South Mountaineer Volume 03, Issue 02

              JAe South Mountaineer.
Volume 3
MARCH, 1935
Number 2
Published by The Lehigh Alumni Council, Lehigh University, Bethlehem, Pa.
£ /oo
0  80
X5O0
jh
t   \
{■400-
V
tZOO   Q
o
H
z:
HI
Q
CO
rt  I
/
0
v
10
a:
J
1
ID
E
A
r
M
400
~Key -
Faculty ■«>■
Students •—'
"*"?
**.      J
7
ZOO
'jmi
1 M 1
V
1111^
1111
+++t
1111
is
ii 11„
1111
-H-4-+-
i l l I
Mil,
Mil
1
W
College   Year
Where Do We Go From Here?
EVERY Lehigh man naturally thinks of Lehigh in terms of
his own experience there: The friends, the personalities of
the faculty, the college life, the student escapades, etc. We
seldom stop to realize that Lehigh is an American institution—
a national tradition. One of the very earliest technical schools
in the country, she has for seventy years played a virile, dominant part in the great pageant of America's industrial evolution.
This is no idle boast; it is a plain, unvarnished fact, recognized
by the outside world more fully than by us, because our affection
for Lehigh, the college, clouds our perception of Lehigh, the
institution.
Thus, Merriman, Harding, Chandler, Ringer, Richards, Klein,
Lambert, Franklin, Miller, Palmer, Stoughton, Carothers—to
us, they are old friends, revered teachers; but to the world of
education they were and are the outstanding leaders; men who
have blazed the trail, made educational history. Their students
have literally shaped the destiny of America; they have dominated industries—steel, coal, construction, electricity, mining,
transportation, communication; they have achieved national
prominence in the sciences and professions. To us, they are old
class-mates and college friends; to the outside world they are
the creators and leaders of America's industrial empire. This,
too, is not biased opinion. A tabulation of the graduates of any
college of comparable size who have made significant contributions to the development of industry, business or science, can
be matched by Lehigh with a list of two or three times as many
men of equal or greater recognized prominence. Such a comparison demonstrates that no mere accident produced such men but
rather the sound philosophy and the steadfast adherence to invariable standards that has brought Lehigh from an inconspicuous beginning at "scratch" through seventy years of inspiring
progress to the very front rank of the world's universities.
THE CURVE of Lehigh's development has climbed steadily up-
ward year by year. And why ? Because those men, teachers and
alumni, have ploughed back the fruits of their labors. Part of
the renown that came to those great teachers; part of the material rewards that came to those grateful alumni has been '' put
back into the business" with a devotion to the ideal that is
Lehigh unsurpassed by any college, large or small, American
or foreign.
Today, there are unmistakable signs that the curve of Lehigh's
growth, which has climbed steadily upward for seventy years,
is tending to flatten. If you can contemplate this prospect with
equanimity, read no further. But if your instinct rebels at the
thought of Lehigh halting in the march of higher education,
then read these signs:
1. In his last annual address to the alumni, President Richards
frankly admitted that Lehigh has been obliged to "mark time" for the
past year or two. Although it is pleasing to know that the University
is operating without a deficit, it is disconcerting to realize that progress
has ceased. A college, like a business, cannot *'mark time" for long
without slipping behind the procession.
2. Of 6,500 "active" alumni, only 1,525 supported the Alumni Association last year by paying all or even part of their dues. Of this 1,525,
only 432 contributed something over and above their dues to apply toward the University's welfare. Ten years ago, more than half of the
"active" alumni were contributing regularly. In the past four years,
the total annual contributions have dropped from $108,000 to $23,000.
In view of economic conditions and other factors this decrease in dollars is not nearly as serious as the decrease in the number of contributors.
3. We are forced to recognize that inevitably the men who have been
the "backbone" of every alumni enterprise for the past twenty years
are thinning out. If the curve of Lehigh's development is to continue
ascending, new "wheel-horses" must take the vacant places. Who these
men will be, nobody knows. But they will never be discovered unless
each man of us revives in himself and in his Lehigh friends an active,
aggressive interest in our college and its future.
4. When Dr. Richards was invited to accept the Presidency of Lehigh
in 1922, his first consideration was to ascertain what kind of support
could be expected from the alumni. He realized that he could not
carry out any worthwhile program without the hearty support, moral
and financial, of the alumni. Dr. Richards has had splendid support
from the alumni during the past twelve years. Do you think that he
would have taken the job if we had had to tell him that only 7 per
cent of our alumni contribute to the support of the college?
In reflecting on these points, let it be clear that the securing
of funds is distinctly and decidedly a secondary consideration.
Lehigh could survive without alumni contributions but she cannot survive without alumni interest. And she cannot continue
her steady growth in prestige and influence unless each of us
who believes in her as an institution and an ideal will "plough
back" our little share as an investment in her future.
Lehigh was a unique institution when it was founded in 1865.
It is unique among the colleges of today. You and I know, first
hand, the kind of a college that Lehigh is. Do you believe that
the country needs that kind of a college ? That industry, business
and society need the kind of men that Lehigh has always produced? Or are we willing that Lehigh should settle into the
rut of mediocrity and become "just another college"?
We are proud, and justifiably so, of what Lehigh is and has
been. Shall we be as proud of what Lehigh is twenty years hence,
or shall we find ourselves ashamed, in 1955, that our University
has not kept its place of leadership ?
The choice is ours—yours and mine.