Chapter 3: The Early History: 1905–1911

In accordance with the Buckman Act of June 5, 1905 of the State Legislature, and the coalescing of five of the public institutions of higher learning into two institutions, the Florida Female College in Tallahassee and the University of the State of Florida at a site to be determined by the Board of Control, our current institution can be partially viewed as a merger of the Agricultural Institute in Lake City and the East Florida Seminary in Gainesville. Thus the first academic year in 1905–1906 saw a grand total enrollment of 135 students, and the instruction was still provided in Lake City. The move to Gainesville occurred during June and July of 1906. The 1905–1906 Catalogue reflects this merger, for the cover is titled The University of the State of Florida on the upper part of the page, and on the lower portion, Temporary location: Lake City, Florida on the left hand side and Permanent location: Gainesville, Florida on the right hand side.

The motto printed on the inside cover, which continues to be seen in the catalogues throughout the period 1905–1910, is “Sound morals on the basis of good citizenship,” which is still reflected in Latin motto “Civium in Moribus Rei Publicae Salus,” on the current University seal, which Proctor [1] translates as “The welfare of the state rests on the character of its citizen.”

Dr. Andrew Sledd, Ph.D, LL.D, has the title of President. Proctor’s history [1] reveals all the politicking that went on between the Murphree supporters and the Sledd supporters, which resulted in Sledd being appointed the first President of the University of Florida, while the popular Murphree was consoled with the position of the first presidency of the Florida Female Seminary, now Florida State.

In this first academic year, the instructional staff listed for the University of Florida numbers 16 faculty members, including

Captain James Taylor, Commandant of the Cadets and Professor of Military Science,
and two assistant professors,
A. W. Blair, B.S., A.M., in Chemistry, and
N. H. Cox in Civil and Mechanical Engineering.
The Professors listed in the order given were:
Andrew Sledd (President),
James Farr (Vice-President and Professor of English and German),
W. F. Yocum (Professor of Philosophy),
Charles Conner (Professor of Agriculture),
F. M. Rolfs (Professor of Botany and Horticulture),
Edward Flint (Professor of Chemistry),
M. T. Hochstrasser (Professor of Mechanical Engineering and Drawing),
Karl Schmidt (Professor of Mathematics and Astronomy),
E. H. Sellards (Professor of Zoology, Geology, and Entomology),
J. R. Benton (Professor of Physics and Civil Engineering),
David Yancey Thomas (Professor of History and Political Science),
James N. Anderson (Professor of Latin and Greek),
C. L. Crow (Professor of Romance Languages).

Also an instructional staff of 6 faculty is listed for the Normal Department (teacher training) including W. S. Cawthon with an A.B. from Chicago in 1905, who provides the mathematical training for the teacher candidates.

In keeping with the tenor of the times, Sledd saw fit to impose on the student body during the years 1905–1910 the following regulations, which seem no longer to be found explicitly in the catalogues after 1910:

“Religious exercises. — All students are required to attend a daily morning service in the assembly hall, consisting of a selection from the Bible, a prayer and a song. The service is conducted by members of the Faculty.

The university is absolutely non-sectarian, but attendance upon some form of public worship service is required of every student. The choice of place of worship rests entirely with the student or parents. The pastors of all churches take an active interest in the spiritual welfare of the students. A letter from the parent or home church, addressed to the pastor or religious body in town, will call forth especial care and attention to the student in whose behalf it is written.”

Nonetheless, Proctor [1] writes that in the 1920’s, freshman and sophomores were still required to attend a weekly service, until President Tigert ended all required chapel attendance during his presidency, which began in 1928. In addition, as found later in the 1920 Catalogue, the attention of the student body is especially called to the Y.M.C.A Sunday activities, as well. An interesting discussion of the evolution of the morning chapel service is provided in Osborn’s biography of President Tigert, cf. [3, pp. 279–280].

“Some of the issues discussed at these campus meetings overflowed from the halls of academia and attracted statewide attention; weekly chapel services were a case in point. Presidents Andrew Sledd and Albert Murphree required students to attend weekly chapel services, but by the time Tigert appeared on the campus there was a growing antipathy toward compulsory attendance at religious services. The new president agreed with the protestors, abolished compulsory attendance, and offered the students on a voluntary-attendance basis a ‘semi-weekly convocation, a devotional program which in theory would be so attractive that students would willingly file into the auditorium and sit through the program with true undergraduate enthusiasm.’ His hopes did not materialize; attendance was small and soon all religious services were dispensed with.

Certain outside forces joined hands with student religious groups in demanding the restoration of compulsory chapel exercises. Roger Babson, a friend of long standing who made his winter home in Lake Wales, wrote Tigert that a stronger religious influence existed on the campus of the Florida State College for Women than on the University of Florida campus and continued:

‘There seems to be a strong disappointment on the part of parents that chapel has been given up …. The Florida native is instinctively religious and is very anxious that his child get a religious training. Therefore, the more you can emphasize religious features in appealing [to the legislature] for appropriations, the more successful you will be.’

Tigert assured Babson that he had analyzed the Florida situation correctly, but that he was misinformed concerning religious conditions at the university. During Murphree’s administration compulsory chapel attendance applied only to freshmen and sophomores and violations were not punished. As a matter of fact, compulsory attendance could not be enforced in a state institution; the American principle of religious freedom and the separation of church and state made this obvious.

In the meantime, Tigert explained, the university had acquired a new building for the activities of the Young Men’s Christian Association. In additiion, various churches in Gainesville employed full-time student pastors and were making plans to acquire property adjacent to the university campus on which to erect student religious centers. The president did not know of a state university campus anywhere on which better religious conditions existed, but he was on the defensive about the demands of strong religious influences both on and off campus.

In February 1930 he instituted Religious Emphasis Week on the campus with a series of religious services conducted by Dr. George W. Truett of Dallas, Texas, president of the Southern Baptist Convention. For ten days, Dr. Truett preached two sermons daily; the morning services, held while students and faculty members were in class, were conducted in the First Baptist Church and the night services were held in the university chapel. All of the campus services were broadcast over WRUF. On the last night of the services, Tigert asked for a reaction from the radio listeners and 270 largely favorable replies came into the campus radio station from the surrounding area. In subsequent years distinguished clergymen of other religious faiths appeared on campus for the annual Religious Emphasis Week ….”

During 1905–1906, the listing of grounds and buildings contains the following sentence:

“The tract on which the buildings are located lies in the southern extremity of the town, sufficiently removed from the business quarter to avoid its distracting influences, yet near enough to be reached quickly in case of necessity. Of this tract, the thirty acres immediately surrounding the buildings are devoted to a campus, a drill ground, and the tennis courts. The remainder of the land, with the exception of some of the original hammock, is utilized for experimental purposes and as a farm.”

During this first academic year, the list of buildings describes those in Lake City, consisting of nine buildings. Following the move to Gainesville, at first the campus consisted solely of three buildings which are described in the 1907 Record as the Main Building, the Dormitory, and the Machinery Hall. Procter [1, p. 28] writes vividly about the space difficulties during the Sledd years, and how in 1908, to remedy the desperate situation, Sledd himself and some student volunteers constructed the laboratory building for electrical engineering, using money obtained by selling firewood sawed from the trees cut down on campus to clear the space for Buckman and Thomas Halls.

During the Sledd presidency, the organizational structure of the University of Florida is described as follows:

The School of Language and Literature

The General Scientific School,— Which embraces [A few years later we find Physics added as a fourth entry in this school.] the

Chemical Course,

Mathematical Course,

Natural History Course.

These courses are named from their chief element, and offer the student with a taste or need for Chemistry, Mathematics, or Natural History, unusual opportunities to devote himself to his chosen subject, and to fit himself either for further technical work along these lines, or for the study of Medicine, Surgery, Pharmacy, as a profession. These courses are of four years’ duration, and lead to the degree of Bachelor of Science.

The School of Agriculture

The Technological School

Mechanical Engineering

Electrical Engineering

Civil Engineering

Short Course in Mechanic Arts

These courses are designed for students who desire to give their college work a strictly practical direction, and to prepare immediately for their life work in one of these lines. Every course requires a very large amount of practical work, and the student who successfully completes these courses will be prepared to enter on his active profession immediately. Courses 1, 2, and 3 extend over four full years, and issue in the degree of Bachelor of Science in Mechanical, Civil, and Electrical Engineering, respectively; course 4 covers two years and leads to a certificate of proficiency.

NO LATIN OR GREEK IS REQUIRED IN SCHOOLS III AND IV

The School of Pharmacy

The Normal School.”

It is interesting to observe that the B.S. in Mathematics requires in addition to advanced scientific electives, that the student take Chemistry I, II; Physics I, II; and Botany I.

It is a commonplace that scientific faculty at the turn of the century tended to do graduate work in Germany. We can see how this is borne out at the University of Florida. The Professor of Mathematics and Astronomy [In notes taken while in graduate school in 1894, Schmidt’s successor, Herbert Keppel, listed many of the Departments of Mathematics in the world together with their faculties. This list reveals that even in Mathematics Departments with more than one faculty member, which were the exception, rather than the rule, it was customary for one member of the faculty to hold the title Professor of Mathematics and Astronomy.] from 1905–1908 was Dr. Karl Schmidt. He had the following background prior to coming to the University of Florida:

KARL SCHMIDT*
Professor of Mathematics and Astronomy*

Graduate Student at the University of Marburg, 1893–1894, Berlin, 1894–1897,
and Marburg, 1897–98; A.M., Ph.D., University of Marburg 1898; First Assistant
in Physical Laboratory, Marburg, 1900–01; Lecturer on Mathematics, Harvard
University, 1901–1903; Professor of Physics, Bates College, 1903–1904;
Professor of Mathematics and Astronomy, University of Florida, 1904–05;
present position, 1905—}

During the academic year 1905–1906, Professor Schmidt served on the following Standing Committees of the Faculty:

Entrance Examinations and Classifications, and
Student Organizations.

The “university affairs” column of the Gainesville Daily Sun of October 18, 1908, records the following transition:

“We found a few new faces among the faculty and Experiment Station staff. … Dr. Keppel has succeeded to the chair of mathematics, a position made vacant by the resignation of Dr. Schmidt, who owing to ill health, has been forced to give up teaching for a while.”

Fortunately, we have been able to discover, at least, what ultimately became of Professor Schmidt after his resignation in 1908 from the young University of Florida. In early December, 1994, I received a surprise telephone call from Professor Samuel Proctor one afternoon. He had just discovered materials pertaining to Professor Schmidt that he had obtained in the 1950’s which had been lost for several decades, placed inside of another file folder for another personality from the past! Now, President Sledd proudly proclaimed the military discipline at our early institution in newspaper advertisements that he wrote for various state newspapers to run during the summer of 1906 as our institution was moving to the new Gainesville campus. Nonetheless, Sledd requested faculty opinion on the issue of military discipline in the fall of 1906, for he received the following handwritten letter from Professor Schmidt in November of 1906 (cf. [2], the underlined words in the letter have been capitalized in the transcription):

“Gainesville, Fla. November 19, 1906

Dr. Andrew Sledd,
President of the University of the State of Florida
Gainesville, Fla.

Dear Sir;

To your circular letter of Nov. 13, 1906, asking for an opinion on questions relating to the present military organization of the University, I return the subjoined reply. I am aware that I have largely given reasons rather than observations, this seemed to me justified, as the latter, however valuable, were in my own case insufficient and too much subject to error.

The present military work has NOT so far to any appreciable amount decreased the work laid out, as the increase in military duties has been largely counterbalanced by a better qualified student-body and smaller classes. It is however important to remember that the present schedule was planned with the assumption of a minimum amount of military work, and it is a question how long the students will be able to stand the increase strain upon them.

The system INTERFERES with studiousness, in the deeper sense of the word:

Perhaps the most important part of college work is that which lies beyond the limits of class room work, the following out of suggestions made, and the opening up of new aspects and new ideas; all this is cut out as ‘relatively unimportant’ by the hurried and overcrowded student, trained to obey definite orders rather than to take suggestions.

The atmosphere of military organization with its frequent interruptions, exaggerated promptness, attention to numerous little duties and frequent enforced idleness (as waiting in readiness, as guards etc) is not that atmosphere of leisure and repose which engenders mutual interest and studiousness.

The discipline in my classes is good—and would be so without military discipline.

Class attendance IS, I think, promoted—except in so far of course as military duties interfere with such attendance.

The absence of the sergeant of the guard from all classes during a whole day

seriously affects the individual student, in the following ways:

if the work is of such a nature that it can be ‘made up’, it means an extra full day’s work to be accomplished soon (in order to keep in connection with the work) when it must be admitted that the regular amount of work is already about as much as our students can stand. The ‘making up’ will therefore be HURRIED and SUPERFICIAL;

Some work cannot be made up at all, such as lectures and incidental explanations; for notes taken by college students are at best suitable only for the writer himself and no substitute for the work in class;

if I correctly understand the case, the loss amounts to practically TWO days of classroom work, as the sergeant comes to class the next second day unprepared and looses most of what is being done then;

the enforced absence creates an uncertainty in the mind of the student as to whether difficulties that he may find are due to forgetfulness, lack of capability, or absence from class on the day when explanations pertaining to the subject were given, and thus interferes most decidedly with that spirit of MODEST SELF-RELIANCE which ought to be one of the most precious requirements of a college student.

effects the class as a whole

of course in so much as individual students are affected;

in some classes the instructor will find himself in a position where some part of the argument is missed by some one and the whole completely followed by none not on account of natural difficulties, but on account of absences on previous days;

it cannot be fair to call a student to account for ignorance on some point which, without his fault, he was prevented from acquiring; but it is impossible, on the other hand, to keep account of who was absent on that particular day when the subject was treated in class. Absence from class as sergeant of the guard will be an excellent excuse and subterfuge for real ignorance and lack of preparation.

Any detailed consideration of possible advantages or disadvantages of a military organization in a college would avail nothing, if it could be shown that the SPIRIT of the military organization is essentially OPPOSED to the spirit of the college. In order to determine what the teaching and controlling idea of a military organization is, it is important to remember that it is neither a part nor a miniature imitation of the essential features of the army. It omits all field work (scouting, reconoitering etc) and adopts merely the instruction in military subjects, drill, and military discipline. We need therefore consider only these phases and their spirit. Instruction in military subjects can be classed with other subjects of instruction and we have thus these two to consider: DRILL and MILITARY DISCIPLINE. The controlling idea of these is OBEDIENCE (‘BLIND’ obedience) to given ORDERS, without question of the VALUE of the order, so long as it comes from the appointed AUTHORITY; actions are required without the incurrence of any RESPONSIBILITY by the performer, who DEPENDS on his superior officers for the direction of his acts; criticism and concerted action, even in the form of petitions to the highest officer, however polite the language and however justified the complaint, are MUTINY; orders are obeyed to avoid PUNISHMENT, which necessarily must be of frequent application, as it is the chief means of upholding the system.
In direct opposition to all this is the spirit which ought to prevail in a college and to which its students should be educated—FREEDOM (‘academic freedom’), by which is meant LAW-obedience, and which requires first and above all the CRITIQUE of the VALUE of the law from WHATEVER AUTHORITY it may come; because action carries with it individual RESPONSIBILITY, which under no circumstances can be shifted to other shoulders, as no one can escape the judgment of his own CONSCIENCE. It requires therefore INDEPENDENCE or rather SELF-DEPENDENCE. The good action is imperative, irrespective of REWARDS or PUNISHMENTS.

This is the ETHICAL side of college education. And in the deepest sense all its intellectual training contributes to and ends in Ethics.

To such freedom man is not born but EDUCATED by the awakening of the moral sense, establishment of right ideals, strengthening of the character, and development of the intellect to DISCERN the Good from the Bad. It is therefore the question when does COERCION end, and when does education to moral freedom begin. The college, by its traditions, methods, and ideals, is preeminently the place for the latter. Military organization, as using opposing means to establish opposing ideals, has no place in the college proper; in the High School and Preparatory-School it may be appropriate. If, therefore, for other reasons, a military education should be deemed necessary, it would seem proper to confine it to the Sub-Freshman and Freshman classes.

Respectfully submitted,

Karl Schmidt
Professor of Mathematics
The University of the State of Florida.”

Once this letter has been rediscovered, it does not come entirely as a surprise to learn that Professor Schmidt would become an ardent Quaker later in life. In the early 1950’s, Professor Proctor received correspondence from a Professor of Philosophy, Herbert Schneider, at Columbia University (cf. [2]) and obtained the following assessment of Professor Schmidt’s later career in an undated letter:

“You could no doubt get interesting auto-biographical details from Prof. Schmidt at Tamworth, N. H. Though his memory is not perfect, he likes to reminisce about his connections with [Paul] Natorp, James, Royce, etc., whom he knew very well. He was with us at Columbia for only a few months, but I had learned to know him earlier in Vermont. His most effective teaching was done at Carleton College, Minnesota, where he made a big impression on both students and faculty. His scientific approach and training were his strong point. But his exceptionally gentle and genial personality also made him many friends. In recent years he has become well-known in Quaker circles, for he is an ardent Quaker.

Some years ago in The Review of Religion I reviewed his metaphysics along with that of Boodin, but I have no copy of this review. I think his Creative I and the Divine [ed., Dial Press, New York, 1937] is a first-rate and original piece of metaphysical analysis. He also wrote some good articles in the Journal of Philosophy. I’m sorry that since my removal here to the Unesco I am without my notes and library, and hence can answer only in these very general terms. …”

Further, we could now determine that the Karl Schmidt, listed in the card catalogue as being born in 1874 and the author of the book From Science to God: Prolegomena to a Future Theology, Harper Brothers, New York, 1944, as Professor of Philosophy, Carleton College, was the very same man as our first Professor of Mathematics and Astronomy during 1904–1908! This book reveals that Schmidt’s wife’s name was Edith Kimball Schmidt, and he also thanks his daughter Baldura Schmidt Lindemann for helpful suggestions toward improvement of the text. Schmidt dedicates the book to President Donald Cowling of Carleton College who

“made Carleton a suitable place for the growth of philosophic thought.”

In [3, p. 6] we find the following reference to Schmidt’s studies in Marburg during the latter part of the nineteenth century:

“… I shall not forget the remark made by a brilliant professor of mathematics with whom I was studying in Marburg University–that I was wasting my time studying philosophy! And this was from a man who had himself been a pupil of Weierstrass and was a disciple of Riemann, both mathematicians whose creative thought was not given to the practical applications of mathematics but to its philosophy and logical clarification!”

In [3, p. 13], Schmidt offers the following comments on his earlier book which was mentioned in Professor Schneider’s letter [2]:

“In a previous book [The Creative I and the Divine, Dial Press, New York, 1937] I presented a philosophy, in outline at least. It develops a methodology which accounts for our mathematics and physics; it proves itself adequate to establish ethics and aesthetics; and it leads to the establishment of the existence of a soul and of God. Assuming that God is the central topic of the higher religions, it seems worth while to determine what light is thrown by this philosophy on some of the cardinal tenets of Christian religion. Such concepts as ‘Providence’, ‘inspiration’, ‘revelation,’ attain a new vitality; the concept of ‘God’ receives new meaning. ……”

In [3, p. 20], Schmidt wrote

“If man is thus wedged between the demands of the scientific spirit and the conflicting demands of religion, is it any wonder that he becomes uncertain? For six days he is asked to think; can he stop thinking on the seventh? Some undoubtedly can, but many cannot. Hence their unbelief. They begin by asking for warrants of the objects of their beliefs; they end by doubting or denying even the existence of God. In early times man may have been convinced by miracles—he craved miracles. Thinking man cannot be amenable.

Thus we still have the clash between faith and reason on our hands.”

A recent book by the historian of science Dr. Fredrick Gregory [4] treats among many other issues the topic of how the geological discoveries of the nineteenth century and the wide discussion throughout the whole world after the 1870’s of Darwin’s book On the Origin of Species published in 1859, effected German Protestant religious thought in the later portion of the nineteenth century. The general results of Gregory’s work suggest that Dr. Karl Schmidt’s own philosophical writings may be viewed as a very natural intellectual endeavor during the times in which he was a young scholar, and resonate well with the diverse theses swirling within the German intellectual community, themes to which Schmidt as a native German was exposed not only in his Gymnasium studies, but also while studying in Marburg and Berlin, just prior to the turn of the century. Much of Schmidt’s writing discusses the question of truth; in [4, p. 17] Gregory writes the following about German intellectual concerns during the second half of the nineteenth century, emphasizing that these concerns were not restricted to German professors of theology or philosophy, but rather common to most educated Germans during those times:

“For most people in the nineteenth century, the question of truth was the key issue in the relationship between science and religion.”

and in [4, p. 19] that a commonly held attitude then was that

“Truth is determined by what really exists. Our knowledge of nature, when it is correct, is the same as the truth of nature.”

An example is given in [4, p. 110] of the Professor of Mathematics Carl Reuschle at Stuttgart University writing a book, published in 1874, on Philosophie und Naturwissenschaft: Zur Errinerung an D. F. Strauss [ed., which would translate as Philosophy and Natural Science: in Remembrance of D. F. Strauss.]

The recent work [5] which gives extensive documentation for the emergence of the American mathematical research community in three phases, discusses in detail the second phase in which German doctoral study or postdoctoral study by Americans was common. This work reveals that most of the bulk of the Americans studying in Germany either studied in Berlin, where Karl Weierstrass was still lecturing until his death in 1897, or during the time period 1880–1890 tended to study with Felix Klein, first in Leipzig between 1880–1885, or in Gottingen after 1885. After 1890, when Klein wanted to wind down his involvement with American foreign students, then Sophus Lie, Klein’s successor at Leipzig picked up the slack, and had 20 American auditors between 1892 and 1899, including Leonard Dickson, G. A. Miller, and H. F. Blichfeldt. Now this is precisely the time period during which Karl Schmidt spent two years in Marburg and three years in Berlin, and during which time he met his future wife, a native Bostonian, who was also visiting Berlin.

It is intriguing to speculate based on Schmidt’s later career as a Quaker and philosopher at Carleton College, that perhaps he was attracted to Marburg based not only on the possibility to do graduate work in mathematics and physics, but also because a world renown exponent and main proponent of the Ritschl School of theology, Professor Johann Wilhelm Hermann, became a Professor at Marburg in 1880, after the publication in 1876 of his work Die Metaphysik in der Theologie. Gregory writes in [4, p. 328]

“that Hermann eventually brought considerable attention to Marburg. In addition to students from all over the world who came to study with him, including, according to Welch, a generation of Americans who pursued graduate study in pre-World War I Germany, a Norwegian and an American university bestowed honorary doctorates on him, as did the philosophical faculty at Marburg itself.

… Hermann remained at Marburg for the rest of his life in spite of numerous offers from other universities. What held him there, according to F. W. Schmidt, was his role as the soul of theology faculty and the possibility of interchange with the neo-Kantians of the philosophy faculty ….”

Once the materials from Professor Proctor alerted us to Schmidt’s later career as a philosopher at Carleton College, we were able to obtain some materials from the archives at Carleton College [6] which helped fill in some of the details of Schmidt’s life. Schmidt was born on August 28, 1874 in Frankfurt, Germany, into a family which included seven sisters. As a young man, he studied piano and tutored others, as well as pursuing his own academic studies. According to a clipping from the Carletonian, dated December 1, 1937, Schmidt

“started specializing in mathematics, but after taking physics, changed his course.”

The Carleton archival sources reveal that Paul Natorp, one of the German philosophers mentioned in [4], was Schmidt’s thesis advisor in Marburg. The newspaper clipping from 1937 offers the following account of Schmidt’s arrival in America:

“A year in compulsory service in the army intervened after college and before the important first year of this century. In 1900 [ed., actually 1898 according to Schmidt’s own entry for the Lake City Agricultural Institute catalogue] not only did Dr. Schmidt obtain his M.A. and Ph.D. degrees, but he came over to Boston to marry his fiancee, whom he’d met when she was visiting Berlin.

Upon his return to Marburg, Dr. Schmidt became first assistant in the physics laboratory and was in charge of the time-service telescope. From that work he came to American, where he lectured for two years at Harvard upon the larger foundations of mathematics. The 27-year old licensed lecturer counted among his pupils three mathematics instructors and two instructors in philosophy. The others were graduate students, and several are now professors of philosophy at Harvard.

At Marburg he was a student of physics and mathematics as well as philosophy, and although in his later years his interest turned to the general problems of metaphysics and the philosophy of religion, his own system of thought bridged the gap between the sciences on the one hand and philosophy and religion on the other, a gap which so troubled the nineteenth century and also our own.”

Schmidt later published portions of the material presented during these Harvard lectures in the Journal of Philosophy in three articles contained in volume 9 (1912), volume 10 (1913), and volume 30 (1933). A footnote in the second of these articles reveals that Schmidt delivered a presentation at a meeting of the American Philosophical Association held in January, 1910 at Yale University.

Apparently, one of Schmidt’s successors as Chairman of Philosophy at Carleton College had the job of preparing a draft obituary notice and wrote the following additional comments which were not published in the above newspaper article (cf. [6]):

“At a time when few scholars knew of the new developments in logic and mathematics, even before Russell and Whitehead published Principia Mathematica, he was lecturing on the logical foundations of mathematics …. The general orientation of his thinking was neo-Kantian.”

The Carleton archival sources are not entirely consistent on what happened to Professor Schmidt after 1908 and before he obtained an appointment at Carleton College as Acting Professor of Philosophy during 1927–28, then Professor and Chairman of Philosophy from 1928–1946, after the previous chairman, Professor John Boodin, received an offer from U.C.L.A. Mention is made that Schmidt had taught at Tufts, Northwestern, and possibly a second time at Harvard before coming to Carleton in 1928. This is partially confirmed by Schmidt’s publication in 1913 in the Journal of Philosophy which lists Tufts as Schmidt’s academic affiliation and the article in 1912 which lists Cambridge, Massachusetts as Schmidt’s academic affiliation. Also Schmidt did some lecturing at Columbia University after his retirement from Carleton. Already by 1910 the Schmidt’s were summering in Tamworth, New Hampshire, where Schmidt was to live in retirement until his death on August 26, 1961 at the age of 87. The Carleton materials also indicate that Dr. Schmidt continued his early interest in music, writing music criticism and remaining a skilled pianist. He was a loyal supporter of the Minneapolis Symphony Orchestra and a friend of the conductor Dmitri Mitropoulos of the orchestra. Schmidt’s daughter Baldura Lindemann became a pianist as well; the Carleton archival material contains a newspaper article describing a recital which she presented on the Carleton campus in 1946. This review indicates that Mrs. Baldura Lindemann studied in New York and London for part of her training.

Dr. Schmidt’s successor, Dr. Herbert Keppel, who was the Professor of Mathematics and Astronomy from 1908–1918 had the following background as described in the 1909 University Record:

HERBERT KEPPEL, Ph.D.,*
Professor of Mathematics and Astronomy*

A.B., Hope College, 1889; Graduate Student, Clark University, [Worcester,
Massachusetts], 1892–1895; Mathematical Fellow, Clark University, 1893–1895;
Instructor of Mathematics, Northwestern University, 1896–1900; Mathematical
Fellow, Clark University, 1900–01; Ph.D. [Clark University], 1901; Instructor
in Mathematics, Northwestern University, 1901–1908; Present position, 1909—}

We have learnt from the Library Archives at Clark University that the title of Keppel’s thesis is “The Cubic 3-Spread Ruled with Planes in 4-fold Space,” although the thesis itself is a lost document at the Clark Library. In [7, p. 163], the following comments are made about Clark University, where Dr. Keppel took his graduate work. G. Stanley Hall, who first taught philosophy at Johns Hopkins in 1881 was later approached and asked to found Clark University as follows:

“In 1881 Hall’s efforts to professionalize American scholarship took another step forward with the sudden opportunity to establish his own university. Jonas Clark, a businessman who had made a fortune as a San Francisco merchant during the gold rush, came back to his native Worcester, Massachusetts, offering to endow a great university. He chose Hall to be the founding president. Hall, in turn, convinced Clark that the university should be a Johns Hopkins without undergraduates, apparently to Hall the best of all possible worlds.

Although Clark University started with great promise as the nation’s first purely graduate institution, it soon fell upon hard times. Jonas Clark, after showing somewhat too much personal interest in the enterprise during its first years, in 1892 lost interest entirely. Philanthropists were not likely to be deeply interested in pure academic research, without undergraduate colleges to provide both a justifying moral purpose and more immediate community service. Much of Hall’s fine faculty abandoned Clark for the new University of Chicago, more securely endowed with Rockefeller money. Hall was left with little more than a graduate program in psychology.”

It is interesting that Dr. Keppel turns up in the very first Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society 1 (1894–95) on page 127 with the following announcement:

“A graduate student at Clark University, Mr. H. G. Keppel, is taking a series of photographs of the mathematical models and portraits of mathematicians to which he has access. It will include stereoscopic views of about one hundred different models. Among the portraits already photographed are likenesses of Sophie Kovalevsky, Gauss, Abel, Euler, Newton, Laplace, Lagrange, John Bernoulli, Borchardt, Kronecker, Cayley, Benjamin Peirce, Kummer, Steiner, Monge, Lobachevsky, Bessel, Abbe Moigno, Mobius, Fourier, Fermat, Jacobi, De Morgan, Galileo, Huygens, Lambert, Arago, Tycho Brahe. Applications for copies of Mr. Keppel’s pictures may be addressed to him and will receive his attention.”

Professor John Kennison of Clark University, who kindly provided me with this reference, also noted that Clark University has photographs from that time period which were probably taken by Keppel.

Under the course descriptions for the Department of Mathematics and Astronomy for 1905–1906, we find Prof. Schmidt listed together with an unnamed assistant, Mr. _________. The following paragraphs are found on the philosophy of studying mathematics in those times:

“The work in the Department of Mathematics is planned with a threefold purpose in view:

For the students who intend to SPECIALIZE in Mathematics, it provides the training necessary for pursuing their work. By offering different advanced courses in different years, a comparatively large number of courses is made available. Still it should be remembered that they give a necessarily one-sided sketch rather than a complete picture of modern Mathematics.

To those who need Mathematics as an INSTRUMENT it offers opportunities to become familiar with this instrument. The application of the methods of Calculus not only to Physics, Chemistry, Engineering, etc., but even to such seemingly remote realms as Psychology and Political Economy, makes it advisable that this class should continue the study of Mathematics at least as far as Calculus.

To others it gives logical training in Analysis and Proof, introduces them to that scientific method par excellence of the Hypothesis, and introduces the idea of a deductive system in its classical form. Elementary (Euclidean) Geometry is studied with this purpose by all members of the Freshman class.

THE FOLLOWING COURSES ARE OFFERED EACH YEAR:

Mathematics Ia. – Solid Geometry. – (5 hours during the first semester of the Freshman year.)

Mathematics Ib. – Plane and Spherical Trigonometry. – (5 hours during the second semester of the Freshman year.)

[Mathematics IIa. – Algebra and Introduction to Infinite Analysis. – (5 hours during the first semester of the Sophomore year.)

Mathematics IIb. – Analytic Geometry. – (5 hours during the second semester of the Sophomore year.)

Mathematics III. – Calculus I. –(3 or 6 hours through the Junior year.)

OF THE FOLLOWING ADVANCED COURSES, THREE AT LEAST WILL BE OFFERED EACH YEAR

1a. Advanced Calculus with Applications to Geometry

1b. Introduction to Differential Equations. – First course

2. Introduction to the Theory of Functions. – First course

3a. The Theory of Equations

3b. The Theory of Numbers

4. The Theory of Functions of a Complex Variable

5. The Theory of Differential Equations. – Second semester

6. Modern Algebra. Galois’ Theory of Equation

7a. Elliptic Functions

7b. Abelian Functions

8. The Theory of Algebraic Functions of One Variable

FOR 1905–1906, courses 1a, 1b, 2, AND 9 WILL BE OFFERED:

Mathematics IV.–1a– The course on Advanced Calculus with Applications to Geometry will treat of line and surface integrals; of envelopes, contact, curvature and torsion (Elective; first semester, Senior year)

Mathematics IV.–1b– The course on Introduction to Differential Equations will treat of some of the most important methods employed in solving Differential Equations. (Elective, second semester, Senior year)

Mathematics V. – 2 – The course on Introduction to the Theory of Functions will aim to give a general theory rather than a detailed study of various functions. It will treat of numbers, infinite series and products, continuation of a function, conformal representation, with form and periodic functions. (Elective; both semesters, Senior year)

Mathematics VI. – 9 – The Mathematical Seminary is a Research course. Subject for the year: Number Systems. Dedekind’s and G. Cantor’s theories will be studied in particular and the Principles of Critique of Cognition applied to them.

In connection with the Department of Mathematics a course in General Astronomy will be offered, consisting of lectures and recitations with practical exercises. No advanced mathematics is presupposed. Textbook; Young, Manual of Astronomy. (Elective; both semesters, Junior or Senior year)”

We have discussed in the Introduction how the wanderlust generation of Americans who had studied in Germany in the late 1800’s were so impressed with the institution of the Seminar or Seminary, that they transplanted this German innovation back to their own institutions after returning to America. We have just seen listed in the catalogue “Mathematics VI–The Mathematical Seminary …” as an example of this importation during the time when we had our first Professor of Mathematics and Astronomy, Karl Schmidt, who had taken the Ph.D. at Marburg University in Germany. Let us trace this Seminary course through the early catalogues until it disappears as a catalogue entry in 1913–1914, and is replaced in the catalogues by advanced course offerings. The 1905–06 catalogue reveals that the topic of Number Systems was treated in the Seminary for the academic year in question. Then for 1907–1908, we find the listing

Mathematical Seminary – Subject for this year: Higher Plane Curves (Both semesters, 3 hours).

This same listing occurs in the catalogue for the academic years 1908–1909 through 1912–1913, during which time Herbert Keppel had replaced Schmidt as the Professor of Mathematics and Astronomy. Finally, with the academic year 1913–1914, the Mathematical Seminary is no longer listed. Instead, the following new advanced course appears: Mathematics VII: Modern Projective Geometry. We then have a period of time in which certain courses are listed under the heading “Advanced Courses.” During the academic years 1914–1915 through 1917–1918, the following two advanced courses are listed:

Theory of Equations and Modern Higher Algebra
Modern Projective Geometry.

In addition, in the Record for 1916–1917, the following is printed:

“A course of Teaching of Mathematics was given in 1916–1917.”

After Professor Simpson replaces Professor Keppel as Professor of Mathematics and Astronomy during 1918–1919, a different set of Advanced Courses is listed, apparently reflecting Simpson’s own interests:

Theory of Equations, Complex Numbers and Determinants
Modern Projective Geometry.

“Modern Higher Algebra” thus disappears from the Catalogue. During 1919–1920, the designation “Advanced Courses” is dropped from the catalogue, and the two courses listed above just appear at the end of the course list, not especially dignified by the name “Advanced Courses.” By 1922–1923, the list of advanced courses has grown to the following four:

Mathematics VI. – Theory of Equations, Complex Variables and Determinants (3 hours)
Mathematics VII. – Modern Projective Geometry (3 hours)
Mathematics VIII. – Theory of Least Squares, Fourier Series (2 hours)
Mathematics IX. – Introduction to Higher Algebra.

Higher Algebra is back in the curriculum!

We return to 1905–1911 and consider a second scientific figure that played a most prominent role in the early development of science and engineering on the campus, Dr. John R. Benton. By the time of the 1911 Catalogue, we have encountered Benton as Dean of the College of Engineering, and Head Professor in both Physics and Electrical Engineering. The 1905–1906 catalogue lists the following information:

J. R. BENTON, A.B., Ph.D*
Professor of Physics and Civil Engineering*

A.B., Trinity College, Hartford, Conn., 1897; Ph.D., Gottingen, 1900;
Instructor in Mathematics, Princeton University, 1900–1901; Instructor of
Physics, Cornell University, 1901–1902; Special investigation work in Physics,
Carnegie Institution, Washington D. C., 1904–1905; Present position, 1905—

Just as we have found in the Mathematics curriculum, the specialization in Electrical Engineering was deferred until the Senior year. In the catalogue, we find the following entry for this department.

“ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING
PROFESSOR BENTON Professor Benton [Dr. Benton was the author of a textbook An Introductory Textbook of Electrical Engineering, Ginn and Co., 1928 and also of Problems in Physics, to accompany Ames’s textbook of General Physics, American Book Co., 1909. Mrs. Theral Moore recalls that Dean Benton died of psittacosis (parrot fever) in 1930 during his mid-fifties when the United States was in the throes of the Great Depression, leaving Mrs. Benton with the task of raising their four sons by herself. Mrs. Benton, a graduate of the Florida Female College discussed in this chapter, lived on until February 1981, remaining faithful to the memory of her late husband. During the 1960’s, the Moores lived across the street from Mrs. Benton. Mrs. Moore would go with her sons, Mrs. Benton, and Mrs. Benton’s yardman to the Evergreen Cemetary where Mrs. Benton and her yardman would work to keep the weeds off her husband’s grave and also that of her son who died in World War II.]

Dynamo Electrical Machinery. The principles of action of direct-current dynamos and motors; calculations of dynamos and motors; determination of characteristic curves; designing of electrical machinery; electrical testing. (Required of Seniors in Electrical Engineering course; 4 hours)

Alternating Currents. Principles of single phase and polyphase alternating currents; alternating current machinery; theory of the transformer. (Required of all Seniors in Electrical Engineering course; 4 hours)

Electric Lighting and Transmission of Power. Electric lighting; photometry; principles of illumination; design of distributing systems. (Required of all Seniors in Electrical Engineering course; 1 hour)

Telegraph and Telephone Engineering. Design of telegraph and telephone lines; submarine cables. (Required of Seniors in Electrical Engineering course; 1 hour)”

During the academic year 1905–1906, Professor Benton was apparently lucky enough to be on just one of the following Standing Committees of the Faculty: ENTRANCE EXAMINATIONS AND CLASSIFICATION

In an interview [8] by Professor Samuel Proctor in the Florida Oral History Project in 1969, Mrs. Mabelle Benton recalled what her husband had told her about why he came to the University of Florida:

Proctor:
“Mrs. Benton, did he ever say how he happened to come to Florida to accept the position at the Lake City School?”

Mrs. Benton:
“Sledd. Dr. Sledd was a very scholarly man, and he was looking for scholars. It was quite remarkable at that early date that they had such a high percentage of Ph.D’s.”

Proctor:
“Yes.”

Mrs. Benton:
“They really did. So Dr. Benton felt he would like to work with Dr. Sledd because he was a scholarly man, and he felt it was a small institution that had a chance of growth. I guess he thought he’d like to come to Florida.”

As a final example of the scientific training of the early faculty on campus, we consider the well known

EDWARD R. FLINT, B.S., Ph.D., M.D.*
Professor of Chemistry*

B.S., Massachusetts Agricultural College, 1887; Ph.D., University of
Gottingen,1892; Assistant Professor of Chemistry, Massachusetts Agricultural
College, 1893–1899; Medical Student, Harvard University, 1899–1903; M.D.,
Harvard, 1903; Professor of Chemistry, University of Florida, 1904–1905;
Present position, 1905—}

During 1905–1906, Professor Flint was on the Standing Committees on Courses and Degrees, and on Schedules.

Here is what the 1906–1907 Catalogue reveals about the chemistry offerings under the provenance of Dr. Flint.

“CHEMISTRY

PROFESSOR FLINT

The facilities for instruction in Chemistry compare favorably with those of the larger institutions of the South and are being steadily improved. The department is equipped with the necessary apparatus and material for instruction in general inorganic and organic, analytical and industrial chemistry.

Beginning with the Sophomore year, all students in all the courses are required to take general chemistry. In the scientific courses, the junior year is devoted mainly to qualitative, the senior year to quantitative analysis. Abundant laboratory work is offered in all of these courses.

Chemistry I. – This course is on general inorganic chemistry. During the first semester, the non-metallic elements are studied, by means of a text-book, lectures and recitations. Special attention is given to the principles underlying chemical union, and the theories and laws which govern the science.
In the second semester the metals and their more important compounds are studied in the same manner. (Three hours a week throughout the Sophomore year for the B.S. course and Junior year for the B.A. courses is required of all students.)

Chemistry II. – This is a laboratory course in general chemistry. In order to impress the principles of the science upon the minds of the students, they are required to repeat in the laboratory many of the experiments seen in the lecture room, taking notes of the same, and writing the chemical reactions as far as possible. Each one is required to perform over a hundred experiments designed to illustrate chemical principles, including the preparation of many of the elements and their most important compounds.
In the second semester the laboratory work is designed to study the reactions of the metals with a view to their classification. During this semester a portion of the time is devoted to a thorough course in dry analysis. (Two exercises a week throughout the Sophomore year, required of all students in the scientific courses).

Chemistry III. – This is a laboratory course in qualitative analysis, in the Junior year. (Three exercises a week, elective in the A. B. Course.)

Chemistry IV. – Includes course III with two additional exercises a week in the same line of work. (Offered as an elective in the Science courses, and required in the chemical course.)

Chemistry V. – This is a course in organic chemistry which includes lectures and recitations, although a text-book is largely depended upon. In the latter part of the second semester a portion of the time is devoted to organic preparations in the laboratory. A short course of lectures on the subject of metallurgy is given in the latter part of the semester, in which the chemistry involved in the reduction and fabrication of the more useful metals, as iron, copper, zinc, lead and silver, is explained. (Three hours a week throughout the Junior year, required of all students in the Chemical course.)

Chemistry VI. – This is a laboratory course in quantitative analysis. (Elective in the Senior year to students in the B. S. courses. Three hours a week.)

Chemistry VII. – In this course five exercises a week are devoted to laboratory work. During the first semester this is given to quantitative analysis, the exercises being selected with a view to familiarizing the students with the leading quantitative operations involved in the gravimetric, volumetric and electrolytic methods in vogue. As far as possible, the work of each individual is selected to aid especially in the line of work he may wish to pursue in the future, as medicine, pharmacy, analytical chemistry, etc.
During the second semester, the laboratory work is still further specialized for each student and is devoted especially to investigation on some one subject, leading to material for a thesis.

During two hours a week a course is given in chemical technology which comprises a consideration of the chemical principles involved in the manufacture, refining and preparation of the leading products of commercial importance. Thorp’s Outlines of Industrial Chemistry is used as a text, lectures being given occasionally enlarging upon or explaining the subject matter of the book. Among the subjects studied may be mentioned fuels, sulphuric acid, the soda industry, the chlorine industry, fertilizers, cements, glass, pigments, coal tar, mineral oils, soap starch, sugar fermentation industries, explosives, textile industries, paper, leather, etc. In connection with this visits will be made to such facilities and chemical industries as may be accessible.

To those who desire it, a short course during this time is offered in the assaying of gold, silver and lead. (Seven hours a week throughout the Senior year. Required of students in the Chemical course.)

Chemistry VIII. – A course of lectures in agricultural chemistry, embracing the chemistry of soils, the atmosphere, plant and animal growth and feeding, fertilizers, dairy products, insecticides, etc. (Three hours a week for one semester in the Senior year. Required of all students in the Agricultural course.)”

At the end of the time period, 1905–1910, at the beginning of the Murphree presidency, (cf. Proctor, [1, p. 27]) the organizational structure of the University of Florida was revamped and both the College of Arts and Sciences and the Graduate School were set up. In taking this action, Murphree was following national patterns, cf. Veysey [9, pp. 264–268]. In the 1910–1911 Catalogue, the following organizational structure is present:

Graduate School

College of Arts and Sciences: Degrees offered–A.B., B.S., A.B. in Education

College of Agriculture: B.S. in Agriculture

College of Engineering

B.S. in Civil Engineering

B.S. in Electrical Engineering

B.S. in Mechanical Engineering

College of Law Curriculum leading to LL.B.

Sub-Collegiate Division

Sub-freshman course
Short courses in Education
Short courses in Agriculture
Short courses in Mechanic Arts

The following information is to be found on the

GRADUATE SCHOOL

“Organization. The work in this school is under the direction of the Committee on Graduate Studies. This committee consists of Professors Anderson, Banks, Benton, Davis, Keppel and Vernon.

Degrees Offered. The University is not in a position at present to lay any great stress upon the graduate work. Its work is mainly of a college grade and will doubtless remain so for a good many years to come. However, for the benefit of those who wish to carry their studies farther, the University does offer the degree of Master of Arts (M.A.) and the degree of Master of Science (M.S.). Many of the departments of the colleges are prepared to give courses leading to these degrees.

Prerequisite Degrees. Candidates for the Master’s degree must possess the corresponding Bachelor’s degree of this institution or an institution of like standing.

Applications. Candidates for the Master’s degree must present to the Chairman of the Committee on Graduate Studies a written application for the degree not later than the first of November in the year in which the degree is desired. This application must name the major and minor subjects which are offered for the degree and must contain the signed approval of the heads of the departments concerned.

Time Required. The student must spend at least one full academic year in residence at the University of Florida as a graduate student, devoting his full time to the pursuit of these studies.

Work Required. The work is twelve hours per week. Six hours of this work must be in one subject (the major) and of a higher grade than any course offered for undergraduate students in that subject. The other six hours (major or minor) are to be determined and distributed by the professor in charge of the department in which the major subject is selected. It is understood, however, that no course designated primarily for students of a lower grade than the Junior class will be acceptable as a minor. It is also to be understood that while the major course is six hours, these hours are not the same as in undergraduate work. It means that the professor has the privilege of using these six hours for recitations or examinations, but the student will find that considerably more time is required to prepare one of recitations than is the case in an undergraduate course.

Dissertation. It is customary to require a dissertation showing original research and independent thinking on some subject accepted by the professor under whom the major work is taken, but this requirement may be waived at the option of the professor, subject to the approval of the Committee on Graduate Studies.”

It is interesting to read in the 1928 posthumous biography of Murphree [10, pp. 47–49] about this reorganization according to the recollections of the faculty who were on the small staff during the fall of 1909.

“… But during that term Dr. Murphree gathered his faculty together and said to them in substance:

‘Gentlemen, it will look a little pretentious for our University to be organized into separate administrative groups known as colleges, but I am looking to the future. I propose that we establish the four colleges in the university group from the four outstanding departments of instruction. You will have to start with small enrollments, but all great things have small beginnings. Gentlemen, you will see the day when more colleges will be added. It is imperative that we lay a foundation for big things in the future.’

Dean J. N. Anderson of the College of Arts and Sciences was one of the group who listened to those words. As he discussed that memorable meeting of the University of Florida faculty, he said:

‘It is the best illustration of his foresightedness that I know of. Dr. Murphree was a cautious man, but in matters affecting the growth of the institution he had chosen to head, he was fearless and aggressive.’

After placing the matter squarely before his associates of the University, Dr. Murphree took a vote on the organization of four colleges. The vote carried. The University of Florida became a university in fact. The organization provided for these four colleges: Arts and Sciences, with Jas. N. Anderson as dean; Agriculture, with J. J. Vernon as dean; Engineering, with J. R. Benton as dean; and Law, with A. J. Farrah as dean.

In addition to these colleges, there was a position as director of the Experiment Station and Superintendent of Farmers’ Institutes and Extension Division filled by Prof. P. H. Rolfs. Dr. L. C. Crow was secretary of the general faculty, and Dr. E. R. Flint of the department of chemistry was resident physician to the University.
………

‘We who were selected deans found ourselves thrust into positions which seemed to be more or less honorary with no additional salary for the time being, but we quickly discovered that with the growth of the University our jobs would take on administrative proportions,’

said Dean Anderson.

The enrollment climbed steadily from that year.
………

At the close of the academic year 1909–1910, when Dr. Murphree was finishing the first year of his administration as president of the University of Florida, there were enrolled in the regular classes of the University 112 students ….

The results of Dr. Murphree’s plan to broaden the scope of university instruction and work through the various colleges were apparent in the enrollment figures during the first year the plan was in operation, 1910–1911. The enrollment jumped from 186 to 241.

In [10, pp. 57–58], Dean John Benton had the following comments about the early days of the Engineering College.

‘The College of Engineering was the third of the group of four colleges that were formed at Dr. Murphree’s direction in 1910.”

In charge of the course was Dr. J. R. Benton who had been with the University since 1905.

‘As a matter of fact,’

Dean Benton relates,

‘I arrived in Lake City on the same train with Dr. Crow and came down with him, Dr. Farr, Dr. Anderson and Major Floyd when the University came to Gainesville.

With the organization of the new College of Engineering, it seemed almost an act of pure nerve on our part to enter upon a curriculum that we were not equipped to give. However, we had confidence with Dr. Murphree that as our students advanced to the upper years, money would be found to provide the teaching staff and equipment; and our faith has been justified. Previous to this we had granted five degrees in engineering, the class of 1909 being the first to receive such degrees from the University of Florida. Our enrollment during the first year under the new organization amounted to only forty-eight and the number of graduates in engineering at the preceding commencement was only two.

The first class to graduate from the Engineering College as a distinct college was that of 1911, with five receiving degrees; three in civil engineering and two in electrical engineering. The first bachelor degrees in mechanical engineering were awarded in 1913.

In 1913 the University of Florida raised its entrance requirements, and although this did not greatly affect the content of the engineering curricula, it did at first affect the enrollment in engineering. The first class to graduate under the new entrance requirements—that of 1917—contained only one member.

Since then the enrollment and the size of the graduating classes have gradually increased, until the present enrollment of the college [i.e., in 1928] is nearly 300, and the number of graduates last June was twenty-five.

The total number of graduates from the College of Engineering has reached 181, of whom the great majority are engaged in engineering or related occupations in Florida, although some have strayed to all parts of the United States and the outside world. The number of former students in this college who have not graduated has reached nearly a thousand, and many of them are doing successful work in the industries of Florida and the nation, and have retained their contact with the University, which we are very glad to have them do.’

A curriculum in chemical engineering was first organized in 1917, while Dr. Flint was head of the chemistry department.

‘In my association with Dr. Murphree, I found him always ready to give his associates a free hand in the administration of their work, but he tried always to give us his hearty cooperation. Dr. Murphree was not an engineer, but was always sympathetic and helpful with our problems. He was always seeking to harmonize. He could be patient, and was called upon frequently. I believe this had a lot to do with his success. President Murphree was often silent for the sake of harmony, and some may have gained the impression that he was not standing firmly for the right. But a little time would always show that he was waiting patiently to put into effect what he knew to be right.’ ”

To put the scale of operations in perspective in these pre-World War I times, some enrollment and graduation figures may be helpful. At the first commencement in June 1909, a total of 8 degrees were awarded; 1 M.S., 5 B.S.’s, and 2 B.A.’s.

Table: The Roll of Students in 1910–1911—College of Arts and Sciences (all but three students were from Florida)

Class or program	Students
Seniors	8
Juniors	6
Sophomores	16
Freshman	23
Three Year Short Course on Education	7

Table: College of Engineering enrollment (all but one student were from Florida; one was from London, England)

Class	Students	Program
Seniors	2	Electrical Engineering
Seniors	4	Civil Engineering
Juniors	3	Electrical Engineering
Juniors	2	Civil Engineering
Sophomores	13
Freshman	17

Table: Degrees conferred in 1909–1910

Degree	Number	Field
Doctors of Law	2
B.A.	3
B.S.	2	General Science
B.S.	2	Civil Engineering
B.A. of Law	3

The scale of things in those times is also nicely illustrated by an article in the May 27, 1908 Gainesville Daily Sun describing the Closing Exercises.

“The graduating exercises of the class of 1908 began Tuesday morning at 10:30 in the auditorium. The building was crowded, a large number of those present being strangers, although the majority were from Gainesville.

While the crowd was gathering the Duval Orchestra of Jacksonville rendered excellently several selections. The exercises began with a short address from Dr. Sledd, announcing the character of the occasion. He then asked Dr. Hay to invoke the divine presence.

The second ‘honor man’ of the year, Mr. Jas. S. Shands, was then introduced, and in a few well chosen words welcomed the audience to the exercises.

After this salutatory the orchestra rendered another selection. Then Dr. Sledd gave a concise and pointed statement as to the conditions now existing in the University.

This was followed by the baccalaureate address by Governor Broward. Apt in illustration, full of common sense, this address was greatly enjoyed by all.

After a musical selection, the degrees and medals were conferred. Persons, R. F., and Shands, J. S., were awarded the degree of B.A., and Fisher, C. M., Earman, J. B., Gammon, J. R., Carter, P. J., and Cason, T. Z., were awarded the degree of B.S.. After those degrees were conferred the degree of M.S. was conferred with special credit upon H. S. Fawcett, B.S. (Iowa State College).

The president of the Board of Control, Hon. N. P. Bryan, was then introduced, who awarded the medals to the winners. The Buckman Medal, given by the board for the best work done in the Department of Civil Engineering, went to Mr. Hadley Taylor. A medal offered by the Colonial Dames was won by Mr. R. F. Persons with an essay entitled ‘England’s Commercial Policy Toward the Colonies.’ The winner in the Freshman-Sophomore declamation contest was adjudged to be Mr. O. W. Drane. The winner of the oratorical contest from the Junior class was Mr. W. D. Martin; from the Senior class, Mr. P. J. Carter.

The awarding of these prizes was followed by a masterly valedictory by C. M. Fisher, the first ‘honor’ man.

The president then made several announcements, chief of which, perhaps, was the establishment of a new professorship, that of ‘Secondary Education.’ The incumbent of the new chair was Capt. Geo. M. Lynch. He also made announcements of courses of lectures to be offered next year in Gainesville under the auspices of the University Extension Committee. Each of the four lecturers, Doctors Sledd, Farr, Crow, and Banks, offered two courses of sixteen lectures each. Dr. Sledd’s courses were on ‘Education in the South’ and on ‘The elements of Ethics;’ Dr. Farr’s ‘Contemporary Novels and Novelists’ and ‘The Literature of the South;’ Dr. Bank’s on ‘Economic Problems.’

The audience was then dismissed by Dr. Hay with the benediction, and the session of 1907–08 was over.”

References

Proctor, Samuel and Langley, Wright, (1986), Gator History: A Pictorial History of the University of Florida. South Star Publishing, Gainesville, Florida.
Schmidt Correspondence, Florida Oral History Project, Anderson Hall, University of Florida.
Schmidt, Karl, From Science to God: Prolegomena to a Future Theology, Harper Brothers, New York, 1944.
Gregory, Frederick, Nature Lost? Natural Science and the German Theological Traditions of the Nineteenth Century, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1992.
Parschall, Karen and Rowe, David, The Emergence of the American Mathematical Research Community, 1876–1900: J. J. Sylvester, Felix Klein, and E. H. Moore, American Mathematical Society, History of Mathematics, Volume 8, 1994.
Archives, Carleton College, Karl Schmidt File.
Marsden, George, The Soul of the American University, Oxford University Press, New York, 1994.
Florida Oral History Project, University of Florida, interview of Mrs. Robert Benton, by Professor Samuel Proctor, February 26, 1969.
Veysey, Laurence, The Emergence of the American University, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1965.
Armstrong, Orland K., The Life and Work of Albert Murphree published for the Murphree Memorial Fund, 1928.

Appendix A: Dean John R. Benton Remembered

Dean John R. Benton Remembered

We have indicated in a footnote in this chapter that Dean Robert Benton died in his mid-fifties in 1930. Following up on that footnote, we will now provide other material about Dean Benton in this appendix rather than in the next chapter, since that chapter is more focused on the Mathematics Department itself than this Chapter 3. The 1930 Seminole Yearbook contains the following tribute to Dean Benton:

“The world of science recognized and admired his deep and comprehensive learning; the entire University felt and profited by the force of his ideas. The College of Engineering over which he presided as Dean for so many years, stands as a monument to his ability as an administrator, to the inspiring power of his steadfast character. His students knew this, and took pride in it; but for his kindly, understanding nature, they loved him. Believing that the University has lost one whose influence will always be felt, we dedicate this, the twenty-first volume of the Seminole.

In Memoriam:
Dr. John R. Benton
June 6, 1876–January 8, 1930.”

Second, in the interview [8] with Dr. Proctor referenced above, Mrs. Mabelle Benton comments about her impressions of her husband’s service at the University of Florida and his interaction with the student body.

Proctor:
“So he went off to Gottingen to study physics. Obviously, science was always his great love and interest.”

Mrs. Benton:
“Yes, actually the university was so small when he came here, that he told me one time that he had taught every class that was offered in engineering. But that wasn’t surprising. You see, when they would get a new man, they would get him to teach some specific thing, and Dr. Benton could turn to something else.

Actually at the time of his death he was still teaching two classes, one in electrical engineering and one in physics. The physics was first-year physics because he said he wanted to get to know the students the first year they came. As long as he lived they kept physics in the engineering department so that gave him a chance to know the freshmen engineering …. The electrical engineering class he taught was a junior class. He had written the text for that at the urging of the dean of the university, Purdue, I guess ….
…………

Mrs. Benton:
“No, I guess he [Dean Benton] had a reputation for being pretty strict in his grading. Somebody said this to me the other day. Dr. Crow had flunked him in Spanish when he was working for his master’s degree. And I said I knew he had done it for more than one person, and I thought it was a mistake. In other words, if a person, if that wasn’t his main interest, and he was just taking that Spanish to get the credit because he had to have it to get his degree, and if he had made almost a passing mark, why not give him a passing mark? But Dr. Crow just hewed the line.”

Proctor:
“Was Dr. Benton that kind of grader?”

Mrs. Benton:
“He was to some extent, but I don’t believe he would have failed a man if he, you know, were right on the edge of passing. But I was going to say this. I do know that some of his students who were poor students were good friends. So I don’t think he was too unreasonable.”

Elsewhere in the oral interview, Mrs. Benton recalls hearing the following told her. An engineering student recalls another student telling him that Dr. Benton asked him to come to his office and there Benton told this student

Mrs. Benton:

“‘… You are not living up to your capacities and what you really could do. You could do better than this.’

I don’t know how many students Dr. Benton had talked to this way, but I do think that he felt an interest in his students very much.”

Another thing Mrs. Benton mentions in [8] is that, of course, there was no formal Placement Office in those times. But Dean Benton and Dr. Chandler organized the Florida Engineering Society in order to form industrial links, and in this way, Benton and Chandler placed the engineering college graduates themselves.

Appendix B: What Became of Andrew Sledd?

What Became of Andrew Sledd?

Naturally, after uncovering all the material presented in Chapters 2, 3, and 4, my wife Norma and I were rather curious as to what had become of Andrew Sledd after he retired from the presidency of the University of Florida in 1909 at about the age of forty. Fortunately, I found a little volume, Albert Barnett, Andrew Sledd—His Life and Work, printed at the Candler School of Theology of Emory University, apparently in 1956, which has the following introductory remarks by John Bransford Nichols.

“In 1938, [ed., just a year before Sledd’s death in 1939] feeling the need of some ministerial meetings in which emphasis could be devotional and intellectual, several ministers in the Alabama-West Florida Conference met and inaugurated a seminar which soon became known as the Andrew Sledd Study Club.

During the years since, the group has grown in numbers and the members have grown spiritually and mentally through worship, fellowship, writing and hearing papers, and discussion of the many themes which have been considered in the semi-annual meetings.

The group honored itself by choosing a name that commemorates the teaching and preaching ministry of Andrew Sledd, one of the most eminent Methodists this Conference can claim.

This monograph by Albert E. Barnett was presented as a paper in the spring session of 1956.”

We have already seen that Sledd studied at Randolph-Macon College in Ashland, Virginia, graduating in 1894. We have not remarked that he was a star baseball player, playing first base and also gaining renown for the distances he could hit the ball. Also at Harvard, where Sledd received the M.A. in Greek in 1896, Sledd continued to play baseball with the Harvard team and apparently was known as one of Harvard’s great players during those times, according to [1]. We have seen in Chapter 2 that Sledd accepted the chair of Latin at Emory College on graduation from Harvard in 1896 and that as a result of boarding with President Warren Candler, came to meet the Candler’s only daughter Annie Florence, whom Sledd married in 1899. The couple had nine children. In [1, p. 10], we learn of the specific incident that had prompted the Atlantic Monthly article on the Negro question which was to result in Sledd’s resignation from Emory in 1902.

“… A lynching took place at a way station between Atlanta and Covington in the early Summer of 1902. Excursion trains were run from Atlanta to enable Atlanta folk to see the ghastly remains of the victim. Himself enroute home from Atlanta, Sledd was sickened when a souvenir hunter exhibited a charred finger bone and the remains of a knee cap as treasures to take home. Physical nausea might have ended the reaction of some men, but not A. Sledd. Here was a challenge to decency and civilization and he took his pen as the weapon with which to slay this dragon of barbarism. This was the origin of his article that appeared in the Atlantic Monthly for July 1902, Volume 90, pp. 65–73 ….”

Here is Barnett’s summary of this article for his seminar presentation, [1, p. 11–12].

“By way of introduction, he criticizes the usual discussion of the general subject at two points:

With Southerners, the discussion is too largely sectional and partisan;

With Northerners, lacking experience of actual conditions, discussion is theoretical and designed to meet conditions that they do not understand.

The South, in other words, insists the problem is local, not national, rejects light from the outside, and meets offers of aid with a surly,

‘Mind your own business.’

The North, comparably, approaches the problem from the side of preformed theories. The truth must be sought between these extremes.

Positively, Sledd then argues that the Negro question is as national as the Tariff and Immigration, that its solution rightly enlists the interest of people as people regardless of sectionalism, that it requires an approach as rational as that employed in solving any problem. In effect, he declines to admit that here is a problem apart.

Two fundamental facts, he feels require recognition at the outset:

The fact of inferiority: The Negro is in fact, in the main, lower in the scale of development than the White. Immediately and devastatingly, however, he adds that this inferiority is not irremediable, but is rather of the sort that may be erased by environment, i.e.,

‘the indefinite continuance of favorable surroundings and the lapse of indefinite time.’

In other words, the Negro is a person, God’s creature, with all the potentialities persons as such embody. Inferiority, though immediately real, is temporary and in no sense irremediable.

The Negro has inalienable rights: The tendency in the South is to carry the admitted fact of the Negro’s inferiority to the point of dehumanizing him.

‘He is either unnoticed or despised.’

Precisely this is seen to be the crux of the problem.

‘If the Negro could be made to feel that his fundamental rights and privileges are recognized and respected with those of the White man, that he is not discriminated against both publicly and privately simply and solely because of his color, that he is regarded and dealt with as a responsible, if humble, member of society, the most perplexing feature of his problem would be at once simplified, and would shortly, in normal course, disappear.’

Tragically, however, the Negro at his worthiest and best

‘may not eat at the restaurant of the whites, or rest at the white hotel … and if, on a Sabbath, they would worship in a white man’s church, they are bidden to call upon God, the maker of the black man as well as of the white, and invoke the Christ, who died for the black and white alike, from a place apart. As things stand, the Negro must know and keep his place, a place determined not by his ignorance … viciousness … offensiveness but solely on the fact that he is a Negro.’

He then discusses lynching, citing statistics and records, as a flagrant and logical expression of this predominant attitude of contempt, and insists that alteration of contemptuousness is prerequisite to a cure of the disgraceful and barbarous practice.

Reverting to the basic proposition that the Negro has inalienable rights, Sledd continues trenchantly:

‘There is nothing in a white skin, or a black, to nullify the essential rights of man as man …. The home of a Negro is as sacred as that of a white man; his right to live as truly God-given. If a Negro can be kicked and cuffed and cursed, so can a white man. If there is no wrong in dishonoring a Negro’s home, there is no more wrong in dishonoring the white man’s. If the Negro criminal may be burned at the stake with the usual accompaniments of fiendish cruelty, a white man guilty of the same crime, deserves, and should suffer the same penalty.’

Concluding, Sledd generalizes in threefold affirmation:

‘The radical difficulty is not with the Negro, but with the white man! So long as the Negro is popularly regarded and dealt with as he is today, his problem will remain unresolved ….’

‘The development of a free people is a process of law,—the gradual unfolding and expansion of the inherent potentialities of the race. If they are capable of advancement, they will inevitably advance; if not they will inevitably fail and fall out; and no artificial conditions, temporarily created can permanently affect the operation of this law.’

‘The solution is, therefore, to give the Negroes fair and favorable conditions, and suffer him to work out, unhampered, his destiny among us.’ ”

So Sledd wrote this article when he was in his early thirties, the repercussions of which followed him to Florida as we have seen in Chapter 2. Barnett has a colorful description of the immediate reaction to this article in the town of Covington where the Sledd’s were residing, [1, p. 4].

“Unfortunately, the College [ed., Emory] was changing presidents, and the incoming executive had his eye on the Episcopacy [ed., i.e., in obtaining the rank of Methodist Bishop,] though he was to wait until 1920 for actual election. Sledd was burned in effigy at Covington and there was real danger that he might be tarred and feathered and ridden out of town on a rail. With his characteristically cool courage, he did not even bother to mention these dangers to his young wife. This turned out to be fortunate, because in complete innocence Mrs. Sledd dressed herself and baby Frances in their Sunday best and went shopping in Covington, the afternoon of the day of the noon burning in effigy. The citizenry assuming that Mrs. Sledd knew what had happened and was contemplated took this shopping expedition as an exhibition of superb calm in the Sledd household and were themselves calmed and shamed, with the result that no further violence took place.”

As we have already learned in Chapter 2, following Sledd’s resignation from Emory, he accepted his father-in-law’s financial aid to enter graduate study at Yale University, where he received the Ph.D. in 1903 in Latin. Barnett comments that at Yale, Sledd was active in football and boxing. During this time, Mrs. Sledd and baby Frances stayed with Sledd’s sister in Norfolk. During the summer months, the Sledds resided with Bishop Candler in Atlanta. We have seen previously that Sledd spent 1903–1904 at Southern University in Greensboro, Alabama, as professor of Greek. Barnett himself entered Southern University as a freshmen in 1913 and reports [1, p. 4]

“there still lingered on the campus … reports of Sledd’s sensational feats as a baseball player and coach of the college team in 1903–1904 when he taught Greek in the College.”

Dr. Zebulon Judd, who was on the faculty of the University of Florida, had the following recollection in [1, p. 5] of the struggle between President Sledd and Professor Marion previously presented in the Memories of a Southern Schoolmaster:

“… Judd told me that he was returning to his office after lunch one afternoon and saw two men in a physical clinch on a small gallery outside the window of the president’s first floor office. As he got to them, the wrestlers fell to the floor and rolled off onto the ground without relaxing their grip. There at his feet, to his complete dismay, lay President Sledd and a professor whose incompetence had required notice of dismissal from the faculty. He separated the combatants without too much difficulty and helped mollify their emotions. The offending professor had reacted with violence to Sledd’s notice and physical altercation ensued. A beatific smile and gentle spirit, never meant reluctance to fight on Sledd’s part whether the fight involved physical force or the employment of what a brother of the Atlanta Conference later called the use of his rapier tongue.”

A good example of Sledd’s stubborn insistence on defending his principles even where a more diplomatic approach might be safer occurs in the unpublished Autobiography of a Southern Schoolmaster. In the portion of this manuscript in which Sledd is discussing the low standards in Southern higher educational circles and how a higher quality of faculty is needed to alleviate this situation, Sledd devotes a whole page to a harsh criticism of his father-in-law Bishop Warren Candler’s performance as president of Emory College.

One of Sledd’s daughters comments in [1] about Sledd’s construction with student volunteers of an early campus building which we mentioned in Chapter 3.

“Father … hated false pride and glorified in the dignity of manual labor. He taught us to do anything that needed to be done, as long as it was right. No honest labor was below his dignity. With his own hands, he helped to build a small building to house the Mechanical Arts classes at the University of Florida, to make the money go further. This wooden structure was built between Buckman and Thomas and has long since been demolished.”

Proctor [2, p. 27] offers the following account of Sledd’s resignation from the Presidency of the University of Florida in April, 1906. The account begins actually, with Sledd’s appointment to the Lake City Institution in 1904.

“While Sledd had the full support of the Board of Control, there were several influential state officials who had never liked him. In 1905, after the Buckman Act, members of the State Board of Education tried to block his appointment as president. They preferred Albert A. Murphree, president of the West Florida Seminary of Tallahassee. If it had not been for the strong endorsement of P. K. Yonge and Nathan P. Bryan, who persuaded Governor Broward to support him, Sledd would never have been appointed president.

Animosity toward Sledd continued after the University opened in Gainesville. The anti-Sledd faction blamed him for low student enrollment, protesting that entrance requirements imposed by Sledd were too rigid. Presidents of the state institutions were then selected annually in Florida, and the matter of Sledd’s reappointment was on the agenda for the March 1909 meeting of the Board of Control.

The vote on the reappointment was postponed, however, because the State Board of Education—which had jurisdiction over the Board of Control—was adamant about getting rid of Sledd. Among those on the State Board of Education who favored a new president were the newly-elected governor, Albert W. Gilchrist, and the state attorney general, Park Trammell. There was even a threat that funds for construction of new buildings on the campus were blocked unless action was taken against Sledd.

Although the Board of Control members were willing to continue their endorsement of Dr. Sledd, he decided in early April to resign. His resignation was accepted and the board immediately offered Albert A. Murphree the presidency. Murphree accepted, and his administration began July 1, 1909.”

Barnett [1, p. 6] offers a rather more diplomatic account of these events.

“The emotional aftermath of conflicts engendered by transfer of the University from Lake City to Gainesville caused Sledd to conclude that his continuance as president of the University constituted a liability to its progress. Of his own volition and on this disinterested basis, he resigned at the close of the academic year in the Spring of 1909. The Board of Regents demonstrated their admiration of him by unanimously resigning. With characteristic objectivity and self-forgetfulness, Sledd induced them to reconsider for the good of the university.”

During the summer months, Sledd and his family returned to Atlanta to Bishop Candler’s home and Sledd wrote feature articles for the Atlantic Journal. In November, 1909, Sledd became pastor of the First Methodist Church in Jacksonville. Barnett recounts in [1, p. 6].

“He chose to join the Florida Conference [ed., of Methodist ministers,] in part, to show the political big wigs of Florida that he had no fear of them and that his resignation from the Presidency of the University did not mean they had or could run him out of the state! He found Jacksonville a vice-ridden city and his vigorous leadership of reformation crusades rekindled the ire of the same politicians who had opposed him at the University. His family now numbered four children, and their need of a yard in which to play and of a less vice-saturated environment than downtown Jacksonville afforded made Sledd hospitable toward the invitation to the Presidency of Southern University which came during the Summer of 1910. He moved to Greensboro [ed., Alabama] and began his tenure in the Presidency extending 1910–1914. In the Fall of 1913, I became personally acquainted with him during the last year of that tenure, when I entered Southern University as a freshmen for the year 1913–1914.

Sledd immediately offended many oldtimers by having the books of the University audited and by requiring a more careful payment of the modest tuition of $25.00 a term. By rigid economy and careful management, he kept the University solvent and throughout his administration paid all salaries save his own in full. He won the confidence and support of townsfolk by paying all local bills in full when presented and by conscientiously safeguarding the credit of the University at the local banks. Professors’ salaries were low, the highest being $1800.00, but Sledd assembled and held an able faculty, demonstrating that professors do not live by bread alone, but are appreciative of scholarship and inspiring integrity in Administration. The Chapel was the point of contact between the student body and President, and once during each week he was the speaker. There was always a full attendance when Sledd spoke and all of us knew that here was a man of deep seriousness, unquestionable integrity, vital religiousness, who gave his own uttermost and who demanded the best of which others were capable. He made no distinction between personal and institutional ethics, and two unforgettable statements illustrate this indissoluble unity: Of the college he would say,

‘This college doesn’t have to survive: I’d sooner lock the doors and throw the key in the bushes than to be party to keeping it alive dishonorably.’

Of the person, he would say,

‘Necessity requires no moral compromises. A man never actually has to do but two things: die and face the judgment of a righteous God.’

Somehow, this tall, gaunt, fast walking man who seemed to push himself so mercilessly, made those two convictions stick in my mind. He did not hesitate to enforce them concretely in cases of student discipline. The son of a prominent minister in the Alabama Conference had a fight with a Negro on the streets of Greensboro a few years before I entered as a student. He beat the Negro badly with a pool stick. Dr. Sledd ascertained the facts and promptly had the sheriff jail the student and saw to it that he spent a night in jail. Then he telephoned the boy’s father and notified him of the boy’s arrest and expulsion from the college and suggested that he come and get him. The extent of his cooperation with the wrathful father was in getting the boy out of jail and helping him leave town without criminal prosecution. Nor would he admit the young hothead next year! One afternoon, a half dozen boys hid in the gallery of the gymnasium to peep at the coeds practicing basketball. Billowing black bloomers and long black stockings and wrist length sleeves didn’t offer a too extensive visibility, but the boys of those days were grateful for small favors. Two of the President’s nephews from Virginia were among the peepers. Next morning at chapel, the President handled the matter in this terse fashion: Six young men sneaked into the gallery of the gymnasium to watch the coeds practice. That is not to happen again. Just how definitely do I mean that? This definitely; the man who does it again goes home on the next train! Everyone knew exactly that would happen, and thereafter, save on public occasions, no boy came near the gymnasium when the coeds were using it. Knowledge of the swift and inevitable penalties for misconduct meant that disciplinary problems hardly existed under the Sledd regime.”

In 1914, the Candler School of Theology was formed at Emory University. Sledd left the presidency of Southern University and became the first Professor of Greek and New Testament Literature and also served as librarian of this theology school. Sledd was to remain in this position until his death in March 16, 1939, almost one year after his eligibility for retirement in November 7, 1938. Also during this general time period, Sledd served on the Board of Public Instruction of Decatur County, for most of those years serving as the treasurer. We have further evidence for the reduction of salary during the depression, in that it is recorded in [1, p. 9] that Sledd’s salary had been reduced from a maximum of $4,000 to $3,200, a reduction of twenty percent. Here is a story told about Sledd’s continuing to maintain standards while at the Candler School of Theology, [1, p. 9].

“… a student who had begun the study of Greek in Sledd’s classes at Greensboro matriculated in Candler School of Theology and proposed to register for a reading course in Greek.

‘You will have to take an examination in grammar’

warned the austere professor. The candidate took said exam and came hopefully next day to get the verdict. Sledd looked up from his desk with the inimitable smile with which he usually greeted everyone and said,

‘Walter, you made forty on the exam, and I must tell you I am not in the least sorry. You will need to take the elementary course, and this time you must master it.’ ”

Here is another circumstance detailed in [1, pp. 14–15 ] with which Dr. Sledd had to struggle, while at the Candler School.

“Financial reverses that were to sap his energy for twenty years were added to this bereavement [ed., the death of his oldest son Andrew at age 16 in 1919 shortly after a high school track meet in which Andrew entered too many events, then developed malignant endocarditis] in quick succession. Seven children in the modest bungalow which the Sledds had managed to buy hardly left room for orderly living. An advantageous sale of the smaller house was negotiated and a more adequate home was contracted for. Everything was being done on a cost-plus basis, and before the interior of the new house was completed, the contractor presented receipted bills for $22,000! Dr. Sledd was dismayed, but was held by contract, and shouldered the debt, unpayable from a maximum salary of $4,000, to be reduced when depression struck by 20%. He took engagements that paid immediate honoraria in the effort to discharge his debts and was never free for the kind of writing that would have measured his exhaustive scholarship and honored the University that cut his salary by 20%. He lost his home under mortgage foreclosure and when its sale at auction was insufficient to discharge the unpaid balance of the mortgage, the mortgage holders took a deficiency judgment under an iniquitous Georgia statute, under the authority of which they took other real estate holdings and garnished Sledd’s reduced salary at the University. At the time he died in 1939, I wrote Mrs. Sledd to express interest in buying selections from his library. She was forced to reply, that only the insurance left her was exempt from the deficiency judgment above mentioned, and that furniture and books would have to be held under these claims.

‘So at present,’

she wrote,

‘I may not sell any of his books. Perhaps later I may be able to do so. I’d be only too glad to give them to you. I know it would please Mr. Sledd to know you had them.’ ”

Sledd was known within Methodist circles for his writings on religion. He wrote tracts on the Gospel of St. Mark, the Acts of the Apostles, and on various version of the Bible [The Bibles of the Churches]. He contributed regularly to the Adult Student and Teacher’s Magazine for thirty years and was also a member of the original committee for writing the New Testament portions of the Revised Standard Version of the Bible.

Apparently like our long time chair Dr. Simpson, Dr. Sledd wrote poetry. Barnett records in [1, p. 10] that the following poem was found on Sledd’s desk at Emory after his death.

“FAITH

I’m cast upon a troubled time;

Old roads seem blocked, new roads untried.

In doubt, I halt, but may not stand:

The forward urge possess me;

I must move on.

I want to know the right, the true, —

Some order of the scheme of things —

To be a part of some great plan

In which to lose, and losing, thus

To find myself.

What shall I do? I’ll thrust this want,

This voice from out the vast that speaks

In me larger, nobler terms

Than brutish self or dull despair,

And follow on.

‘And if I fail?’ I cannot fail:

In that answer the soul

I’ve found in effort to become, —

Which is itself becoming, — all

That I have dreamed.”

An interesting postscript to this appendix was provided to me in the form of e-mail correspondence with our alumni Professor John Neff (Ph.D. 1956) of Georgia Institute of Technology. He wrote me the following in August, 1994: Neff was recruited from Case Institute of Technology to join the Department of Mathematics at Georgia Tech in 1961 by none other than Dr. Marvin Sledd, who happened to be a son of Andrew Sledd!

“Andrew Sledd’s son, Marvin, was chair at Tech from 1957 to 1962, and, in fact, hired me in 1961. I thought the statue between Peabody and Sledd Halls was Sledd, but discovered in 1992 that it was Murphree. We stopped off between Walt Disney World and Atlanta just after Christmas. I recall that the late Marvin Sledd did not take kindly to my casual remark that the hand of the statue often held an empty 12 oz. beer bottle. A statue of Kosziusko in Cleveland, Ohio, across from the Case Inst., also held an empty beer bottle, thanks to Case Students. …

More on Marvin Sledd. He told me his father rode in the lead wagon of a mule train, when the University moved from Lake City to Gainesville. He had a shotgun in his lap, because the Lake City people were mad when they lost the University. I think I have seen a picture of this wagon. Marvin’s mother was a Candler, from the family who acquired Coca Cola last century. Perhaps this made it easier for father Andrew to leave Gainesville for a theology professorship at Emory. I think Marvin was born here and told me of seeing downtown Atlanta in flames in the great fire of 1917. Marvin had an undergraduate degree (in Engineering) from Emory before World War II, he served in the Marine Corps during the war and came to Tech probably about 1951, after getting a PhD from Eric Reissner at MIT after the war.”

References

Barnett, Albert, Andrew Sledd—His Life and Work, Candler School of Theology, Emory University, 1956.
Proctor, Samuel and Langley, Wright, Gator History: A Pictorial History of the University of Florida, South Star Publishing, Gainesville, Florida, 1986.
Osborn, George Coleman, John James Tigert–American Educator, University of Florida Press, 1974.

Chapter 3: The Early History: 1905–1911

References

Appendix A: Dean John R. Benton Remembered

Appendix B: What Became of Andrew Sledd?

References

Contact Department of Mathematics

Department of Mathematics Menu

CLAS Resources

CLAS Information