for emergency appropriation for worthy purposes which may suddenly arise, either

- 3 -

outside any of the fields in which the Memorial is primarily inter-
ested or within one of the fields but not anticipated in the
original drawing of the year's budget. What percentage should be
thus reserved is an arbitrary matter, but for the purpose of dis-
cussion, let 25% be set aside, this figure to be modified in
practice as may seem desirable. After such reservation for emer-
gency appropriation, there is left the annual sum of $3,000,000.00
to form the financial starting point in the consideration of policy.

CONTINUING CONTRIBUTIONS.

The analysis of the Memorial's financial position shows
that after deducting all conditional and unpaid appropriations now
outstanding, and after setting aside $1,000,000. annually to pro-
vide for emergencies and unforeseen requirements, there remains
available the sum of $3,000,000. annually for new appropriations.

It does not follow, however, that all of this income can
be considered available for new work, even though none of it has
as yet been appropriated. A deduction must first have been made
to cover the amount, if any, which the Memorial may feel called
upon to appropriate to organizations which are now receiving annual
contributions toward their current expense.

The previous appropriations of the Memorial fall into
three general classes : 1. Appropriations to emergency relief,
represented by grants of $1,000,000. to child feeding in Russia,
$500,000. to Russian medical aid, $250,000 to China famine relief,

-4-

and $100,000. to the Russian refugee situation in Constantinople;

2. Appropriations to Baptist denominational organizations of which the more important in size are grants of $4,000,000. to the Northern Baptist Convention and $750,000. to the Northern Baptist Laymen, National Committee: 3. Appropriations to organizations working in the field of social welfare, including in this class such contributions as those to the Y.M.C.A., the Y.W.C.A., Community Service, the Boy Scouts, the Girl Scouts, the Salvation Army, etcetera. If the appropriation to the Interstate Palisade Park Commission be included with the third group of donations, the past donations of the Memorial will be almost entirely located in one or other of these classes.

In considering a program for the future, the first two classes of appropriations may be set aside as not affecting the $3,000,000. income indicated above. Emergency relief matters are in the very nature of the case not subject to plans and programs; and $1,000,000. a year has already been reserved to take care of important contingencies of this and other types that may arise. With reference to Baptist denominational organizations, it is my understanding that appropriations already made cover the situation until 1925 as far as the Northern Baptist Convention is concerned. The smaller requirements of Baptist denominational organizations, such as the Baptist Union of Western Canada, can be amply cared for from time to time from the $1,000,000. which has been reserved. It therefore seems proper to defer general consideration of Baptist organizations until 1925, when the questions of policy involved can be studied in the light of the

-5-

Memorial's other policies and activities as they may have developed.

The third class of appropriations includes those to social welfare organizations. Of particular interest at this time are the contributions to current expense, since here the question of continuing obligations is most pressing.

The Memorial has no legal obligation to these organizations, except in cases where resolutions have been formally passed. On the other hand, it would probably be unwise to discontinue abruptly this class of appropriations, certainly before the Memorial is actively engaged in enterprises that make positive demands on the income now allocated to these organizations. Such discontinuance would in many cases be interpreted by the contributing public as an implied censure of the work of these organizations. Then too, if the action appeared an arbitrary one, it would tend to impair existing favorable public opinion, and would make more difficult the securing of public cooperation in what may become the Memorial's major interests. It seems advisable, therefore, to make provision for continuing appropriations to these organizations for some little time in the future at least.

Contributions toward current expense of social welfare organizations, liberally estimated on the assumption of continuance of all appropriations now active, and including as possibilities donations to Community Service and to the Y.M.C.A., would require approximately $700,000. a year. A detailed list of these organizations is attached to this report.

Serious question may be raised as to the continuance of the Memorial's grants to current expense of these welfare organizations

-6-

as a matter of permanent policy, and certain of these questions will
be discussed later on. Nevertheless, it does seem expedient for the
next few years to make provision for these contributions. The sum of
$700,000. should therefore be set aside to cover these continuing
appropriations. Although it is probable that not all of this amount
will be required, it may be taken as a maximum deduction on this account
from available income.

An estimate for administrative expense should be made,
but any figure which is given will probably be rather unreliable. The
most satisfactory basis seems to be that of setting an amount which
will cover a minimum nuclear organization. A liberal estimate for this
would be $25,000. a year. Administrative expense will increase beyond
this, depending on the program adopted and method of work; but the
question of additional amounts for administration can be easily taken
up at the time various programs are under consideration.

INCOME AVAILABLE.

Income available for new work thus appears as follows:

<table><tr><td>Net income</td><td>$4,000,000.</td></tr><tr><td>Emergency reserve</td><td>$1,000,000.</td></tr><tr><td>Continuing appropriations</td><td>700,000.</td></tr><tr><td>Administrative expense</td><td>25,000.</td></tr><tr><td>Balance not allocated</td><td>2,275,000.</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>$4,000,000.</td></tr></table>

It will be noticed that no deduction has been made to care
for direct work with children in New York City. Two surveys are now
under way, one under the direction of the New York Academy of Medicine
and the other under the direction of Mr. Barrows, who is working in the
Memorial offices. The two surveys have only barely begun, and for this
reason it is not possible to predict what opportunities for expenditure

-7-

may develop. One fact, however, is beginning to emerge; namely, that although the possibilities of important work are very great indeed, it seems probable that the demand for funds will not be large. There are two reasons for this. First, the child life of a community is intimately and inextricably bound up in the whole social life of the community, and in order that substantial, and not superficial, improvement in conditions be made, the responsibility for the welfare of its children must be both felt and assumed by the community. The application of large amounts of money from external sources is likely to retard rather than advance normal progress toward improved conditions through rendering less sensitive the feeling of parental, neighborhood and civic responsibility. In the second place, we have far too few facts as to what really contributes to the welfare of children. There are innumerable opinions, some of them exceedingly shrewd observations by men and women who have long worked with children; but there does not exist the background of demonstrated principles, such as exists in the fields of medicine and engineering, which can be made the foundation for a vigorous, clear-out and extensive program. At the present time it seems conservative to estimate the financial requirements of any direct work that may be carried on for children in New York City to average over the next five years not more than $250,000. a year.

Thus, there remains, after making all deductions, at least $2,000,000. a year, beginning January 1, 1923, available for expenditure in such fields and in such ways as may appear most useful. The most important problem before the Memorial is the determination of the general purposes for which this income is to be used.

-8-

REQUIREMENTS FOR A POLICY.

The problem of policy for the Memorial is not the problem of shaping a single year's activities; it is rather the problem of determining the work of a period of years, perhaps a decade. The funds available for its program must therefore be considered not as $2,000,000., the income of a single year, but as, let us say, $2,000,000., the income of the decade. It is, of course, not the intention to attempt to fix at this time the precise channels of expenditure for this vast amount; but it is desirable to choose the general field of endeavor so that it will be rich enough in opportunities to measure up fully to the resources available for its cultivation.

Conceiving the Memorial's resources in this way makes it evident that no program is suitable that does not make a substantial and permanent contribution to human welfare. The opportunity is now here for doing a work of the first order, one that will appear to those who will look back upon it as being among the significant events of this decade. No lesser program is either desirable or practical in the truest sense. It follows that the Memorial must look for a basic need, a need that does not exist as a result of temporary conditions or accidental circumstances, or that may soon pass through normal social and political development.

It is also true that the field chosen must not be so wide that the Memorial's influence will be lost in a scattering of efforts, coordinate perhaps, but unequal to the task. A program to be satisfactory must be broad enough, but at the same time precise enough. It must reach fundamental issues, but it must not drive too deep. It must produce

-9-

results of basic importance; but it must produce results.

Other things being equal, it would be desirable to formulate a program that follows in a natural way the work that the Memorial has already been engaged upon. In view of the circumstances under which the Memorial was established, its early donations may perhaps suggest the field in which the Memorial's interest may be most appropriately centered. In general this field may be said to be the field of social welfare. In contrast, the Memorial has not been interested in voyages of discovery and exploration; it has not been interested in artistic creation, in literature, in music, in the graphic and plastic arts; it has not been interested in the problem of mathematics, physics and chemistry, nor in classical or philological research. The field of social welfare, though related to these other activities at innumerable points, stands nevertheless somewhat apart as being the field in which the greater part of the Memorial's work has been done. It seems proper, therefore, to search first within this field in the attempt to discover a program satisfactory in terms of other criteria.

## THE SOCIAL FIELD.

An examination of the operations of organizations in the field of social welfare shows as a primary need the development of the social sciences and the production of a body of substantiated and widely accepted generalizations as to human capacities and motives and as to the behavior of human beings as individuals and in groups. Under the term "social sciences" we may include sociology, ethnology, anthropology, and psychology, and certain aspects of economics, history, political economy and biology.

-10-

The great practical need for greater knowledge concerning
the forces that affect the behavior of individuals and societies is
definitely recognized by the ablest leaders of social welfare organi-
zations, and in many cases research departments have been established
or proposed in an attempt to get light on some of the more pressing
problems. Such organizations as the Young Women's Christian Associa-
tion, the Girl Scouts, the Vocational Adjustment Bureau, the Institute
for Government Research and the Association for Improving the Condition
of the Poor, are among the organizations which have felt the need
keenly enough to venture themselves into social research.

All who work toward the general end of social welfare are
embarrassed by the lack of that knowledge which the social sciences
must provide. It is as though engineers were at work without an
adequate development in the sciences of physics and chemistry, or as
though physicians were practicing in the absence of the medical sciences.
The direction of work in the social field is largely controlled by
tradition, inspiration and expediency, a natural condition in view of
our ignorance of individual and social forces.

The explanation for the absence of a scientific groundwork
in the social field is given to a large degree if we examine the situa-
tion in the social sciences in the universities.

First, the sciences are themselves very young. Only since
the middle of the nineteenth century have human beings in their con-
scious aspects been considered a part of the natural order, and their
capacities and behavior subject to study by experimental or even
inductive methods. The first psychological laboratory was established

-11-

in Leipzig only fifty years ago. As important an instrument for social research as the coefficient of correlation is less than forty years old. And the beginnings of attempts at the measurement of "general intelligence" and other human traits are to be found largely within the present century.

Second, the subject matter of the social sciences is extraordinarily difficult to deal with. It cannot be brought into the laboratory for study; elemental phases are almost impossible to isolate; important forces cannot be controlled and experimented with, but must be observed if, when and as operative.

Third, the universities have not been able so to organize their program as to afford favorable opportunities for social research. Facilities for the collection and tabulation of data are meager, and the requirements of classroom instruction limit markedly the possibilities of contact with social phenomena. As a result, production from the universities is largely deductive and speculative, on the basis of second hand observations, documentary evidence and anecdotal material. It is small wonder that the social engineer finds this social science abstract and remote, of little help to him in the solution of his problems.

Does not this situation present the Memorial with its opportunity? Is it not possible that through the development of the social sciences the Memorial's contribution may be made?

The need for knowledge of social forces is certainly very great. Not only is it required by social welfare organizations, but by business and industry, and by the agencies of government as well. It is becoming more and more clearly recognized that unless means are

-12-

found of meeting the complex social problems that are so rapidly
developing, our increasing control of physical forces may prove in-
creasingly destructive of human values. To be sure, social knowledge
is not a substitute for social righteousness; but unless we are ready
to admit that the situation is utterly hopeless, we must believe that
knowledge is a far greater aid to righteousness than is ignorance.

Here then is a field and a program - the development of
the social sciences and the production of a body of fact and principle
that will be utilized in the solution of social problems. The con-
trolling interest which the Memorial would have in carrying forward such
a program would be in no sense an academic interest in the advancement
of social theory and social philosophy; it would be a practical inter-
est in the welfare of individual men, women and children, together with
a recognition that the knowledge which the social sciences can give is
an essential and at the present time inadequately developed means for
the achievement of its purposes.

## POSSIBILITIES OF APPROACHING THE FIELD.

A program of the development of the social sciences would
have four aspects: 1. The definition and marking off within the field
as a whole a certain class of related problems upon which emphasis will
be placed; 2. The opening up of possibilities of contacts for scientists
with concrete social phenomena and the provision of facilities for the
collection and evaluation of data; 3. The increase in the number of
highly able men working in the social sciences; 4. The provision of ways
and means for the general dissemination of the knowledge that is secured
and for its utilization practically in the advancement of social welfare.

-13-

1. The question of defining the class of related problems upon which emphasis would be placed is one that can hardly be settled with finality in advance. Definition can probably be secured in part by a process of exclusion. Problems centering in the life of peoples of remote times or of remote places would scarcely be of major interest. The general fields of education and public health may be set aside because of the agencies already at work here. Matters directly affecting the machinery of government would be approached with caution for reasons of expediency. On the positive side, the problems of child life, of leisure time and recreation, vocational problems, problems affecting the immigrant, the aged and poor, problems of neighborhood relationships - any or all of these afford opportunities for correlated effort. The marking out of related general problems and the bringing of them together tentatively into a reasonably unified program would seem to be an essential phase of the development of the field. Only in this way can excessive scattering of interest be avoided, with positive assurance of tangible contributions of a practical nature in relatively short periods of time.

2. The question of creating possibilities for research is a matter of organization and of facilities. Certain guiding principles may assist in early judgments as to what can best be done. a) In general, the best auspices for research is the university. The stability of the organization, the presence of a wide range of professional opinion, the existence of scholarly and scientific standards of work, recognized and reasonably effective channels of inter-university communication, all make for a favorable environment for investigation.

-14-

b) Means must be devised for securing a far more intimate contact of the social scientist in the university with concrete social phenomena. This is in part a question of organization and in part a question of facilities. As an example of what is possible in terms of organization, the Department of Industrial Research in the University of Pennsylvania is a striking example. The problems to be studied were problems of industrial personnel. Contact with industry was necessary. Consequently, thirty industrial concerns in Philadelphia associated themselves with the Department, and opened their factories for experimental purposes. On the University side, a scientific committee was formed, including men competent in the fields of medicine, hygiene, education, psychology, economics, sociology and statistics. Graduate students and members of the Department are thus given excellent opportunities for the study of phenomena at first hand, and the industries are directly benefiting from the information that is secured under the supervision of the scientific committee. The Department is barely a year old, but is on the point of issuing an important study on stability of employment and turnover in Philadelphia. A similar plan of organization can be worked out for research in other fields and in other institutions. It is a most suggestive arrangement for the attack on certain problems of child life locally. Other means of organizing for contact with practical experience will doubtless evolve, but the above case illustrates one of the possibilities.

To obtain contact with practical experience funds are required for supplies, printing of forms, clerical and statistical assistance, libraries of reference, etc. It is surprising how much needed

-15-

these facilities are, and how research is delayed and made ineffective
for want of them.

A more remote possibility for advancing social research
lies in bringing about closer associations among the various social
sciences, and in creating better means for cooperative work. This
problem presents many obstacles but can be wroked gradually to a
solution.

c) A third principle that may be followed is always to work through some existing institution, or if no existing institution seems suitable, to create an institution; but to avoid creating a situation in which the Memorial is itself actually carrying on social investigations. The Memorial cannot assume responsibility for the outcome of any specific piece of research or for the opinion of any single scientist.

d) Social research should be conducted by permanent organiza-
tions, not by councils, committees, and staffs that are brought together
for the study of a particular question and that disperse after the
publication of a report. Too much is lost scientifically in the
breaking up of a group that has worked together over a period of months
or years in a particular field of social research. The situation would
be very different if the problems studied were brought to a final solu-
tion, but the report is soon out of date, and the scientific group that
made the study has meanwhile been scattered. In general, social research
should be carried on under conditions that favor the continuance of
interest in a group of related problems indefinitely.

e) Social research should ordinarily be associated with
opportunities for graduate and undergraduate instruction. This teaching
need not be a burden, but the opportunity for presenting students with

-16-

material and for discovering research talent among graduate students
is too great to be neglected. These values are apt to be lost under
many existing methods of carrying on social research.

f) A final requirement for social research is better facilities for scientific publication. The truly technical, not semi-popular, journals in the field are inadequate, and it is important that this lack be promptly supplied.

3. Returning to the third phase of the general program, it is important that there should be an increase in the number of highly able men working in the social sciences. No influence will be more important here than the opening up of research possibilities as suggested above. One further step is necessary in the provision of scholarships that will tend to place the social sciences in a more equal relation to the physical sciences and to the arts. An important handicap in the social field is the absence of large commercial value in a training in social science. This handicap will become less severe as the social s sciences themselves become stronger.

4. The fourth phase of the program relates to the dissemination of the knowledge that is secured, and for its utilization practically. The more fundamental truths will automatically get into text books, and will affect in some cases the teaching content in secondary and elementary schools. Regular channels may well be provided for supplying existing popular and semi-popular magazines with material of interest to their readers, In certain cases, new periodicals may be needed or existing publications may be strengthened. Assistance may be needed in the publication of books that cannot have a commercially profitable circulation.

-17-

An important agency for public enlightenment exists in the museums of the country. These have as yet scarcely been used in presenting graphically and by models facts about contemporary society. Such material as that of the census would lend itself admirably to temporary exhibitions, and in this form would secure much space in the daily press.

These four phases of the general program thus appear to offer the possibilities of a concrete starting point, with reasonable assurance of tangible results. The results will not come rapidly, for each phase of the program depends on the development of other phases. Particular care would have to be exercised to avoid an unconscious trend toward rigidity and inflexibility; it would be very wasteful to attempt too sharp a definition in advance of what shall be done and how. The more or less spontaneous creativeness of different workers, active in different places, will produce in the long run a far richer and more valuable contribution to the field of social science than will the controlled efforts of an equally able group working in terms of a predetermined program toward the solution of specific problems.

## THE FIRST STEPS.

Suppose that it be granted that the development of the social sciences is a suitable general field for the Memorial's major work, and that the different phases of the problem seem to lend themselves to a practical operating program; the next question of interest is, what would be the first steps - what actions might be taken at once if the general program should be adopted?

Five specific steps could be taken during the first year:

-18-

1. Assistance might be given to universities in which there is already existing an appreciable interest and activity in research in the social sciences, and where resources are not available to provide satisfactory facilities for the prosecution of this research. As illustrative of institutions at which good work is being done may be mentioned Chicago, Columbia, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Harvard and Iowa. In the beginning, this assistance would not include funds to provide for additions to the scientific staff, since it is possible that the number of competent men is so limited that the enrichment of the staff of one university could be accomplished only through the impoverishment of another. The aid which might be given would rather be directed toward the provision of more adequate clerical, statistical and field assistance, of essential materials and supplies, of supplementing funds for the purchase of books and documents, etcetera. Such assistance would markedly increase the productivity of scientists already engaged in research, and would enlarge the possibilities of minor investigations by graduate students.

At the University of Iowa, for example, a Child Welfare Station has been established, but the budget of $40,000. barely provides for the salaries of the professional staff. The productivity of this laboratory would be greatly increased by an appropriation to care for clerical and statistical assistance, and perhaps additional field workers.

Just where this assistance would be given, in what amounts and under what conditions are questions that must be answered by personal visits to universities now known to be productive. Before the end of the approaching academic year, information should be at hand to enable the Memorial to make a number of appropriations.

-19-

2. In the course of the visiting to universities mentioned above, the fellowship situation would also be studied. A definite policy on this matter could be established, so that fellowships might be available in some measure at least for the next academic year.

3. The situation as to the publication of scientific work in the social sciences should be investigated at once, together with a survey of the social studies being produced by non-academic agencies. Many business concerns, advertising agencies, trade associations, etc., are making studies that should be brought into the general body of social science literature. Prominent among organizations with important research departments are the Curtis Publishing Company, the American Telephone & Telegraph Company, the J.Walter Thompson Advertising Company, the Crowell Publishing Company, and the Retail Research Association. The American Sociological Society and the American Economic Association would probably afford satisfactory auspices for securing the facts. This question could be discussed at the Christmas meetings of these Associations.

4. An informal committee of six to ten eminent scientists in the social field; for example, James R. Angell, L. C. Marshall, J. J. Goss, Robert Park, Joseph Willits and C. E. Seashore, might be brought together from time to time to advise concerning the marking out of certain classes of problems within the general field that are subject to coordinated attack. This group would also be helpful in advising as to the most satisfactory methods of organizing for various types of research and as to the suitability of individual workers for the study of special classes of problems. This committee need not be brought together until after the university situation is surveyed, but it should have met once or twice before appropriations to any institutions are decided upon.

-20-

5. Steps might be taken at once to establish in New York City, perhaps in association with Columbia, an Institute or Department organized in a manner similar to the Department of Industrial Research in the University of Pennsylvania, but for the purpose of studying the problems of child life in this city. The cooperating field organizations would not be industries, but would be the various charitable agencies in New York that have an interest in children. The survey of child life which the Memorial is making points clearly to the necessity for such a research agency, and steps leading toward its establishment might be taken without delay. The negotiations are likely to be somewhat protracted because of the number of special interests involved, but it is probable that work might be definitely begun by the beginning of the next academic year.

These five steps all have a direct bearing on the four phases of the general program previously discussed, and would offer a specific and practical starting point for entering the field.

## PROBABLE RESULTS.

It was stated earlier in this memorandum that the controlling interest in a social science program is not an abstract interest in social theory and social philosophy, but a practical interest in providing a basis of fact and principle that may be used in contributing to the welfare of individual men, women and children. It may seem that the discussion which followed departed from this main purpose, and it may be desirable to show concretely just how the program outlined will come to affect every-day life.

-21-

The most immediate effect will naturally be found on the organizations which cooperate with the university research groups.

The importance of this influence has been abundantly shown in the past.

For example, at the University of Pennsylvania, the results of the study of labor mobility are already to be found in the actual management of Philadelphia companies. If a department for the study of child life is established in New York, with the child welfare agencies cooperating, the earliest practical results would be the effect on the operating programs of these agencies.

The effect of social research is soon reflected in governmental administration. The United States Civil Service Commission has made drastic changes in its examinations as a result of psychological research. The Post Office Department, with the assistance of H. S. Dennison, is applying principles and technique of the social sciences to the solution of extremely difficult problems of personnel. The Department of Agriculture in rating its inspectors drew definitely on the contributions of the social sciences. The use made by the Senate of the Institute of Government Research is illustrative of how public men are coming to draw on available sources of scientific data.

The great practical significance of the results of the social sciences on public opinion must not be overlooked. An outstanding recent example of this influence is to be found in the gradual appreciation of the meaning of the results of the Army Intelligence Tests. The discovery of 25% illiteracy in the general population has also had its effect on the promulgation of literacy tests, et cetera.

Experience seems to show clearly that the results of investigations in the social sciences, where they are conducted by

-22-

obviously impartial scientific agencies, and where these results are
generally accepted by scientific men, come to play a definite and
wholesome part in the thinking of people generally. It hardly seems
too great an assumption to conclude that additions to the body of
scientific knowledge in the social field will also have their due in-
fluence in the public welfare. The development of the social sciences
is therefore not a matter of academic interest, but one which will
profoundly affect for good the practical conditions of every-day life.

In time we may see as a result of such a program the
organization at a number of our principal universities, departments or
institutes of community research, these departments studying intensively
the social and economic life of the community in which the institution
is located. In New York, Boston, Philadelphia, Chicago, Cleveland and
Pittsburgh, the phenomena of urban life might be under investigation;
through such universities as the state universities of Iowa, Michigan,
Wisconsin and Illinois, related problems of rural life would be studied.
These researches would be carried on through these departments as co-
operative enterprises between the scientific staff of the universities
and the agencies and organizations which are engaged in practical work,
social welfare organizations, industries, city and state government,
etc., thereby providing the scientists with a social laboratory and real
"clinical" material, and at the same time affording immediate opportunity
for the utilization of all methods, facts and principles that may be
discovered.

The researches in these various centers would be correlated
through existing or perhaps new scientific organizations, perhaps through
the National Research Council. Through such agencies, problems lying

-23-

outside those of the individual community might be attacked by co-operative effort.

Such a system of social research could not be set up
today. Existing personnel is inadequate, existing technique must be
further tested out and modified, plans of organization must be
experimented with. The steps outlined as first steps in this memorandum,
the strengthening of existing departments in the social sciences, the
provision of fellowships, the creation of any necessary facilities for
publication, the establishment of a department of child life research
in New York City, all are directed at the removal of these obstacles to
the ends described. If these ends, or others similar, can be reached,
the result will be great increase in our knowledge of social forces, the
use of this knowledge practically, and consequently general improvement
in the conditions of ordinary life.

FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS.

It is necessary to return again to the question of finances
to see in a general way how the program outlined relates itself to the
Memorial's resources.

Some very interesting fiscal problems are presented by this
program. These arise from the fact that although the first appropriation
for research would probably be made on an annual basis for a period of
three to five years, in cases where the money is wisely used the grant
would presumably be capitalized in time. If the general program is
planned so that it will be completely contained within say ten years'
available income, i.e., $20,000,000., the funds allocated to projects
susceptible to capitalization must not exceed the resources from which the
capital must be found.

-24-

Concretely, if the Memorial should make commitments call-
ing for $1,000,000. a year in annual expense, during the ten year
period only $12,578,000. would accumulate for purposes of capitalizing
these commitments. This sum would produce only $625,000, less than
two-thirds of the amount required. Thus, either the Memorial's principal
would have to be drawn upon or the capital would have to be provided
from income of several years following the decade.

It is therefore necessary to determine the maximum amount
that can be expended in annual grants that may require capitalization.

Assuming that the administrative expense for the program
will run to about $50,000. a year, there remains $1,950,000. a year
for expenditure. From this sum must be secured, both the annual appro-
priation and their capitalization.

The problem is solved by determining the present worth of
$1,950,000. a year for ten years, and computing the annual income from
this present worth. The income on the present worth is the amount which
can be appropriated in annual grants. The difference between these
appropriations and the total available income will provide for capitali-
zation.

The sum of $1,950,000. a year for ten years, taking interest
at 5%, has a present worth of $15,060,000. The income on this amount is
$753,000. This is the maximum amount that can be voted annually if all
the appropriations are subject to capitalization.

The difference between $753,000. and $1,950,000., the
available income, is $1,197,000; and this amount, if set aside each year,
will amount to $15,060,000., just enough to take care of capital require-
ments.

-25-

If certain portions of the income are voted for purposes not requiring capitalization, the amount available for annual appropriations that might be capitalized is not correspondingly decreased. Thus, if $100,000. is spent in the former class of grants, the amounts available for the latter is only reduced from $755,000. to $715,000. These relationships would require careful attention.

However, the purpose of this analysis is to determine the maximum amount that might be voted in any year under circumstances that might involve capitalization later on. In a ten year program, taken to be financially complete in itself, this amount is $755,000. The question now is as to whether this sum, expended annually, is sufficient to make an appreciable contribution to the field of social research.

It is possible to distribute this amount in an arbitrary manner among different types of activity, in order to get some impression of what can be done.

Suppose we make a distribution as follows:

<table><tr><td>1.</td><td>Facilities for university departments</td><td>$200,000.</td></tr><tr><td>2,</td><td>Fellowships</td><td>100,000.</td></tr><tr><td>3,</td><td>Publications</td><td>25,000.</td></tr><tr><td>4.</td><td>Special Departments, Bureaus and Institutes</td><td>400,000.</td></tr><tr><td>5.</td><td>Miscellaneous</td><td>28,000.</td></tr></table>

Taking these activities up one by one to see what these sums provide, the first would give $20,000. a year to ten universities. Divided between two departments, say sociology and economics, there would be $10,000. a year for each department. This amount is sufficient to increase greatly existing facilities for research. With ten universities so aided, the general increase in productivity would be considerable.

Fellowships would probably run two years, and might average $1,250. Thus, $50,000. would be available for appointments each year,

-26-

which means that forty students might be aided. Distributed among the departments of sociology, economics, psychology and anthropology, political science and history, this number does not seem too large, and at the same time it seems sufficient to offer genuine attractions in the field of social science to able students.

The estimate for publications would probably be sufficient to subsidize a journal and a monograph series. This increase in existing facilities for publication would probably be inadequate to take care of the increase in productivity; but it is reasonable to believe that other journals would arise independently financed.

For special departments, bureaus and institutes, there would be $400,000. A large project, such as the New York Child Study Institute might be, would require as much as $100,000. The budget of such an organization as the University of Pennsylvania Department of Industrial Research requires $25,000 to $50,000. The sum of $400,000 would permit the establishment of between five and seven such research organizations. This number is probably as large as it would be desirable to establish in the immediate future, due to the requirements that would be made for competent scientific personnel. The number is nevertheless sufficient to provide a well rounded attack on a group of related problems in social science.

These figures are not to be taken as a schedule of expenditure that would be followed; they merely serve the purpose of bringing out the possibilities and limitations of the Memorial's resources in developing the social science field. If it appears, as it may, that the resources of the Memorial are inadequate for the task, it is to be remembered that the amount of money taken is a minimum amount, and that

-27-

it is possible, if circumstances are favorable, that the resources
available for the program would be 10 or 15% greater than have been
estimated. It should also be remembered that the cultivation of such
a field as this cannot proceed too rapidly. It is perhaps better that
the resources should appear somewhat restricted; for this will eliminate
any tendency to force the program in order to utilize surplus funds.
It will also tend to make for greater care in the allocation of funds that
are available. On the whole, a program that pinches a little is likely
to bring about a somewhat wiser and more economical use of resources than
is a program that is too easily cared for financially.

The development of the social sciences seems an appropriate
and worth while field for the Memorial to cultivate. The field also
seems to be one that affords the opportunity for a program that the
Memorial is able to finance with reasonable adequacy. There would appear
to be ample justification for the Memorial assuming this work as its major
interest.

## THE PROGRAM.

The question now arises as to what the Memorial should do
about such a program immediately. It has not been the intention in the
preceding discussion to outline a concrete and specific program to be
accepted at once as a basis for action. The purpose of this memorandum
is simply to call the attention of the Memorial to the very great fruit-
fulness of the social field, and to show its logical and intimate associa-
tion with the Memorial's present field and policies. The concrete details
which have been mentioned are not set down as a working program, but
merely as suggestive of how a social science program might evolve.

-28-

If the general field seems to be a significant and appropriate one for the Memorial, the next step would be the securing of competent outside opinion as to the worthwhileness of such a general program, and suggestions as to how it should be worked out. From these opinions and suggestions a specific plan of operation would be developed, which could then be considered by the Memorial as the basis for a working program.

The first decision, however, would be as to the probable significance and appropriateness of the program and would determine whether it seems advisable to explore further the possibilities offered by the social science field.

## OTHER QUESTIONS OF POLICY - SOCIAL WELFARE ORGANIZATIONS.

Although it seems clear that there should be no abrupt discontinuance of appropriations to social welfare organizations toward their current expense, the question of what attitude the Memorial should take toward this field as a matter of permanent policy is an important one.

It may be seriously questioned whether donations to current expense of these social welfare organizations represent the most effective use of the money involved. The aggregate annual contribution for these purposes, $700,000., assumes a very different aspect from that of the particular appropriations taken one by one. Each contribution in itself seems a wise use of the amount voted; but collectively this group of appropriations seems unsatisfying in terms of accomplishment for the expenditure of so large a sum annually.

It may well be that the appearance is illusory, and that we cannot adequately judge the workings of funds directed in so many and diverse ways. It may be that our estimate of worthwhileness is inadequate

-29-

because we cannot form a vivid and concrete picture of achievements.

But it seems more probable that the power for good that attaches to
the fund in the aggregate is in considerable measure lost when the fund
is broken into small amounts and dispersed without some controlling,
unifying purpose. It seems probable that in this case the whole is
actually greater than its parts.

The question may also be raised as to whether contributions
to the current expense of welfare organizations by a foundation really
in the long run increase the resources with which these organizations have
to work. The present period of depression is a special situation, and
in all probability during the past eighteen months, the Memorial's grants
could not have been secured from individual donors. But in general,
does the Memorial's contribution add to the net amount available for
current expense or does it merely reduce the amount which individual
donors might otherwise give? Donations for special purposes and to new
organizations doubtless make possible the beginnings of activities that
might not be started without such stimulus; but a real question attaches
to the long run effectiveness of regular contributions to current expense.

A final objection to these contributions may be made on the
ground that the work consumes the appropriation and leaves but little
residue in the form of a permanent contribution to the body of knowledge or
to conditions of life. Granting that out social and economic organization make
makes such work necessary, is the responsibility for supporting it not that
of the contemporary generation?

The foundations occupy a peculiar position. Their resources
are large enough and permanent enough to make it possible by planning over

-80-

a period of years to attack really fundamental situations and to reach relatively remote ends. Work of this kind the contemporary generation is not organized to do, except through its governmental agencies; and these have scarcely proved adequate. The responsibility of the foundations would seem to be most satisfactorily assumed through the choice of a program requiring effort and support, which they are uniquely qualified to render.

If it is felt by the Memorial that donations to the current expense of social welfare organizations should not be permanently continued, a natural transition is to be found in making of future appropriations, wherever possible, to special work of the organization -work that will terminate within a reasonably limited time. The conclusion of one special activity might be made the occasion either for taking up another or for discontinuing this particular type of work.

If the Memorial decides to enter the general field of social science, there is reason to believe that appropriations to social welfare organizations for special purposes might be continued almost indefinitely with assurance of good results. It is partly through these organizations that scientists will secure their contact with the field, and by so selecting the special purposes for which funds are given as to correlate with the scientific program the general program of the Memorial would be materially advanced.

In any case, the Memorial's contribution to a social welfare organization should be only a small percentage of the total budget except in very special cases. If a maximum percentage, say 10%, is decided upon, it will assist in the handling of this type of request.

-31-

The question of contributions to the same organization
for the same purposes during the same year by both the Memorial and
by Mr. Rockefeller, Jr., should be worked out in the near future.
The reasons for past policy are readily understood. However, if any
reasonable basis for discriminating between the activities of the
Memorial as a foundation and Mr. Rockefeller, Jr., as an individual
can be established, it would be helpful to adopt a policy of not
duplicating their contributions, except in special cases where there
are good reasons for continuing present methods. It is possible that
situations may arise in larger philanthropic undertakings, in some
prominent social organizations, and especially in cases of emergency
relief, to which both the Memorial and Mr. Rockefeller, Jr., may
properly contribute. The existing practice of duplication adds
greatly to the complexity of the problems of policy, both of kind and
of amount, in working with social welfare organizations. It has made
for a considerable amount of confusion in past appropriations; and as
time passes - as the knowledge of what actually happened in a partic-
ular case must be determined from records and not from memories - as
the Memorial's principal interests shift from social welfare organiza-
tions to other fields, as it may, the danger of important errors in
handling duplicate contributions will greatly increase. To sum up,
the practice of duplicating contributions should be put on the
defensive, and unless it can be justified on positive grounds of
necessity or appropriations in special cases, it should be gradually
discontinued as policies of discrimination are stated from time to time.

-32-

THE PUBLIC HEALTH FIELD.

Certain of the Memorial's past appropriations have been
for work within the field of public health. A question of policy
arises as to whether new appropriations should be made in this field,
in view of the activities of the Rockefeller Foundation. The
Foundation has worked out a technique in the field of public health,
it has developed a program, it has ample resources. The Memorial's
policies should be so worked out as to avoid duplication of effort
and confusion through the prosecution of uncoordinated plans and
through possible differences of opinion as to method.

Under the circumstances, it would be natural if the
Memorial should decide to withdraw from the field of public health
entirely. It certainly seems advisable to avoid the support of
scientific research and of demonstration of general significance in
the health field. The Memorial is not equipped with personnel to
give such work the technical supervision it requires, nor is it able to
judge the merits of a project of this kind as to its appropriateness
in time or in location; neither is it prepared to estimate the ability
of the investigators. To be sure, the Memorial could, if it so
desired, build up a staff competent to deal with such questions
authoritatively; but such a development would seem wasteful and un
desirable in view of the Foundation's program.

If the field of social research is entered, certain
phases of problems taken up will no doubt have a close relation to
public health. Such problems would not be automatically ruled out on
grounds of policy; they would be considered in terms of their signifi
cance for the social sciences as the Memorial may be interested in them
and would be dealt with accordingly.

-33-

The Memorial has had in the past numerous requests for aid to hospitals, both for building and for current expense. The magnitude of the field and the difficulty of discriminating between institutions if a restricted program is adopted makes this field one of doubtful promise for the Memorial. The amount of money that would be absorbed in a general hospital program seems out of proportion to the significance and permanence of what would be accomplished. Unless the needs of hospitals come to have a direct relation to a major program adopted by the Memorial, it seems desirable to take a negative position with reference to this field.

## NEXT YEAR'S PROGRAM.

Even though the Memorial should enter immediately into a program of developing the social sciences, it would be impossible during the year 1923 to make any considerable appropriations in this field. From the financial side, this program will more nearly date from the beginning of 1924, or at the earliest from October 1st, 1923. There remains, therefore, an immediate problem with reference to the income for the balance of 1922, i.e., $655,625.00, and the income of 1923 that cannot be applied during that year to the general program, i.e., about $1,500,000.

A decision must be reached as to this $2,150,000. Either of two policies are possible; the first, to conserve this surplus for use at some later time in the general program; the second, to distribute this amount in ways which might not be related to the program, but which would not involve the Memorial in precedents that would be embarrassing later on.

-34-

The first policy, that of conserving the resources, would be entirely justifiable. In working in the social sciences, the Memorial will in time be able to expend wisely every dollar of its available income. It is not as though the income were accumulating because of the absence of a program; on the contrary, it would be conserved because of the existence of a very definite and far-reaching program.

On the other hand, the time when this surplus might be needed would probably be several years away. It would not be required until it became desirable to capitalize successfully used annual appropriations. In the meantime, there might be considerable accumulations on account of the $1,000,000. a year emergency reserve. In other words, though the present surplus would certainly be found useful in time, the situation is so indefinite that it might well be considered questionable policy to husband so large a fund against such uncertain and distant contingencies.

It is also true that the present time is an opportune one for taking up projects that may be extremely worthwhile, but that later may lie so far outside the Memorial's program as it develops that it would seem unwise to support them.

Two very interesting proposals have recently been made in an informal way to the Memorial. Although they are radically different in kind, they each have real merit and each in its own way would be appropriate for the Memorial to consider.

The first suggestion comes from the National Research Council, requesting that the Memorial provide the Council with funds

-35-

that may be allocated to research in the physical and biological sciences. Although the Council has a satisfactory building in Washington, and permanent endowment to take care of the expenses of administration, it almost totally lacks income that can be directly applied to scientific projects. Later this fall a complete analysis of the situation will probably be placed before the Memorial for formal consideration, and at this time the amount of money required, which will not be inconsiderable, will be worked out. From a general knowledge of the conditions of the Council and its work, it may be said that this suggestion is a very important one, and that it offers opportunity for a substantial contribution to the national welfare.

The second suggestion is that the Memorial undertake the assistance of secondary schools in foreign countries, which are run by Americans for the education of American children. Especially in the Far East, there is need for these American schools, since the children of American missionaries, business men, and diplomatic representatives require a secondary education that will prepare them for admission to American colleges and universities, and such education is not available in these countries. A number of such secondary schools have sprung up in centers where there are Americans. These schools seem to have been fairly successful in raising money for current expense, but the capital investment required for even modest plant and equipment has been difficult to secure. If aid were given only to existing secondary schools the number would not be large. From such information as is available without involving the Memorial too closely in the project, there appear to be two schools in Japan, three in China, one in Korea, two in

-36-

India, and two in the Near East that would be worthy of support. No data on South America has been obtainable, but the number of schools of importance there at the present time cannot be large. If assistance could be given to these schools in such a way as to avoid any assumption of continuous responsibility for current expense, this would seem to afford an interim program of considerable interest and appropriateness for the Memorial. The great objections to such a program are that it involves setting up special administrative machinery, that it deals with institutions far removed from the opportunity of occasional direct observation, and that the time for the completion of such a program would undoubtedly extend over a period of several years. Financially, the program might require in the neighborhood of $1,000,000.

## SUGGESTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.

The content of this report may be summarized in the following suggestions and recommendations, which are set down here as a basis for discussion.

It is proposed:

1. That in preparing the Memorial's budget for any year the sum of $1,000,000. be set aside as an emergency reserve, to be expended in connection with any unusual or pressing situation that may arise in the course of that year.

2. That appropriations toward the current expense of social welfare organizations be continued, as a matter of temporary policy, and that the sum of $700,000. a year be assumed to represent probable requirements for these purposes for the next few years.

3. That whenever possible appropriations to social welfare organizations be made to special and terminating purposes rather than to general current expense; that the amount of the Memorial's appropriation to social welfare organizations should not exceed 10% of funds secured from other sources, except in unusual circumstances.