A. CHRONOLOGY

Compiled by Dorothy Collins and David Warriner

HONORS

Of the numerous honors that Dr. Wells has received, the following are a sampling:

Twenty-six honorary degrees

Foreign decorations awarded by the Federal Republic of Germany and the King of Thailand

Benjamin Franklin Fellow, Royal Society of Arts (London)

Fellow, American Academy of Arts and Sciences

Member, American Philosophical Society, Phi Beta Kappa, Beta Gamma Sigma

Gold Medal Award, International Benjamin Franklin Society

Brotherhood Award Winner and Member of National Honor Corps of the National Conference of Christians and Jews

Honorary Fellow, International College of Dentists

National Interfraternity Conference Award

The Robins Award of America

Distinguished Service in School Administration Award, American Association of School Administrators

Caleb B. Smith Award, Indiana Grand Lodge, F. & A. M.

Lifetime Honorary Chairman, Federal Home Loan Bank of Indianapolis

Charter Member, Indiana Academy

First Annual Award, New York Alumni Chapter of Beta Gamma Sigma

Honorary Fellow, American College of Dentists

Honorary Member, DeMolay Legion of Honor

Honorary Member, United Steelworkers of America, District 30

Liberty Bell Award, Young Lawyers Section of Indiana Bar Association

One of “America’s Ten Outstanding Young Men of 1939,” United States Junior Chamber of Commerce

Indiana Arts Award, Indiana Arts Commission

Hoosier of the Year Award, Sons of Indiana in New York

Distinguished Service Award, Indiana Junior Chamber of Commerce

Man of the Year Award, Indianapolis Times

Medal of Honor, University of Evansville

Distinguished Alumni Service Award, Indiana University Alumni Association

B. TRADITIONAL RITE AT FRESHMAN CONVOCATION

THE SPIRIT OF INDIANA:Of all the pleasures and responsibilities which come to a university, one of the greatest is that of welcoming its new members to the collegiate body, to unite into one family the individual members of its academic group.

The spirit that is Indiana knows no limitations of age, color, creed, doctrine, social, political, or economic bounds. The Indiana that welcomes you here includes in its membership all parts of the collegiate body from the youngest freshman to the oldest member of the faculty and of its administrative staff. It includes all those who have come for the purpose of seeking truth and intellectual freedom. Of such, it requests that they partake of its spirit and feel themselves shareholders in its privileges and in its responsibilities.

The spirit that greets you here is the rich heritage of a glorious past made possible by students, who, like yourselves upon entering the university, felt strangely far from home and intimate friends, but who soon adapted themselves to their new environment. The university covets for each of you a like experience. The traditions of the institution must be carried on by the entering classes who take up and carry on where the graduating classes leave off. As rich as is the heritage which you find here, it should be and must be made richer and better because of your having been here.

Soon, even to those of you who stay longest, will be given the commencement farewell. The credit which you eventually reflect upon the university will depend to a great extent upon how you conduct yourselves in the interval between this induction and your graduation. Make the most of the opportunities while here, acquaint yourself with the best traditions of the university, leave here richer in tradition than when you entered. Such is the Law of Progress. All that has been and all that is of the spirit of Indiana University welcomes you unreservedly.

PRESIDENT’S CHARGE

I am for those who see our University as it is, with all its strengths and yet all its needs, and who therefore know it at its best—its resolute integrity, its allegiance to the whole truth, its long service in bringing the young people of this state toward the fullness of the life of the mind, its passion for a clean and just democracy. I am for those who see through the superficialities to the University’s basic purpose: the intellectual development of her sons and daughters. It is in their growth that she exults, for by their excellence will the world judge her. Across the earth these sons and daughters join you in the pledge of the Psalmist of old:

If I forget thee, let my right hand

forget her cunning.

Let my tongue cleave to the roof of my mouth,

if I remember thee not.

A PLEDGE FOR THE UNIVERSITY

At the age of eighteen every free-born Athenian youth (ephebus) took an oath of consecration to civic, military, and religious duty. This oath I now administer is in a form freely adapted to meet modern occasions and the case of an educational institution:

I will not disgrace the University from which I have received my education, nor will I abandon the comrade who stands by my side.

I will fight for its best interests, whether I stand alone or have the support of others.

I will revere and preserve its ideals and traditions, and will incite like reverence in others.

I will strive always to quicken among my fellows the sense of social and civic duty.

I will cherish the sacred institutions of my country. In all these ways I will strive to transmit this our heritage not less but greater and better than it was transmitted unto us.

C. TIME ON WELLS

GOURMET & PRESIDENT

Indiana University waited a year for Paul Vories McNutt to decide whether he wanted to be its president. Once dean of its law school, later Governor of Indiana, now High Commissioner to the Philippines, but still Indiana’s political boss, Paul McNutt is looking for the best road to the U. S. Presidency. Last fortnight, after he had talked to the university trustees (his appointees) and President Roosevelt, he made his decision. Back he flew to the Philippines to keep in active touch with politics. Last week Indiana University appointed as president Paul McNutt’s jovial friend, Herman B (for nothing, and without a period) Wells, 35, youngest president of a state university.

Rolypoly “Hermie” Wells (5 ft. 7 in. and 228 lb.) had been holding the chair for Paul McNutt since old Dr. William Lowe Bryan retired last year. On the serious side, he is an economist who has made studies of Indiana’s financial institutions, has written a new state banking law, was dean for two years of the university’s business school. He is a good friend of Utilityman Wendell Lewis Willkie. But the campus knows him best as a jolly, convivial gourmet, and a Rabelaisian storyteller. His chief crony is Sam Gabriel, who runs a haberdashery shop across the street from the president’s office. They roar about Bloomington in a bright blue touring car with the top down, in summer repair to a cabin in Brown County for merrymaking. For exercise Hermie Wells wields a paddle on initiates in the Sphinx Club, waddles around the campus, rides horseback, takes sunbaths.

Indiana, one of the oldest state universities (118 years), calls itself the “mother of college presidents” because it has produced some 70 of them, including Swarth-more’s famed Frank Aydelotte. Hermie Wells is the latest to be added to the list.

HEAVYWEIGHT CHAMPION

When he took over Indiana University in 1937, fun-loving Herman B (for nothing, and please no period) Wells alarmed hidebound Hoosiers with his penchant for dressing up in a coonskin coat and roaring around Bloomington in a bright blue touring car with the top down. For all his bulk (228 lbs. at 5 ft. 7 in.), the nation’s youngest (then 35) president of a state university looked like a lightweight. Happily, the pessimists were dead wrong. When he stepped down last week at 60—to be replaced by Army Secretary Elvis Stahr Jr.—“Hermie” Wells was known throughout U.S. campuses not only as the man who remade Indiana University but also as just about the best old-pro prexy in the business.

Son of two schoolteachers in Jamestown, Ind., and dean of Indiana’s School of Business Administration before he moved up to the presidency, Economist Wells proved to be a master at charming cash out of state legislators, and he used it to buy academic quality. Up surged the English department, the music and medical schools. The faculty blossomed with top scholars: Heart Surgeon Harris B. Shumacker Jr., Nobel-Prizewinning Geneticist Hermann J. Muller and the late Sexologist Alfred C. Kinsey, whose scholarship Wells stoutly defended when Kinsey first began to publicize his findings.

Indiana’s plant has quadrupled under Wells, enrollment has quintupled to 25,000, the university’s vast research program spans everything from nuclear cloud chambers to training teachers in Thailand. Wells broke down racial barriers at Indiana, quietly opened dormitories and the swimming pool to Negroes (in 1959, Miss Indiana University was a Negro). Not least, Wells in 1956 snagged Drug Manufacturer Josiah Kirby Lilly’s collection of 20,000 first editions and thousands of manuscripts, which made Indiana one of the nation’s leading rare-book centers. Bachelor Wells, lover of antiques and fine food, has gained not only 50 lbs. or so in his 25-year regime but also heavy respect as an academic statesman.

Wells now takes over the Indiana University Foundation, which finances research and handles private gifts. He leaves a rich heritage to Kentucky born President Stahr, 46, lawyer and Rhodes scholar, who had the highest academic average in the history of the University of Kentucky, later taught law at Kentucky, became vice chancellor of the University of Pittsburgh and the youngest president (1959–61) in the history of the University of West Virginia.

Less successful were Stahr’s 15 months at the Pentagon, where his academic personality failed to mesh with hardware-oriented Defense Secretary Robert S. McNamara. Stahr once admitted that he did not know a battle group from a battalion, and blame for foul-ups in last year’s call-up of Army reservists landed on his desk. He should be happier at Indiana, where his talents are more suitable.

Reprinted by permission from Time, The Weekly Newsmagazine (4 April 1938); copyright Time Inc. 1938.

Reprinted by permission from Time, The Weekly Newsmagazine (11 May 1962); copyright Time Inc. 1962.

D. TAKING THE ARTS TO THE PEOPLE

THIS COLLEGE CAMPUS IS THE WHOLE STATE/ KARL DETZER

Into the office of the president of Indiana University there recently breezed an athletic youth. “You’re too fat, Hermie,” he remarked. “Give me two evenings a week and I’ll train 70 pounds off you.”

If this is an unusual way for an undergraduate to address his college president, the explanation is that Herman Wells is an unusual president. At 36, he is the youngest state university head in America, and he has held the job two years. At a time when most colleges require even an assistant professor to be a Ph.D., Wells has no doctor’s degree; he hasn’t had time to get one. He knows thousands of Indiana citizens by their first names, and more than half his 6000 students call him by his. Fat, energetic, good-humored, he combines the earthy background of Midwest small-town upbringing with the politician’s capacity to make and keep friends.

But the most unusual thing about him is his belief that a modern state university should not be a stay-at-home; that it should go out and aggressively carry its message to all the people. Through forums, music, drama, movies, radio, he is pushing the influence of Indiana University to the farthest corners of his state. As a result, housewives, steel workers, farmers, with no thought of diplomas, are getting a cultural education at home. “I’ll not be satisfied,” Wells says, “till we have a symphony orchestra in every county, singing societies and art classes for all who want them, a little theater group in every town hall.”

In part he is carrying on, with a crusader’s zeal, the program that was under way before he became president. When mill-workers in industrial Gary asked the state university for help in forming an orchestra, they got it. The Calumet Symphony was the result. When the amateur singers of the district sought aid, the university formed three large choruses, built around existing societies which had been struggling to keep music alive amid industrial din. Members range in age from 18 to 60, speak 20 languages, include stenographers, teachers, laborers, chemists, engineers, housewives. The university provides sheet music and directors, public schools furnish practice rooms.

Meanwhile, groups in the same region were asking for a place where they could draw, design, paint, model in clay. Like orchestra and choruses, it sprang from the creative yearning of common citizens. Wells immediately furnished a director, arranged with public schools for studios. Drawn by a 15-week course which cost but $8, 50 men and women from smoky Hammond, Whiting, and East Chicago were soon going into Gary three evenings a week to study art.

To help these beginners, as well as teachers and clubwomen, miners and farmers all over the state, the university recently finished a feature-length film called Water Color. Captions explain each move, as Eliot O’Hara, a leading American water-colorist, creates a painting. Any interested group may borrow the film at a small rental, run it and re-run it while they study technique. Twenty Indiana communities asked for it in the first month, and high schools in Cleveland, Toledo, New York and Baltimore are on the waiting list. Rental fees will pay its cost in one year. A second such film is in production.

The university has also launched a traveling art collection which, like two others to follow it, consists of 12 small canvases. “Most exhibitions,” Wells explains, “are the privilege of the few.” This exhibit often hangs in schoolrooms in dingy neighborhoods, in country churches, in labor union halls.

But thousands of people are interested in other subjects than music and art. “What about drama?” citizens wanted to know, “and economics? Why can’t we take up nature study?”

“Why not?” Wells repeated, and told his extension divisions to make the new services self-supporting. This winter, taxpayers in 12 scattered counties are taking part in social and economic forums. Chambers of Commerce, women’s clubs, farm granges are sponsoring the groups. As leaders, President Wells sends advanced students from his campus; from the university library, free of charge, goes literature needed for the discussions.

But Wells’ program does not stop at taking the university out to the people. Just as vigorously, it brings the people to the university. This winter, for example, 250 Indiana bankers accepted Wells’ invitation to a three-day conference on the Bloomington campus, with professors, Federal Reserve officers and banking experts as instructors in credit analysis, investment policies, taxation and personnel. Hardly had the bankers gone when a hundred newspaper editors came to brush up on history, government, economics, physics and law.

Perhaps Wells’ educational philosophy is best stated in his invitation to these editors: “The University fulfills its true purpose,” he wrote, “not only in the classroom, but also by affording facilities and trained personnel to cooperate with all citizens in the solution of their particular problems. It is in this spirit Indiana University invites you.”

Mortgage lenders, retail merchants, prosecuting attorneys, high school principals, and leaders of women’s clubs have accepted similar invitations. To catch up with the latest developments in their special fields, doctors, dentists, policemen, safety supervisors and radio announcers will gather on the campus before spring. There will be short courses devoted to education, school bands, state planning and business.

Specialization, however, never entirely overshadows the broader cultural values which can—and which Wells insists must—come out of such conferences. To the surprise of the bankers, for example, Wells introduced an eminent biologist from Johns Hopkins University to lecture on “The Biological Basis of Sociality.” Every man or woman who attends these conferences will return home with at least a taste of scholarship in some field unrelated to his own.

It is in this welding of business and erudition, art and economics, that Indiana University is believed to be pioneering. Where other schools reach out cautiously in a few directions, Wells is seeking to widen the cultural front until every taxpayer gets some intellectual return from his state university.

Indiana is very likely to go along with him. Hoosier-born, product of the public schools, he graduated in 1924 from the university he now heads. After two years as cashier of a country bank, he returned to the university to teach economics. The governor then drafted him for a commission to rewrite the banking laws. That done, he went back to the lecture hall and in less than two years was appointed dean of the business school. Enrollment in that school doubled in the two years he headed it. When the university president retired, it was he who suggested young Wells as his successor. Students cheered the choice. They knew that every one of the 1500 graduates of the business school, under Wells, had a job waiting for him as soon as his diploma was dry!

When the enthusiastic state legislature appropriated $2500 for his inaugural ceremony, Wells sent the money to the research departments. “No need for pageantry,” he said, and ordered a brief program which cost the state nothing. Then he traveled 33,000 miles to pick the dozen men who would replace elderly faculty members retired under a new state law.

Once back on the campus, he launched his whirlwind campaign to make this state university the people’s own. It developed on many unexpected fronts. To pave the way for a broadcasting station, the university radio workshop participated in a state-wide survey to determine Indiana’s radio tastes and coverage. University workers undertook a school-to-school study of the speech and hearing difficulties of children. Financed jointly by a $10,000 grant from women’s clubs and the university, this study will reach every child in the state. Parents will be told how to guard against increased deafness, how to improve the speech of lispers and stutterers.

Again, Wells imported designers from New York and made plans for a great center of the arts on the Indiana campus, with theaters, radio studios, workshops and recital halls. “Before long,” he says, “I hope we’ll have district contests in drama, with plays written, directed and acted by Hoosiers, and each year a great drama festival right here on the campus.”

Thus functions the dynamo of Indiana culture, the man who is striving to bring culture to the crossroads. When writers like Tarkington, Ade and Riley, statesmen like Beveridge and Marshall, lived and labored on the banks of the Wabash, Hoosiers called their state the Athens of America. The giants died or moved away; the torch of Hoosier culture dimmed. Coal, corn, steel and gasoline took precedence, and for years no cultural leader emerged to guide Indiana to a renaissance. Today many Hoosiers think they have found one. His name is Herman Wells.

Reprinted with permission from the March 1939 Reader’s Digest. Copyright © 1939 by The Reader’s Digest Assn., Inc. Condensed from the Kiwanis Magazine.

E. TELEGRAMS FROM GENERAL LUCIUS CLAY

My dear Governor Gates: Recently at my request, Dr. Wells, president of Indiana University, visited Germany to examine the problems which we face in the reeducation of the German people. At the conclusion of his visit, I urged him to return for a year as my personal adviser in this field and to supervise our activities not only in the field of direct education through the school system but also in the re-establishment of sound cultural relations with Germany and in disseminating to the German people information pertaining to democracy as we know it.

Our major objective in Germany is in the development of a democratic government in which the people will have confidence, and such a government is essential if we are to successfully prevent the penetration of Communist influence into western Germany. We can succeed if we have the highest type of American leadership.

I am convinced that Dr. Wells will provide this type of leadership. I do not know of any more important service which could be rendered to our country and I would be grateful indeed if Dr. Wells could be given a leave of absence for a year to undertake this program. I would be even more grateful for your support to this end.

My dear Judge Wildermuth: As you know, military government is striving earnestly to establish democratic procedures in Germany which will serve to resist the penetration of communism and to permit the entry of Germany at some future date into the family of democratic nations. In accomplishing these objectives, there is no more important assignment than the reeducation of the German people, not only in their schools but in every walk of life. If this is to be accomplished, the highest type of American leadership is essential. For this reason I have urgent need for a personal adviser in the field of education who will supervise and direct our efforts in this field, to include the reestablishment of cultural relations between America and Germany and in the dissemination of information pertaining to democracy.

I have met Dr. [Herman] Wells, president of Indiana University, and I know that he would give us the type of leadership which we need if he could come to us for a year. I do not believe that America has any more important task, and I would be grateful indeed to you for any support you can give to making him available to us for a year.

Jean Edward Smith, ed., The Papers of Lucius D. Clay: Germany, 1945–1949, vol. I (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1975), pp. 424–25. Messages sent through Major General Daniel Noce, Director, Civil Affairs Division, U.S. War Department, September 11, 1947.

F. DIRECTORS

INDIANA UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION, 1980

G. INDIANA UNIVERSITY

150TH BIRTHDAY FUND SUBSCRIPTIONS

TRANSMITTAL 309, JULY 28, 1972 (FINAL)

Project Designated by Donor

H. MESSAGE TO THE UNIVERSITY COMMUNITY, November 1, 1968

When I agreed to talk to interested students on the subjects of recruiting in our recreational facilities, “learning how to kill in our classrooms,” and performing military research in our laboratories, I felt that the University community had a right to know my views and my information on these topics.

Six days after that agreement, I was presented a list of points described as demands, supported by the Young Socialist Alliance but mentioning repeatedly and prominently “S.D.S.,” the initials of an organization known as Students for a Democratic Society. Spokesmen requesting the original meeting were members of the delegation presenting the demands. Through a letter to “Mr. King et al.,” I explained that the original invitation tendered to me to speak to these issues had been qualified by conditions which made it apparent that my views and information were of minimal interest to those students who had requested a meeting. Therefore, I would present my statement instead to the Indiana Daily Student and would have copies available for anyone interested.

The questions raised by the S.D.S., I wish to emphasize, do not concern extracurricular activities or regulations affecting student life as have issues raised earlier by students. The S.D.S. demands invade the area of academic programs and the scholar’s freedom to pursue his research interests.

The impropriety of “demands” as a form of questioning policy and practice in an academic community should be evident to every member of the community. Nevertheless, I shall respond to them specifically in giving my views and the information I have, in order to keep the record as clear as possible.

I believe that any community of scholars would agree that no special interest group, internal or external, should be allowed to impose its particular point of view upon the university. This does not imply any restriction on questioning, making suggestions, seeking information or peaceful and orderly advocacy—although usually there are more direct sources of information than the president of the University. It does mean that the policy of an open campus in which freedom of inquiry is protected is of highest importance to the university community. Indiana University has an unblemished tradition of preserving an open campus.

In times of national stress, when public opinion is divided, pressures are invariably brought to bear upon the University to support the views of one or the other side by excluding controversial speakers, activities or programs. The sharp cleavage of opinion about the national involvement in Vietnam has produced such pressures. This background of the open campus and the pressures to restrict it should be kept in mind throughout my discussion of the nine points raised by the S.D.S.

The S.D.S. document delivered to me through my assistant began: “SDS rejects Indiana University’s role as a subserviant, uncritical flunky of the military establishment and of the agencies formulating American policy. We reject this university’s commitment to the objectives of American foreign policy and its commitment to train armies and police forces and their spies. Consequently SDS demands that President Wells immediately sever Indiana University’s ties to all military and paramilitary organizations and specifically that:

“1. All R.O.T.C. programs be eliminated. In other words, that Indiana cease supplying academic credit for R.O.T.C. courses, academic personnel to teach these courses, and classroom and office space for R.O.T.C. programs. And that Indiana University cease to have any direct or indirect military presence on campus.”

My response: Indiana University offered military training sporadically from 1841 to 1874. Its R.O.T.C. program was established in 1917 and military training has been part of the undergraduate curricula ever since then. The program was compulsory for most male undergraduates until September, 1965, when, by action of the Board of Trustees, it was made voluntary. The inclusion of military training in the curricula was instituted on each occasion at the urgent request of students.

Land-grant institutions such as Purdue University are required to provide military training by the Morrill Act of 1862 which established them. Students desiring to come to I.U. but who are intent upon taking R.O.T.C. should not be limited in their choice to land-grant institutions. Furthermore, as a result of R.O.T.C. programs at civilian institutions, the large majority of the men in officer ranks are R.O.T.C.-trained college men and partly because of this, the United States fortunately has not developed a narrow professional group with a stake in militarism.

R.O.T.C. continues to be offered at I.U. because many of our students desire officer training in conjunction with their college education to prepare either for military careers or for a period of military service. The presence of an R.O.T.C. unit on campus in no way interferes with conscientious objectors any more than, for example, the existence of our School of Medicine interferes with students who are Christian Scientists. R.O.T.C. is included as an integral part of the accepted academic program at the Ivy League universities and at all the major state universities.

The University’s R.O.T.C. program has been reviewed many times and at least three times in the last seven years by the Curriculum Committee of the College of Arts and Sciences. These reexaminations and one now in progress reflect the fact that the faculty of the College, like the faculties of the other Schools with undergraduate divisions, establishes the number of credit hours in military science applicable to the satisfaction of its degree requirements. Originally, military training at IU was associated with a program in civil engineering. Its availability now as an option for students in each of the undergraduate schools is indicative of the variety of duty assignments in the armed services.

The University’s agreement with the Department of Defense with respect to the R.O.T.C. program commits the University to granting appropriate academic credit applicable toward graduation for successful completion of courses offered in military science. The University provides classroom and office space as it does for other programs in which courses are taught for credit; the Department of Defense furnishes instructors, equipment, clothing and student retainer pay.

In recent years there has been some experimentation with the R.O.T.C. curriculum. At I.U., students in Army R.O.T.C. may satisfy one of its requirements by taking a course in American History which is open to all interested students and a course in Government is offered under similar conditions to students in Air Force R.O.T.C. and others. The possibility of including additional University courses as part of the R.O.T.C. program can be further explored. This, of course, is not a question of supplying academic personnel to teach R.O.T.C. courses, but rather of permitting course work in various departments to be counted toward satisfaction of R.O.T.C. program requirements.

As a credit program, R.O.T.C. grades are figured in the overall accumulative average of a student in any of the undergraduate colleges except the College of Arts and Sciences, which includes grades of advanced R.O.T.C. work only.

The chairman of the Committee to End the War in Vietnam [CEWV],Grant Williams, has asked me to respond to several questions about R.O.T.C. which I am including in this discussion. He asked whether such nonacademic factors as appearance, obedience and political beliefs count in R.O.T.C. grades. Factors which contribute to such grades vary as they would in any professional-type training program. For example, appearance, uniforms and obedience are essential factors in the I.U. Marching Hundred and other factors are crucial to HPER courses. Political beliefs, in the sense of a choice among alternatives available to any citizen of a democracy, provide criteria for neither exclusion from nor inclusion in R.O.T.C. If such beliefs as conscientious objection to war are meant by the question, the fact that R.O.T.C. is voluntary makes such a point irrelevant.

Mr. Williams also asked whether admission to advanced R.O.T.C. was limited by such factors as sex and physical qualifications, and if so, was this policy consistent with academic requirements. As a matter of fact, female students may enroll for credit in Army and Air Force R.O.T.C. with the approval of appropriate military authorities. Driver Training, Physical Education for Men, Dentistry, and numerous other areas of study have limiting factors for enrollment, including sex or physical qualifications.

Credentials of officers nominated for positions in the Department of Military Science and Air Science are transmitted through the Dean for Undergraduate Development to the University President for appointment. The President need not approve an appointment and he can request relief of an officer for cause.

The CEWV chairman has suggested that R.O.T.C. could be made a voluntary student group, such as the Chess Club. In 1861 military training was provided through an organization called the University Cadets. However, such an approach would not only be in violation of our agreements with the Department of Defense but would place professional preparation for military service at an unwarranted disadvantage in relation to other professional programs.

Mr. Williams further suggested the establishment of a Department of Peace with an equal status to the R.O.T.C. program. Peace, given its broadest meaning, undoubtedly embraces a large number of courses already offered. The rationale for instituting a Department of Peace apparently is that this would be a positive approach to achieving peace. It should be remembered that many people have long held that an important way to achieve peace is through the deterrent of adequate military preparation. Moreover, all who now decry defense should recognize that the nation faces many problems in this area in addition to Vietnam.

I might point out that in 1918, when students became enlisted soldiers while in residence, classes in War Aims were instituted which dealt with the immediate causes of the war and the underlying conflicts of points of view as expressed in the governments, philosophies and literatures of the warring countries on each side of the struggle.

Before concluding my discussion of R.O.T.C., I wish to make two points.

If in this time of war hysteria we should be persuaded to cancel out the R.O.T.C. program for political reasons, we would in effect be yielding to precisely the same kind of pressures which from time to time have demanded that we cease teaching anything about Karl Marx, Russian history, and Slavic languages and literature. There is little practical difference to the University whether those demands come from inside or outside the University community. Secondly, while it is understandable that many people who bear the terrible brunt of war should be opposed to war, our national involvement in Vietnam is nonetheless a fact, as is the draft. The likelihood that many of your fellow students will be called upon for military service still remains unfortunately strong. In your zeal to end the war and promote peace, consider the effect of your attack upon R.O.T.C. Its existence is less essential to the war effort than to fellow students who wish to have the advantage of preparation in the skills that will equip them for a better chance of survival in the performance of their mandatory military service. Opposing R.O.T.C. may satisfy your hunger for action but its crucial effect will be to remove the option of valued training for many of your classmates.

S.D.S. demand: “2. Cease actively channeling students into military and military-related agencies (i.e., the Defense Department, State Department, CRA, FBI, Army, etc.) by allowing their recruiters to use University facilities.”

My response: The University is not engaged in “actively channeling” students into anything other than its instructional programs. (I mean by this that students are assisted through the University’s counseling program to be aware of fields of study for which their scholastic aptitudes and interests fit them.) But, as all students know, they are completely free to choose their courses of study, their fields of concentration and their careers, within the limitations of their capabilities. No one is pressured into accepting any job. Everyone is a free agent, free to accept, reject or ignore recruitment efforts.

Historically, the University began to furnish placement services as a convenience and aid to graduating students in their search for jobs. In recent years, as more jobs became available than graduates to fill them, employer representatives have come to the campus for interviews, a development which again was to the advantage of students.

After a group of students objected to the presence on campus of employer representatives associated with Dow Chemical Company, the Faculty Council elected a Steering Committee to Study Policies Governing Picketing and Demonstrations and added student representatives. One of the first recommendations of that committee was as follows:

The Faculty Council reaffirms the present policy of providing student placement services and allowing any employer to interview any student for the purpose of lawful employment, subject to the nondiscrimination policy established by the Board of Trustees, July, 1967.

This recommendation, in the form of a motion, was passed unanimously at the Faculty Council meeting of February 20, 1968.

At the Faculty Council’s meeting on March 12, 1968, the committee submitted a more comprehensive resolution on this subject which was passed after lengthy discussion.

The resolution reads:

The Faculty Council hereby resolves:

1) THAT IT IS THE SENSE OF THE COUNCIL:

THAT PUBLICIZING EMPLOYMENT AND CAREER OPPORTUNITIES AND RECRUITING FOR SUCH OPPORTUNITIES SHALL BE GOVERNED BY RULES AND REGULATIONS THAT ACCORD NO PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT FOR ANY TYPE OF EMPLOYMENT OR SERVICE;

THAT ANY ORGANIZATION, PUBLIC OR PRIVATE, BE PROVIDED UNIVERSITY FACILITIES FOR RECRUITMENT ONLY WHEN ONE OR MORE STUDENTS HAVE INDICATED AN INTEREST IN BEING INTERVIEWED BY THAT AGENCY;

THAT RECRUITMENT INTERVIEWS OR THE PUBLICIZING OF EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES, PUBLIC OR PRIVATE, SHALL BE CONDUCTED IN PRIVATE, EXCEPT THAT CAREER INFORMATION MEETINGS, AS DISTINGUISHED FROM RECRUITMENT INTERVIEWS, MAY BE HELD IN DESIGNATED ROOMS, AND THAT REASONABLE PUBLICITY BY NOTICES PLACED ON BULLETIN BOARDS OR BY LITERATURE DEPOSITED FOR PICK-UP AT DESIGNATED LOCATIONS, MAY BE PERMITTED;

2) THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT, THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE INDIANA MEMORIAL UNION, AND THE DIRECTORS OF UNIVERSITY PLACEMENT SERVICES ARE REQUESTED TO TAKE ANY NECESSARY STEPS TO BRING CAMPUS RECRUITING PRACTICES INTO CONFORMITY WITH THIS RESOLUTION.

It should be pointed out that the Indiana Memorial Union is a student building, financed by student fees. Every student officially enrolled on the Bloomington campus of I.U. is an active member of the Indiana Memorial Union. The legal title to all funds and property of the Indiana Memorial Union is vested in and subject to the control of the Trustees of Indiana University. However, The Board of Directors of IMU, comprised of twelve students and five representatives of the faculty and administration, is “empowered to promulgate and administer such bylaws and house rules as may be needed to govern the activities and conduct of members, guests, visitors and organizations in, on, or about the premises of the Union Building.”

By long-standing policy, the Union Board’s regulations permit representatives of the armed services as well as of other organizations to reserve tables in the Commons Lobby for three days in a five-week period as an informational service to students.

At present, the policy committee of the Union Board is conducting interviews to ascertain the opinions of key people on the campus concerning this policy. The Board will hold an open hearing on this subject Monday afternoon, November 4.

Although the Faculty Council and the Union Board differ in respect to the locations in which recruiters may provide information and conduct interviews, both support the “open campus” policy I discussed in my opening comments.

The argument has been advanced from time to time that to allow recruitment is to approve of the agency doing recruitment. The reverse is more cogent: refusal to permit recruitment by a particular agency means condemnation of that agency.

Now, placement services and recruitment are admittedly adjuncts to the educational process. They need not take place on the campus except as a matter of convenience for students. But for the University to select from among the agencies of government, business, industry, etc., which ones should be permitted to recruit would place it in the untenable position of passing judgment on an agency.

Those who wish to ban military recruitment on campus either because of their pacifist views or as a means of protesting governmental policy have an obligation to consider the full and long-term effect of using the University for promotion of their own position on war generally or the Vietnam War in particular. Pressure to use the University for promotion of any group’s particular position on an issue constitutes an assault upon the integrity of the University. Yielding to that pressure would make the University vulnerable to any and every special plea. The plain fact is that those who are objecting to military recruitment simply wish to use the University as a means of protesting or even coercing governmental policy. This is an ineffective and even reprehensible use of the University.

S.D.S. demand: “3. All military-financed research be immediately terminated and the University cease to accept contracts and grants from any military or military-related agency.”

My response: The University has no contracts or grants which provide for faculty members to engage in military research, if by “military research” one means research directed toward the production and use of military weapons such as tanks, guns or bombs, or to engage in research on chemical or bacterial warfare methods.

Indiana University received $1,281,145 from the Department of Defense agencies last year to support basic scientific research. This represented about 4.4% of our total research support from outside sources. It should be emphasized that these projects are basic research, and in every case the project was initiated by the faculty member himself. Each project represented a research interest of the faculty member, frequently pursued for a long period of time prior to the submission of a proposal. There are no restrictions on publication of the results; that is, none of the research is classified.

The history of the discussion leading to the decision of the government to support basic scientific research through DOD (Department of Defense) agencies is pertinent. After World War II with its disruption of fundamental research, the scientific community urged the Federal Government to support basic research. Since there was neither a National Science Foundation (established 1950) nor an Atomic Energy Commission (established 1946) the government turned to the Office of Naval Research and similar DOD agencies and granted them funds specifically to support scientific research. These agencies have continued to administer funds of this nature. DOD agencies have not asked our faculty to do specific research for the government. To the contrary, our faculty have made their own proposals in their own fields of interest. They seek support wherever available. The DOD agencies use panels of distinguished, non-agency scientists to evaluate the scientific merit of these proposals and to select those to be funded with the monies available. May I repeat, no restrictions are placed on publication of results.

In order to avoid too much overlapping of effort, each agency has established certain areas of specialization but these are not necessarily exclusive. It is desirable to have more than one source of possible support, should one agency not have funds available or should some review panels or administrators become biased against a particular area of science.

A special word about the Themis project, which is funded by the Air Force. Our faculty proposed three projects which they wanted to pursue under this program and which they felt were within the areas outlined for support with the original funds available to the DOD. One of these was selected by the agency for support and was funded. This project, directed by Dr. Bullard of our Department of Anatomy and Physiology, is entitled “Environmental Hazards to Biologic Systems” and continues work he and others in his department have been engaged in for a lengthy period. The project has to do with physiological adjustments of men to heat, cold, work and altitude, in relation to the effects of aging, physical condition and status of physiological adaptation. It also is concerned with X-irradiation effects, oxygen, sound and light on the nervous system, biological rhythms in amphibians and the regulation of sweating. These are obviously of interest to athletes and space travelers among others. It is good, basic, fundamental research; such research has in the past [saved] and will continue in the future to save lives of persons whose conditions of stress do not relate to military activities in any regard, as well as the lives of some who are in military service. It has been prominent among the special areas of research of our Department of Anatomy and Physiology.

Let me reaffirm in the strongest terms our intention to defend the right of every faculty member to carry on without fear of censure or disruption the research in which he is interested. We will seek support for him from any and all legal sources. I need only mention the Kinsey research to illustrate that the University has braved heavy criticism to prevent the subjects of research and of classroom instruction from proscription by external or internal pressure groups.

S.D.S. demand: “4. All special training programs for police forces, foreign or domestic, be ended.”

My response: I confess to some bafflement here, having understood that widespread agreement exists on the desirability of the best possible training for police forces everywhere. Consistent with that understanding, we have a Department of Police Administration in the College of Arts and Sciences. The University has recognized police administration as a profession since the establishment of the Institute of Criminology in June, 1935. The department exists for students who wish to pursue professional careers in this field. Its faculty perform research to increase knowledge of the field and to improve methods of professional practice. Instruction and research are appropriate university functions. Determination of the curricula is, by statute, a faculty responsibility. Over the nearly century and a half of Indiana University’s existence, a narrow classical curriculum has evolved into diverse curricula with many specializations. In general, the developments have represented a response to student interest and needs of our state and society. Within this framework, the existence of a Department of Police Administration asserts the social desirability of University-trained individuals in positions of responsibility for community and state police forces, and evidences a continuing choice by I.U. students to pursue careers in this field. Foreign students enrolled at I.U. naturally have that same option.

Also, as a service to the State of Indiana we have entered into annual contracts with the State for the use of classroom and housing facilities by the Indiana State Police Department in its training program. This is, of course, always subject to the availability of the facilities.

Indiana University, as an agency of the State, is sensitive to the areas of cooperation and service which it can provide when requested to do so. The use of its facilities for another State agency’s training program is not inconsistent with the purposes of the University.

S.D.S. demand: “5. The University cease all special training programs for military and intelligence of any kind.”

My response: Since I cannot find that we have a single program of this kind, we can hardly cease having what we do not have.

S.D.S. demand: “6.a. The University cease intimidation of student political activity by: removing all plainclothes and secret police from the campus;”

My response: I do not accept the premise that the University intimidates student political activity. This “when did you stop beating your wife” type of trap need not confuse the discussion.

I want to remind you also that the abandonment of registration procedures for student organizations makes identification of a student with any political organization impossible, except as the student himself establishes that identity. But I do not condone intimidation of students, faculty or administrators who are engaging in lawful pursuits by police or by student groups, for that matter.

Now, to the question of plainclothes and secret police. I know of no secret police on the campus. The University quite naturally cooperates with law enforcement agencies, except when a request conflicts with a University policy such as the confidentiality of personal records.

We will not protect illegal activity on the campus and will cooperate with the efforts of law enforcement officers to detect violations and enforce the law in the legitimate performance of their duties.

We do have three investigators on the Safety Department staff at Bloomington in addition to Director Spannuth who customarily do not wear uniforms. There is nothing either sinister or secret about their presence. They are here to protect the University community, its property and the University’s property.

S.D.S. demand: “6.b. The University cease intimidation of student political activity by: sending only clearly labeled administrative observers to political events;”

My response: I do not know what useful purpose labeling of individuals would serve, but if that is generally desired, I suggest that everyone be labeled—students and faculty members as well as administrators. Faculty observers and administrative observers are present at demonstrations and for the same purpose: to obtain first-hand information about the event. In earlier incidents, claims and counter-claims by the parties involved produced a confusing picture of the actual sequence of events and of the conduct of the participants. The presence of observers helps guarantee as accurate a report as possible, which is certainly in the interest of students participating. The University is concerned that no wrongful complaints be made against any of its students.

S.D.S. demand: “6.c. The University cease intimidation of student political activity by: ending intimidation of students through the use of cameras and recording devices at such events;”

My response: Again, the University is interested in accurate reports of events. It is not apparent to me why the recording of what is actually said or done could be anything but helpful to students who are not guilty of any violation. Students themselves bring these “devices” to “such events.”

S.D.S. demand: “6.d. The University cease intimidation of student political activity by: removing from the campus all implements of political repression such as tear gas, chemical mace and riot clubs, whose only use could be against students.”

My response: There is a sly appeal in the picture of the campus as a tranquil place which has no need for a safety division. By implication, the existence of such a division with its supply of deterrent tools must surely be for some questionable purpose. The S.D.S. would have students believe that the division exists to intimidate student political activity. What are the facts?

During the month of September, 1968, the Bloomington campus Safety Division was called upon to investigate 134 reports of incidents, viz.:

92 larcenies

20 acts of vandalism

5 assaults

5 vehicle thefts

3 breaking and entering

3 minor sex offenses

2 trespasses

1 suicide

1 attempted suicide

1 attempted rape

1 impersonation of a police officer

The monetary losses reported amounted to $8,872.80.

Clearly the campus is not a crime-free environment and the campus residents need protection. A majority of the suspects involved are outsiders, rings of thieves, etc., who operate out of large cities. It is patently absurd to charge that provisions for protection are disguises for intimidation of student political activity. Campus elections, Dunn Meadow political gatherings, marches around Showalter Fountain, discussions in the area south of Woodburn Hall have always been carried on without Safety Department interference with legitimate activity. The presence of Safety Department personnel at large assemblages, whether for an Auditorium Series event, an athletic contest or a student political rally signifies primarily a recognition of the accident potential in crowds. Quite honestly, there is an additional factor of concern, however, when an emotionally charged issue is to have partisan presentation before a student gathering, namely, that representatives of the opposing side will lose their constraint.

In either event, the presence of Safety Department personnel is for protection in cases of emergencies and loss of equanimity. Moderate subduers for crowd control have prevented accidents resulting from hysteria and have permitted the resolution of differences to occur in a less emotionally charged atmosphere.

However, the entire question of Safety is under study by a faculty committee and its report will undoubtedly deal with some of these matters.

Finally, I wish to exercise the prerogative of speaking to one subject of my own choosing. That is our foreign contracts. I do this to correct the impressions left by various assertions made in publications circulated on campus that the University is engaged in supporting reactionary governments abroad.

The facts are:

1) I.U.’s relationships in every case are with universities, not governments;

2) All of the contracts are connected with development—that is, with advising universities on their training programs in order to assist in the development of progressive professional leadership; and

3) Only two of the projects, in Afghanistan and Chile, are funded by an agency other than the Ford Foundation; these two are AID–supported. Our present contracts are with universities in Afghanistan, Chili [sic], Indonesia, Pakistan, Peru, the Philippines, Thailand and Yugoslavia. Through this aid we hope not only to further the educational progress of newly developing nations but also to discharge our debt to the world of scholarship which we and other American universities incurred when older universities in Europe gave us invaluable assistance during our early years. Happily, the repayment of our intellectual and scholarly debt is financed by the Ford Foundation and AID,without cost to the Hoosier taxpayer. Dean Merritt or I will be pleased to discuss the nature and details of these projects with any of you who are really interested in the facts about our overseas projects.

I thank you for your interest in my views and information on these several topics. May I add that, while I am sensitive to the strong pacifist sentiment among some of our students and faculty members and the depth of their convictions about the United States’ involvement in the Vietnam War, I am even more sensitive to the vital necessity of preserving the principle of the open campus. I strongly oppose the exclusion of recruiters and the banning of R.O.T.C., just as I have successfully opposed efforts to have the University oust individuals active in anti-military and other controversial causes. I fully support the discussion and study of issues involved in the Vietnam War, in war itself, and in the presence of the military on campus. I would support as well thorough, objective, unbiased research into the history, development and nature of the military arm of government and its role in enabling American citizens to live according to their Constitutionally determined choices.

Each of us has a crucial stake in seeing to it that Indiana University enters the post-war period, which will come, still invulnerable to the pressures that would erode its strength and violate its cherished principles: freedom to teach, to learn, to seek new knowledge and to serve society.

I. INDIANA UNIVERSITY TECHNICAL-ASSISTANCE PROJECTS

J. SPECIAL COMMISSIONS AND COMMITTEES

MEMBERS, CONSULTANTS, STAFF OF COMMITTEE APPOINTED BY MICHIGAN COORDINATING COUNCIL FOR PUBLIC HIGHER EDUCATION TO ADVISE ON NEED FOR THIRD MEDICAL SCHOOL

MEMBERS

Herman B Wells (Chairman), Chancellor, Indiana University

Judge George E. Bowles, Circuit Court of the Third District

Bradley M. Harris, M.D., Chairman, Medical School Liaison Committee, Michigan State Medical Society

Joseph C. Hinsey, M.D., Director, New York Hospital, Cornell Medical Center

Herbert E. Longenecker, President, Tulane University

Emory W. Morris, President, W. K. Kellogg Foundation

E. Gifford Upjohn, Chairman of the Board, Upjohn Co.

REPRESENTATIVES

Warren M. Huff, Member, Board of Trustees, Michigan State University

Eugene B. Power, Regent, University of Michigan

CONSULTANTS AND STAFF

William N. Hubbard, Jr., M.D. (Secretary), Dean, University of Michigan Medical School

Gordon H. Scott, M.D., Dean, Wayne State University Medical School

Charles J. Tupper, M.D. (Recording Secretary), Associate Dean, University of Michigan Medical School

MEMBERS AND STAFF OF THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON U.S. TRADE RELATIONS WITH EAST EUROPEAN COUNTRIES AND THE SOVIET UNION

MEMBERS

J. Irwin Miller (Chairman), Chairman of the Board, Cummins Engine Co., Inc.; Member, Executive Committee, World Council of Churches

Eugene R. Black, Chairman, Brookings Institution; Past President, International Bank for Reconstruction and Development

William Blackie, President, Caterpillar Tractor Co.; Director and Chairman of the Foreign Commerce Committee, U.S. Chamber of Commerce

George R. Brown, Chairman of the Board, Brown and Root, Inc.; Chairman, Board of Trustees, Rice University

Charles W. Engelhard, Jr., Chairman, Engelhard Industries; Director, Foreign Policy Association

James B. Fisk, President, Bell Telephone Laboratories; Past Member, President’s Science Advisory Committee

Nathaniel Goldfinger, Director of Research, AFL-CIO; Trustee, Joint Council on Economic Education

Crawford H. Greenewalt, Chairman of the Board, E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Co.; Chairman, Radio Free Europe Fund

William A. Hewitt, Chairman of the Board, Deere and Co.; Trustee, U.S. Council of the International Chamber of Commerce

Max F. Millikan, Professor of Economics and Director, Center for International Studies, Massachusetts Institute of Technology; President, World Peace Foundation

Charles G. Mortimer, Chairman, General Foods Corp.; Trustee, Stevens Institute of Technology

Herman B Wells, Chancellor, Indiana University; Former U.S. Delegate to the United Nations General Assembly

STAFF

Edward R. Fried, Secretary to the Committee

James A. Henderson, Deputy Executive Secretary to the Committee

MEMBERS OF THE NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMISSION ON FOOD AND FIBER

Sherwood O. Berg (Chairman), Dean, Institute of Agriculture, University of Minnesota

Harry B. Caldwell, Executive Vice President, Farmers Cooperative Council of North Carolina

Willard W. Cochrane, Dean, International Program and Professor of Agricultural Economics, University of Minnesota

C. W. Cook, Chairman, General Foods Corp.

George C. Cortright, Chairman of the Board, National Cotton Council

Woodrow W. Diehl, Farmer, Iowa

Edmund H. Fallon, Executive Vice President, Agway, Inc.

Carl C. Farrington, Vice President for Development, Agricultural Group, Archer Daniels Midland Co.

Frank Fernbach, Assistant to the President, Special Projects, United Steelworkers of America

Roscoe G. Haynie, President, Wilson and Company, Inc.

Fred V. Heinkel, President, Missouri Farmers Association

Roy Hendrickson, Executive Secretary, National Federation of Grain Cooperatives

William A. Hewitt, Chairman, Deere and Co.

George K. Hislop, President, National Wool Growers Association

J. G. Horsfall, Director, the Agricultural Experiment Station, New Haven, Connecticut

Herbert J. Hughes, Farmer, Nebraska

D. Gale Johnson, Dean, Division of Social Sciences and Professor of Economics, University of Chicago

Herman S. Kohlmeyer, Broker, New Orleans, Louisiana

Robert Magowan, Chairman, Safeway Stores, Inc.

L. L. Males, Farmer and Conservationist, Oklahoma

Edward F. Mauldin, Farmer; Partner, Preuit and Mauldin (implement dealership) ; Chairman, First Colbert Bank of Leighton, Alabama

Paul Miller,¹ President, West Virginia University

W. B. Murphy, President, Campbell Soup Co.

Ernest J. Nesius,² Vice President, West Virginia Center for Appalachian Studies and Development; Director, Cooperative Extension Service, West Virginia University

Leon Schachter, Vice President, Amalgamated Meat Cutters and Butcher Workmen of North America, AFL-CIO

Janice M. Smith, Head, Department of Home Economics, University of Illinois

Lauren Soth, Editor, Editorial Pages, Des Moines Register

Jesse Tapp,³ Retired Chairman of the Board, Bank of America

Jay Taylor, President, Texas Livestock Marketing Association

Herman B Wells, Chancellor, Indiana University

John Wheeler, President, Mechanics and Farmers Bank of Durham, North Carolina

MEMBERS OF THE PRESIDENT’S SPECIAL COMITTEE ON OVERSEAS VOLUNTARY ACTIVITIES

U.S. Secretary of State Dean Rusk (Chairman)

Attorney General Ramsey Clark

Budget Director Charles Schultze

Senator Carl Hayden (Ariz.), Chairman, Appropriations Committee

Senator Richard B. Russell (Ga.), Chairman, Armed Services Committee

Senator J. W. Fulbright (Ark.), Chairman, Foreign Relations Committee

Senator Milton R. Young (N.D.), member, Appropriations and Agriculture Committees

Congressman George Mahon (Tex.), Chairman, House Appropriations Committee

Congressman L. Mendel Rivers (S.C.), Chairman, Armed Services Committee

Congressman Thomas Morgan (Pa.), Chairman, Foreign Affairs Committee

Congressman Frank Bow (Ohio), member, Appropriations Committee

Milton S. Eisenhower, President, Johns Hopkins University

Thomas S. Gates, Jr., President, Morgan Guaranty Trust Co. of New York (formerly Secretary of Defense)

James H. McCrocklin, President, Southwest Texas State College

Paul R. Porter, Washington attorney

Frank A. Rose, President, University of Alabama

Henry S. Rowen, President, Rand Corporation

Robert M. Travis, President-elect of the student body, University of North Carolina

Herman B Wells, Chairman of the Board, Education and World Affairs; Chancellor, Indiana University

MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION ON THE HUMANITIES

Barnaby C. Keeney (Chairman), President, Brown University

Herman B Wells (Vice Chairman), Chancellor, Indiana University

Kingman Brewster, Jr., President, Yale University

Carl Bridenbaugh, Professor of History, Brown University

Paul H. Buck, Director, Harvard University Library

Edgar M. Carlson, President, Gustavus Adolphus College

Arthur H. Dean, Senior Partner, Sullivan and Cromwell

William K. Frankena, Professor of Philosophy, University of Michigan

Pendleton Herring, President, Social Science Research Council

Rev. Theodore M. Hesburgh, President, University of Notre Dame

Harold Howe II, Superintendent of Schools, Scarsdale, New York

Devereux C. Josephs, Former Chairman, New York Life Insurance Company

Clark Kerr, President, University of California

Robert M. Lumiansky, Professor of English, Duke University

Whitney J. Oates, Professor of Classics, Princeton University

Henri M. Peyre, Professor of French, Yale University

Mina Rees, Dean of Graduate Studies, City University of New York

Andrew C. Ritchie, Director, Yale University Art Gallery

Glenn T. Seaborg, Chairman, United States Atomic Energy Commission

Thomas J. Watson, Jr., Chairman, International Business Machines Corp.

K. “ALL’S WELLS THAT ENDS WELL”

Early in my presidency, Eleanor and Newell Long presented one of their inimitable musical shows entitled “The Inauguration of the Boy President” as a greeting to me in that office. With a sense of the fitting, they wrote “All’s Wells That Ends Well,” performed on March 16, 1962, under the auspices of the University Club. More than 125 members of the club—unaccustomed thespians among the faculty, staff, administration, and their spouses—trod the boards that night. The Daily Student, in a special edition for the occasion, carried a rave review:

The University Club acted like students for a couple of hours and produced a combination boress-tribute Friday evening at 8 P.M.in Alumni Hall. The show—“All’s Wells That Ends Well”—hit almost every phase of campus life and closed with a grand tribute to President Herman B (no period) Wells.

And the audience loved every minute of it!

The orchestra, undoubtedly the best unpaid group in the world, colored the production with all types of music. The cast was talented, too. . . .

Nearly a hundred University Club members humored the full house in Alumni Hall with such routines as “Student Squares,” “How to-succeed-in-business-without’ Professors,” “Bachelor Bait,” and “Merry Medicos”. . . .

Light, comically amateur, delightful, it represented a generous investment of time and energy on the part of my colleagues that was as heartwarming as the show itself and as memorable for me.

____________

1. Includes $2,555,612.50 designated by donors for purposes other than construction.

1. Includes $1,635,000.00 designated specifically for Glenn A. Black Laboratory.

2. Includes ½ of IU-PU Advanced Research total which is credited to 150th.

3. Includes ½ of IU-PU Ft. Wayne total which is credited to 150th.

4. Does not include scholarships designated for Regional Campuses which total $285,784.42 and are included in Regional Campuses total.

1. Resigned from the Commission, July 29, 1966.

2. Replaced Paul Miller, November 1, 1966.

3. Died, January 19, 1967.