{"id":35,"date":"2023-03-23T17:46:36","date_gmt":"2023-03-23T17:46:36","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/digitaleditions.library.dal.ca\/livesofdalv2\/chapter\/carleton-stanleys-kingdom-dalhousie-1933-1938\/"},"modified":"2023-03-28T18:40:50","modified_gmt":"2023-03-28T18:40:50","slug":"carleton-stanleys-kingdom-dalhousie-1933-1938","status":"publish","type":"chapter","link":"https:\/\/digitaleditions.library.dal.ca\/livesofdalv2\/chapter\/carleton-stanleys-kingdom-dalhousie-1933-1938\/","title":{"raw":"Carleton Stanley's Kingdom: Dalhousie 1933-1938","rendered":"Carleton Stanley’s Kingdom: Dalhousie 1933-1938"},"content":{"raw":"Business, the professions, influence the universities. Stanley\u2019s standards. The Medical Faculty and the Public Health Clinic. Angus L. Macdonald, Dalhousie law professor, premier of Nova Scotia. The 1935 Dalhousie Act. Stanley deposes the registrar. Dalhousie students as middle-class survivors. European affairs impinge on Dalhousie. Death of MacKenzie.<\/strong>\r\n\r\nThe Commercial Undermining of Liberal Education<\/strong>\r\nBy the mid-1950s every college and university, in or out of Nova Scotia, was at grips with a problem that bore in upon them with pressure inexorable: the increasingly commercial test of old and tried intellectual values. Commerce cared little for Coleridge or Kant, and what was irrelevant to commerce and business began, increasingly, to seem to be so elsewhere. Thus the intellectual values of western culture came under attack, and in an insidious form, by being made to seem unimportant to life, living, and progress.\r\n\r\nThe old core of the university was Arts and Science and the universities had accommodated professional schools with some reluctance. At Dalhousie the Law Faculty was started with a Munro professorship in 1883, and then in 1911 came the duty, as it seemed to Dalhousie, of having to take on Medicine and Dentistry, because there was no one else to do it. Robert Hutchins, president of the University of Chicago from 1928 to 1945, in The Higher Learning in America maintained that the only reason for including professional schools in a university was the influences that Arts and Science might bring to the dreariness of the professional disciplines:\r\n
\r\n
Vocationalism leads, then, to triviality and isolation; it debases the course of study and the staff. It deprives the university of its only excuse for existence, which is to provide a haven where the search for truth may go on unhampered by utility or pressure for \u201cresults.\u201d[footnote]For Hutchins\u2019s view, see Robert Hutchins, The Higher Learning in America (New Haven 1936), pp. 42-3.[\/footnote]<\/div><\/blockquote>\r\nArchibald MacMechan would have agreed. He pointed out in the midst of Dalhousie\u2019s Million Dollar campaign of 1920 that the university\u2019s growth was owing to the accretion of professional schools; while these were important even essential acquisitions, there had been \u201cno corresponding growth in the original Arts departments, which gave Dalhousie her standards and her reputation.\u201d A university of seven hundred students in 1920 with one solitary professor of history, one of modern languages, and one in mathematics, was starved.[footnote]MacMechan\u2019s criticism of Arts funding is in Morning Chronicle, 14 Sept. 1920, with supporting editorial comment.[\/footnote]\u00a0There was some improvement in the 1920s with modest reinforcement from King\u2019s in 1923, but the point was more relevant in 1930, with Dalhousie\u2019s registration running high (838 in 1928-9) and going higher (902 in 1929-30).\r\n\r\nPresident MacKenzie, scientist that he was, effortlessly made room at Dalhousie for Medicine and Dentistry, and found no intellectual difficulties in doing so. His problems were financial, and institutional, in getting Dalhousie\u2019s research criteria accepted by a conservative medical community. Atlee\u2019s appointment was a good example. Some of MacKenzie\u2019s fellow scientists thought the new sciences in medicine were not very good science, and were being built up at the cost of more worthy research. Humanities professors such as Carleton Stanley would find it still more difficult to appreciate the needs of medicine. Stanley was interested in science, especially biology. One of his more quixotic academic adventures was trying to establish an honours course in Greek and biology; the students would read Aristotle\u2019s science in Greek, and slowly work their way to the present day. The biologists managed to defeat it. A proper science course could not be built around the history of science; it had to be done around modern research, techniques, apparatus, and outlook.[footnote]F. Ronald Hayes, \u201cTwo Presidents, Two Cultures, and Two Wars: A Portrait of Dalhousie as a Microcosm of Twentieth-Century Canada,\u201d Dalhousie Review 54, no. 3 (Autumn 1974), pp. 405-17<\/a>. Hayes was appointed to Dalhousie in place of Gowanloch in 1930; he saw something of MacKenzie\u2019s, and all of Stanley\u2019s and Kerr\u2019s presidencies.[\/footnote] MacKenzie, who had in his time been well out on the cutting edge of physics research, knew that; Carleton Stanley didn\u2019t. Stanley aimed in other directions. His outlook, with a big intellectual range, is set out in his annual report for 1940-1, from his 1941 convocation address:\r\n
\r\n
But I do call university graduates illiterate who have not read, and who show no likelihood of reading later... at least some of the books which on one side or another give a man some inkling of the fabric of European civilisation. On the side of history, politics, law, for example, a man is illiterate who has not read Thucydides\u2019\u00a0History<\/em>, Aristotle\u2019s\u00a0Politics<\/em>, Hugo de Groot\u2019s\u00a0Law of Nations<\/em>, Guizot\u2019s\u00a0History of Civilization in Europe<\/em>, Bryce\u2019s\u00a0Holy Roman Empire<\/em>, and at least some of the work of Maitland or Vinogradoff on jurisprudence.[footnote]Stanley\u2019s 1941 convocation address is in President\u2019s Report, 1940-1, p. 80.[\/footnote]<\/div><\/blockquote>\r\nCarleton Stanley\u2019s own major work was on Matthew Arnold, published by the University of Toronto Press in 1938. In\u00a0Culture and Anarchy<\/em>\u00a0(1869), Arnold described the middle class as Philistines, honest doers but not thinkers, with no real appreciation of arts and letters. Stanley, like Arnold, was trying to re-establish the authority of older disciplines which he now felt were in jeopardy. In some ways Stanley resembled Arnold\u2019s description of Oxford, a university Stanley knew well, \u201cwhispering from her towers the last enchantments of the middle Age[s]... Home of lost causes, and forsaken beliefs, and unpopular names, and impossible loyalties!\u201d[footnote]The Arnold quotation is from the preface to Arnold\u2019s Essay in Criticism First Series (1865).[\/footnote]\r\n\r\n[caption id=\"attachment_200\" align=\"alignnone\" width=\"394\"]\"Photograph<\/a> Carleton Stanley about 1936, President of Dalhousie, 1931-45: \u201ca well-read mind, a versatile intelligence, deployed with energy.\u201d[\/caption]\r\n\r\nStruggling to Raise Standards<\/strong>\r\nStanley set out to reform some Dalhousie practices that he regarded as pernicious. The first was admitting students with incomplete matriculation, which they would make up during the next years. He discovered that one-quarter of Dalhousie\u2019s undergraduates had not completed matriculation, and many of them had been at Dalhousie three, four, or even five years. At his first meeting with the Arts Faculty in September 1931, he appointed a committee to study Dalhousie\u2019s curriculum. They reported in February 1932, recommending that students take all of Dalhousie\u2019s required classes, including make-up matriculation ones, before being allowed to take any electives. The committee\u2019s second recommendation, with more serious implications, was that the forthcoming 1932-3 calendar carry the prescription that English and five others of the eight matriculation subjects be required for admission to Dalhousie. \u201cIt is hoped,\u201d the committee added, \u201cthat in the near future complete matriculation required in eight subjects will be adhered to.\u201d But on motion of the registrar, Murray Macneill, that was deleted.[footnote]Letter from Carleton Stanley to F.W. Patterson, 24 Apr. 1933, President\u2019s Office Fonds, \u201cAcadia 1921-1963,\u201d UA-3, Box 63, Folder 2, Dalhousie University Archives; Carleton Stanley to W.N. Wickwire, 17 Dec. 1938, President's Office Fonds, \u201cCampaigns 1939,\u201d UA-3, Dalhousie University Archives; Faculty of Arts Minutes, 4, 19 Apr., 29 Sept. 1931; 18 Feb. 1932, Dalhousie University Archives.[\/footnote]\r\n\r\nHere lay a developing quarrel between the president and the registrar. Stanley did not know Nova Scotia; Murray Macneill did. Of the thirty-five members of the Arts Faculty, assistant professor rank and above, twenty-six were from outside Nova Scotia. That had many advantages, in the style, knowledge, and experience of the professors; but it did have some disadvantages. Murray Macneill was a Maritimer, born in Maitland, Nova Scotia, brought up in St. John\u2019s, Newfoundland, and in Saint John, New Brunswick. He recognized what some others did not, that there were good reasons for students to come to Dalhousie with incomplete matriculation. It was not just students finding an easy back door into university, though there were some of those; it was because relatively few high schools in Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Newfoundland, or Prince Edward Island could properly prepare students in Grade 11 to pass provincial matriculation examinations. Macneill\u2019s was the position of George Trueman, president of Mount Allison (1923-45), who as a boy had been the victim of just such a school system. Trueman had grown up in Point de Bute, New Brunswick, near the Nova Scotia border, within sight of the Tantramar marshes. Trueman told Stanley in March 1934, \u201cin this sparsely settled country, any system that denies opportunity to those who have not been able to attend good high schools... is wrong.\u201d Outside of Halifax, the Dalhousie Faculty of Arts and Science recognized only a few good high schools in Nova Scotia capable of solid matriculation work.[footnote]Arts Minutes, 6 Mar. 1934, Dalhousie University Archives; letter from Trueman to Carleton Stanley, 22 Mar. 1934, President\u2019s Office Fonds, \u201cMount Allison University 1923-1945,\u201d UA-3, Box 285, Folder 6, Dalhousie University Archives. John Reid, Mount Allison: A History, to 1963, vol. II: 1914-1963 (Toronto 1984), pp. 141-2, has a pertinent elaboration of this point. Officially accredited schools for Grade 11 and Grade 12, outside of Halifax, were Kentville, New Glasgow, Glace Bay, Yarmouth, and Pictou. Some others were accredited for Grade 11 only.[\/footnote]\r\n\r\nNevertheless, in 1933 the faculty agreed that beginning in September 1934 the Dalhousie minimum entrance requirement would be English, Algebra, a foreign language, plus four other matriculation subjects. These new rules would be sent to all Maritime provinces high schools and to Newfoundland schools. In this tightening of rules, Dalhousie wanted to carry the other colleges with her; but although there was talk of doing so, only St. Francis Xavier followed Dalhousie\u2019s lead. Stanley complained bitterly that some colleges, notably Acadia, were pouring graduates out into the school system as teachers without requiring either Latin or mathematics or a foreign language of any kind for a BA. What kind of teachers would such students make?[footnote]Arts Minutes, 4 Apr. 1933, Dalhousie University Archives; letter from Carleton Stanley to R.H. Coats and J. Robbins of Dominion Bureau of Statistics, 23 Mar. 1937, private and confidential, President\u2019s Office Fonds, \u201cConference of Canadian Universities, 1936-1939,\u201d UA-3, Box 256, Folder 3, Dalhousie University Archives.[\/footnote]\r\n\r\nDalhousie\u2019s restrictions on admission had an effect on enrolment, which dropped from 1,015 in 1931-2 to 846 in 1934-5. Mount Allison\u2019s enrolment stayed fairly consistent at about 400 between 1930 and 1935. That was owing, according to Stanley, to blatant recruiting; Mount Allison hired six young women as canvassers, who each had a car and were given five dollars for every student they secured. Acadia was alleged to have matched that with six dollars. The president of the University of New Brunswick, C.C. Jones, grumbled to Stanley in October 1934 about both colleges; one student had telegraphed President Jones, \u201cAm offered $100 by Mt. Allison, and $100 by Acadia. What do you offer?\u201d Jones replied, \u201cIf you are fully matriculated, we offer you the best education we can give you.\u201d That was not always good enough, UNB\u2019s registration was down 15 per cent in 1934-5, and according to Jones, there were many at both Acadia and Mount Allison whom UNB would not have admitted. Jones congratulated Dalhousie on doing what it had done, refurbishing standards, risking enrolment.[footnote]Letter from Carleton Stanley to Clarke, 29 Oct. 1934, President\u2019s Office Fonds, \u201cProfessor Fred Clarke, 1931-1945,\u201d UA-3, Box 253, Folder 6, Dalhousie University Archives. Clarke was with the Department of Education, McGill University. Letter from Carleton Stanley to Governors, 27 Oct. 1934, confidential, reporting conversation with C.C. Jones, 26 Oct. 1934, President's Office Fonds, \u201cBoard of Governors Correspondence,\u201d UA-3, Box 176, Folder 2, Dalhousie University Archives.[\/footnote]\r\n\r\nPrivately Stanley had much fault to find with Dalhousie. The university had no economics professor; Stanley did not consider W.R. Maxwell at King\u2019s, with a Harvard MA, up to standard. Dalhousie had no professor of Greek, nor of German, although both subjects were taught; he thought the staff in mathematics weak (the head of the department was Murray Macneill); J.G. Adshead, with a first-class degree from Cambridge, was appointed in 1927 (King\u2019s), and Charles Walmsley also from Cambridge in 1929. Both were good lecturers, Adshead in particular. But neither were research-minded; distant frontiers had little appeal for them, and they swung easily into teaching routines under Murray Macneill. Stanley thought the Department of English, now that MacMechan was gone, no better.[footnote]A.J. Tingley has a brief, useful history, Mathematics at Dalhousie (1992).[\/footnote]\r\n\r\nHowever, as the result of submissions made by MacKenzie and Pearson in 1931, the Carnegie Foundation gave $125,000 in 1933 to endow a chair in geology. In 1932 Stanley appointed George Vibert Douglas, aged forty, a big, vibrant bear of a man, noisy, open-hearted and energetic, a Canadian from McGill, who had taught at Harvard, and had been on Shackleton\u2019s last Antarctic expedition in 1921. Douglas had been geologist for the Rio Tinto copper mine when the depression closed it down. \u201cIt would be hard to find,\u201d wrote L.C. Graton of Harvard recommending Douglas, \u201ca man more charged with dynamic energy, constructive ideas, absolute loyalty and concentrated sunshine.\u201d Douglas was Stanley\u2019s man from the day of his appointment to Dalhousie. Douglas stirred up the campus. One student recalled his first lecture in Geology 1 in 1932; Douglas could be heard coming, clumping down the hall in his walking boots, starting to lecture as he came through the door. He liked to throw open a window, fall or winter. He smoked a gnarled pipe, loaded with a Canadian tobacco called \u201cOld Chum,\u201d which he lit with long Eddy matches that were carried in a long waterproof cylinder. He was a character, knew it, and revelled in it. He was also a one-man department, giving eight separate courses. He was a good lecturer; if his science was occasionally rusty, the students liked him for his forthrightness and generosity, his ebullient air of imperturbable cheerfulness.\r\n\r\nStanley wanted to appoint new men in whom he could rejoice; with him every new Dalhousie vacancy was a golden opportunity to find the best man available. Stanley saw Dalhousie, and many another Canadian university, cursed with the results of appointments made in a hurry: \u201cthe landscape is littered with misfits and experiments that never flowered or even burgeoned.\u201d He was not going to make that mistake. Moreover, he said, \u201cI must get people to reinforce my own plans.\u201d Those included trying to raise Dalhousie\u2019s standards. He was persuaded by his own experience, and perhaps that of his father-in-law, W.J. Alexander, that the Dalhousie graduates of 1885 to 1905 were far above the current crop. \u201cNot only were these men and women well educated,\u201d said Stanley, \u201cbut they nearly all had some nobility of soul. At least one could say that they formed a little nucleus of public conscience in the communities in which they lived.\u201d[footnote]For G.V. Douglas, see letter from L.C. Graton, of Harvard Laboratory of Mining Geology to Carleton Stanley, 4 Dec. 1931, UA-3, Box 90, Folder 12, Dalhousie University Archives. There is an excellent departmental history of geology by G.C. Milligan, who knew Douglas well, On the Rocks: the Training of Geologists at Dalhousie (Dalhousie 1995), pp. 26-34. Also interview with D.H. McNeill ('33), 6 Dec. 1995., Peter B. Waite Fonds, MS-2-718, Box 3, Folder 38, Dalhousie University Archives. Stanley\u2019s idea about appointments is suggested in letter from Carleton Stanley to Clarke, 26 Apr. 1935, President\u2019s Office Fonds, \u201cProfessor Fred Clarke, 1931-1945,\u201d UA-3, Box 253, Folder 6, Dalhousie University Archives. For comments on the graduates of his father-in-law\u2019s time, see letter from Carleton Stanley to Sir Edward Beatty, 15 Sept. 1935, Carleton Stanley Fonds, Box 1, Folder 32, Dalhousie University Archives; Carleton Stanley to Chas. A. Maxwell, Salt Springs, Pictou County, 17 Dec. 1937, Carleton Stanley Fonds, Box 1, Folder 40, Dalhousie University Archives.[\/footnote]\r\n\r\nStanley\u2019s most outspoken public criticism was against the Nova Scotian (and Canadian) public schools, against weak teachers and bad textbooks, against the spurious pedagogy that in his view encouraged both. He sent his own son to Rothesay Collegiate, a private school in New Brunswick, in 1934. The printed annual reports of Dalhousie presidents are not noted for their charm or intellectual vigour; some, like President MacKenzie\u2019s, seem almost to have been deliberately pedestrian and low-key, as if the secret of successful development was understatement. Stanley\u2019s annual reports were quite the reverse - vigorous, trenchant, forthright; they called spades spades. He would quote Lucretius,\u00a0De Rerum Natura<\/em>, to explain why,\r\n
\r\n
\r\n\r\n...Medio de fonte leporum\r\nSurgit amari aliquid quod in ipsis floribus angat.\r\n\r\n...In the midst of a fountain of delights\r\nComes up bitterness that chokes their very beauties.\r\n\r\n<\/div><\/blockquote>\r\nHis annual report for 1933-4 is a case in point, condemning public school education and all its works, and not sparing universities either:\r\n
\r\n
But if so many teachers in the secondary schools are illiterate, and have to be spoonfed by pretentious editors, whose fault is that? Are the universities forever to be permitted to rail at the schools for sending them students who are dunces... ? If the teachers of French in our secondary schools cannot read a sentence of French so that a Frenchman would recognise the words, whose fault is that? Has it to do with the vicious importation [from the United States] of a certain kind of pedagogy which says openly, blatantly and continuously, \u201cit matters not whether teachers know what they teach, so long as they know how to teach it\u201d? This is equivalent to claiming that it does not matter whether you know\u00a0what<\/em>\u00a0to feed a baby so long as you know\u00a0how<\/em>\u00a0to feed it. Get the proper bottle and the proper nipple, and it does not matter whether you fill the bottle with cow\u2019s milk or arsenic, especially if you have taken a course in nutritional psychology.<\/div><\/blockquote>\r\nThat was hard-hitting, but he won approval in New York at the Carnegie Foundation. James Bertram congratulated Stanley on his courage and force, and showed the address to one of the Carnegie trustees who said, \u201cThis is a fine blast, and I\u2019m sure President Stanley is right.\u201d Stanley sent Bertram\u2019s comment to F.B. McCurdy, chairman of the board\u2019s Finance Committee, to counter criticisms the report had, not surprisingly, earned for Stanley and Dalhousie. McCurdy wrote back, \u201cAm glad to read the above comment, though regretful that his important approval could be purchased only at the cost of so much local good will.\u201d Stanley was confident there was not much ill will. \u201cI don\u2019t believe it exists,\u201d he told McCurdy confidently, \u201coutside the minds of a few. And I have strong evidence that the few grow fewer.\u201d But he was wrong. By 1938 and a few more blasts, Stanley himself admitted that Dalhousie\u2019s only friend among the secondary schools of Nova Scotia was the Halifax Ladies College. There were times when Stanley could usefully have remembered Sir John A. Macdonald\u2019s old saw, that one caught more flies with honey than with vinegar.[footnote]Titus Lucretius Cams, De Rerum Natura, Book iv, lines 1, 133; Dalhousie University, President\u2019s Report for the Year July 1st, 1933-June 30th, 1934, pp. 5-6. On sending his son to Rothesay, Stanley wrote to Allan Gillingham, a Newfoundland Rhodes scholar then at New College, Oxford: \u201cHalifax had become completely impossible. The teachers are illiterate women struggling with classes of fifty-five and sixty, even in high school grades.\u201d Letter from Carleton Stanley to Gillingham, 19 June 1935, President\u2019s Office Fonds, \u201cAllan Gillingham 1932-1944,\u201d UA-3, Box 345, Folder 3, Dalhousie University Archives. Gillingham became professor of classics and German as well as secretary of the faculty of Memorial College. See photograph no. 7 in Malcolm Macleod, A Bridge Built Halfway: A History of Memorial University College, 1925-1950 (Montreal and Kingston 1990), after p. xvi. Letter from Carleton Stanley to R.J. Messender, Bridgetown, NS, 8 Aug. 1939, President\u2019s Office Fonds, \u201cCampaigns, 1939,\u201d UA-3, Dalhousie University Archives; letter from James Bertram to Carleton Stanley, 18 Sept. 1934, \u201cBoard of Governors Correspondence,\u201d UA-3, Box 176, Folder 2, Dalhousie University Archives; McCurdy\u2019s note on it is 26 Sept. 1934, with Stanley\u2019s rejoinder the next day. F.B. McCurdy (1875-1952) was head of a Halifax financial firm and had been on the Dalhousie board since September 1928. He was MP for Colchester, 1911-21, and minister of public works, 1920-1. About the Halifax Ladies College, Stanley said: \u201cIt is the only remaining friend to us among the Secondary Schools.\u201d Letter from Carleton Stanley to J. McGregor Stewart, 4 Mar. 1938, Carleton Stanley Fonds, Box 2, Folder 79, Dalhousie University Archives. Stewart was at this point chairman of the Board of Governors.[\/footnote]\r\n\r\nBy 1934 Dalhousie\u2019s financial position was better than many colleges, though it was serious enough. The depression had cut dividend and bond income, but Dalhousie\u2019s investments had been so well placed that losses on capital were slight compared to others. That was the good side. The bad side was current debt. The new gymnasium, built in 1931-2, cost $150,000, much of it borrowed, and it added substantially to Dalhousie\u2019s existing debt. As of 30 June 1938 the accumulated deficit was $201,170. How was one to prevent it rising further? McGill University had reduced its academic salaries by 10 per cent. Stanley had opposed that, and neither Pearson nor his successor Hector McInnes had suggested it. Mclnnes thought it could not be done without the consent of the professors. There was talk in 1936 of a campaign, but no real spirit for it. J.L. Hetherington, a member of the board, told R.B. Bennett:\r\n
\r\n
The immediate Dalhousie constituency is somewhat lukewarm and suffering perhaps a bit from divided enthusiasm and an inferiority complex... it may be apparent to yourself that the staff is without personalities such as it had in former days. The Board, as well, unfortunately, is not conspicuous in leadership among its members, many of whom are now elderly men who have served their day.<\/div><\/blockquote>\r\nHector Mclnnes, chairman since 1932, was seventy-six and there were several other prominent members in their seventies. But to Bennett it was not so much a question of age as impossibility. \u201cI know of no means,\u201d he told Hetherington, \u201cby which you can raise half a million dollars within the next few years.\u201d[footnote]See President\u2019s Reports, 1933-4 et seq., especially 1938-9 which has a consolidated balance sheet as of 30 June 1939, Dalhousie University Archives. For Bennett, see UNB Archives, R.B. Bennett Papers, vol. 908, no. 2, 569337-9, J.L. Hetherington to Bennett, 6 May 1936; Bennett to Hetherington, 9 May 1936.[\/footnote]\r\n\r\nThe crunch was at the Medical Faculty. Its 1929-30 income was $90,611, but its expenses were $20,000 more. Of that deficit, $15,000 was incurred by the Public Health Clinic, which had been running annual deficits on almost the same scale for the past few years. The endowment needed to give $20,000 additional annual income was, at 4.5 per cent, $444,444. New money like that was nowhere in sight.[footnote]Income and Expenditures for 1929-30, dated 14 Nov. 1930, confidential, President\u2019s Office Fonds, \u201cMedical Faculty, 1921-1931,\u201d UA-3, Box 279, Folder 1, Dalhousie University Archives.[\/footnote]\r\n\r\nThe head of the Public Health Clinic was the assistant dean of medicine, W.H. Hattie, who really functioned as dean. The dean himself, Dr. John Stewart, CBE, had been in the office since 1912 and had had an honourable career: assistant under Lister in Edinburgh, an able surgeon in Halifax, then head of Canadian Stationary Hospital No. 7 in the Great War. But by the end of the 1920s he was old and tired; Hattie was doing all the work, Stewart just signed the forms. Hattie was loyal, modest, and generous; his specialty was mental illness. He used to tell fourth-year medical students, many interested in surgery, that it might be ten years before they would see a patient needing a gall bladder operation, but they would see a psychiatric patient in their first hour of practice. In December 1931 Hattie died in harness; Stewart resigned six months later.[footnote]Carleton Stanley\u2019s funeral oration of 7 Dec. 1931 (for W.H. Hattie), President's Office Fonds, \u201cWilliam Harop Hattie,\u201d UA-3, Box 93, Folder 5, Dalhousie University Archives. Pearson complained of the attendance at Hattie\u2019s funeral. Of 1,075 staff and students, there were between 125 and 150 people present. Pearson thought this was too few. Stanley suggested that every year Dalhousie would gradually grow to seem less like the compact community that Pearson had once known. (Pearson to Carleton Stanley, 7 Dec. 1931; Carleton Stanley to Pearson, 12 Dec. 1931, President's Office Fonds, \u201cWilliam Harop Hattie,\u201d UA-3, Box 93, Folder 5, Dalhousie University Archives.) For Hattie and mental illness, see R.O. Jones, \u201cEarly Recognition of Mental Illness,\u201d Nova Scotia Medical Bulletin 34 (1955), p. 324.[\/footnote]\r\n\r\nDean H.G. \u201cPat\u201d Grant and the Medical Faculty<\/strong>\r\nA new and active dean of medicine was now imperative. In November 1931 there was even consideration given to shutting down the Schools of Medicine and Dentistry altogether. President Stanley\u2019s position was straightforward. New as he was to the scene, having acquired as yet little authority with the board, he nevertheless took this position:\r\n
\r\n
You can\u2019t cut limbs off the community like that without taking the community into your counsels. Since 1868, by something like a succession of miracles, you have maintained a Medical School here, and for many years a Dental School. You say the public is indifferent and has never offered you support. Have you let the public know that you need support?<\/div><\/blockquote>\r\nPerhaps, said Stanley, Nova Scotians think that the private endowments of Carnegie and Rockefeller, so talked about in the early 1920s, signified that Dalhousie did not need public money. Stanley concluded that through drift and the absence of any strong dean, the Public Health Clinic had been allowed to go on haemorrhaging the university.[footnote]Letter from Carleton Stanley to A.A. Dysart (premier, 1935-40), 5 May 1939, recounting events of November 1931, Presdient's Office Fonds, \u201cProvincial Government of New Brunswick, 1935-1947,\u201d UA-3, Box 271, Folder 7, Dalhousie University Archives.[\/footnote]\r\n\r\nThe board girded itself up and faced the future, carrying its Medicine and its Dentistry burdens as best it could. And they found a new dean - a Nova Scotian, Harry Goudge Grant, forty-three years old, who had taken his MD from Dalhousie in 1912. He and Atlee had done postgraduate work in London together. Grant\u2019s specialty was preventive medicine, and he had become director of county health work in Virginia where he was epidemiologist since 1926. Grant would stay as dean for the next twenty-two years.\r\n\r\nHarry Grant (he was always called \u201cPat\u201d) was very different from Stewart or Hattie. He had little of their paternalism. One of Grant\u2019s younger colleagues, Dr. H.L. Scammell, remembered being in Fredericton with him, interviewing UNB students for Dalhousie Medical School. Scammell was much struck by the obliquity of Grant\u2019s questions. How did they spend their summers? What did they work at? What games did they like to play? Grant was trying to elucidate their character. He was a great ideas man; he rather liked leaping at suggestions. As this was combined with a generous and incurable optimism, Grant would often promise more than he could deliver. But he would try anyway. He persuaded the faculty, rather against its will, to make the fourth year of medicine a clinical year.[footnote]H.B. Atlee, C.B. Stewart, and H.L. Scammell, \u201cHarry Goudge Grant 1889-1954,\u201d Nova Scotia Medical Bulletin 33 (1954), pp. 169-70; letter from Wilson G. Smillie, School of Public Health, Harvard University, to Carleton Stanley, 10 Mar. 1932, on Grant: \u201cExcellent judgment, fine mind, and would make you an excellent Dean.\u201d President's Office Fonds, \u201cHarry Goudge Grant,\u201d UA-3, Box 92, Folder 14, Dalhousie University Archives.[\/footnote]\r\n\r\nOf the income of the Medical Faculty for 1929-30, 41 per cent came from class fees. The cost of the whole faculty, per student, was $642. Income per Canadian student was about $180, American $320. It was not good arithmetic. Grant\u2019s first major exercise in December 1932 was to cut the 1933-4 budget of $71,000. He managed a 6 per cent cut, pointing out he did not think the faculty should be charged with a share of the cost of Shirreff Hall. He also reminded the board - it was neither the first nor the last time that a dean of medicine would find this threat useful - that \u201cOur Medical School is at present a class A medical school, and drastic economies within our various departments will undoubtedly result in our losing that status.\u201d\r\n\r\nFundamentally, Stanley was angry with the whole medical question. McGill thought it had the best medical school in Canada, but it had been overtaken by Toronto, where politicians understood what Montreal millionaires did not, \u201cthat a medical school requires a mint of money.\u201d Dalhousie\u2019s undertakings in medicine were not the \u201cgallant and courageous endeavours\u201d Stanley had heard them called. \u201cThey were blunders by ignorant and stupid people who wanted to make a show. On top of that we undertook a Public Health Centre.\u201d[footnote]President\u2019s Office Correspondence, A-575, \u201cFaculty of Medicine 1931-1945,\u201d Grant to Carleton Stanley , 8 Dec. 1932; A- 736, \u201cDugald MacGillivray, 1931-1938,\u201d Carleton Stanley to Macgillivray, 1 Apr. 1937.[\/footnote]\r\n\r\nThe clinic was the sore point with Stanley. President MacKenzie had warned the city in 1928 that Dalhousie would have to close it down if help were not forthcoming, but nothing was done about implementing the threat. In 1929 Hattie pointed out to the city what the clinic was and how important were its functions. The city opted for the happy thought that Dalhousie would not carry out its threat, that the clinic was needed for Dalhousie\u2019s own medical students. In part that surmise was correct.\r\n\r\nThe clinic\u2019s purpose was simple, its functions many. None of the Halifax hospitals had out-patient departments. Rich and middle-class patients could find and pay their own doctors; but the only place the poor could go had been, for nearly a century, the Halifax Visiting Dispensary. In 1924 the dispensary accepted Dalhousie\u2019s invitation to take space in the new Public Health Clinic, with out-patient doctors supplied by Dalhousie. The Public Health Clinic also provided free accommodation to the Halifax Welfare Bureau and a VD clinic for the provincial Department of Health. Opening on 1 November 1924, the clinic handled nearly seven thousand cases in its first year, and by 1930 that had more than doubled.\r\n\r\nGreat assistance in running the Public Health Clinic had come from the thirteen full-time nurses and one doctor of the Massachusetts-Halifax Health Commission. The commission, chaired by G.F. Pearson, had been an outgrowth of the Halifax explosion, but such outside philanthropy could not go on for ever. The commission announced that its work would end on 31 May 1928. From the thirteen full-time nurses the staff at the Public Health Clinic was reduced by 75 per cent.[footnote]See the speech of Premier Murray on laying the cornerstone of the Public Health Clinic in November 1922, Halifax Echo, 9 Nov. 1922. See also two articles: W.H. Hattie, \u201cPublic Health Clinic Correlates Preventive and Curative Practice,\u201d in The Modem Hospital 25, no. 2 (August 1925); and Dr. Franklin Royer, \u201cA method of teaching the public health point of view to the medical student,\u201d in Journal of the American Medical Association, 15 May 1926. In the Australian journal, Health (Sept. 1926), Dr. Royer raised the question of the medical profession\u2019s antipathy to public health. These are also in President\u2019s Office Fonds, \u201cPublic Health Clinic, 1926-1929,\u201d UA-3, Box 265, Folder 3, Dalhousie University Archives, and Halifax Mail, 25 Nov. 1926. For a modern review, see John G. Reid, \u201cHealth, Education, Economy: Philanthropic Foundations in the Atlantic Region in the 1920s and 1930s,\u201d Acadiensis 14, no. 1 (Autumn 1984), pp. 64-83.[\/footnote]\r\n\r\nThe running of the Public Health Clinic was now wholly in Dalhousie\u2019s lap. President MacKenzie was worried about what responsibilities Dalhousie should retain, and there was uncertainty in the minds of some of the Dalhousie governors. The Public Health Clinic, said Dugald Macgillivray, \u201cwas always draped with a good deal of mystery and individual possession by both Pearson and MacKenzie, and what it meant or was to mean in cost to Dalhousie never gripped us.\u201d That suggests some deliberate obfuscation by Pearson, a strong public health man, confident doubtless that in time the City of Halifax would be willing to shoulder its proper responsibilities.[footnote]Letter from Dugald Macgillivray to Carleton Stanley, 29 June 1933, from Annapolis Royal, President\u2019s Office Fonds, \u201cDugald Macgillivray, 1931-1938,\u201d UA-3, Box 310, Folder 3, Dalhousie University Archives. There is some evidence that G.F. Pearson arranged to have the Public Health Clinic established on the Dalhousie campus. William Buxton, \u201cPrivate Wealth and Public Health: Rockefeller Philanthropy, the Massachusetts Relief Commission and the Halifax Explosion,\u201d in Colin Howell and A. Ruffman, eds., Ground Zero: Perspectives on the 1917 Explosion in Halifax Harbour (Halifax 1994).[\/footnote]\r\n\r\nThere was no doubt that the teaching value of the clinic was considerable, with its great variety of out-patient cases. Hattie had devised a follow-up arrangement whereby the medical students would visit out-patients in their homes and thus see the environments that had nurtured TB, infant mortality, and other public health problems. Those visits were a revelation to many students. Nevertheless, Dalhousie was now paying for the clinic from its own money, and Hattie\u2019s efforts to get the city to pay for any of it were unavailing.\r\n\r\nHalifax for its part was struggling to get back on its own feet. After the explosion of 6 December 1917 the task of rebuilding the city was taken over by governmental and philanthropic boards. The Halifax Relief Commission was established by the Dominion government early in 1918 to provide permanent care for the injured and crippled, and to rebuild the shattered north end of Halifax and parts of Dartmouth. The city was going to be hard up for some time yet; its tax base had shrunk, some of it permanently, and swaths of property belonging to two governments, the armed services, educational institutions, churches, and cemeteries were wholly exempt from taxes. Thus Dalhousie\u2019s request to have the city fund the Public Health Clinic was put off as long as possible.[footnote]The history of this development has been admirably told in Janet F. Kitz, Shattered City: The Halifax Explosion and the Road to Recovery (Halifax 1989), pp. 125-212.[\/footnote]\r\n\r\nThis problem of the Public Health Clinic was the first thing Carleton Stanley encountered in September 1931. The Board of Governors recognized the importance of the clinic\u2019s work, but where could it find the money without adding to Dalhousie\u2019s burgeoning debt? Over the years Dalhousie had already contributed more than $100,000 to the clinic. It had done much to bring medical students face to face with health and preventive medicine as a social question. But as Dean Grant pointed out in a letter to the papers two years later, \u201cIt can be said without fear of contradiction that in no other place in the world is it [the medical care of the sick poor] done by a University.\u201d Carleton Stanley claimed that the knowledge so gained from the clinic had not done much public good, for \u201cthe slums that send us patients... are allowed to remain.\u201d[footnote]Board of Governors Minutes, 8 Sept. 1931; President\u2019s Office Correspondence, A-856, \u201cPublic Health Clinic, 1930-1943,\u201d Carleton Stanley to W.H. Hattie, 9 Sept. 1931; draft letter, Carleton Stanley to Hector Mclnnes, dated 9 Sept. 1932, probably for a submission to the Rockefeller Foundation.[\/footnote]\r\n\r\nThe president and the new dean of medicine went to New York in the autumn of 1932 to make an appeal to the Rockefeller Foundation for funding for a Department of Preventive Medicine. The City of Halifax was approached for $10,000 annually for the clinic; the best it could manage was $2,500. The Nova Scotia government was asked for $5,000 per annum, and it proved more generous. It happened that Dalhousie\u2019s professor of clinical surgery, Dr. G.H. Murphy, was elected in a 1929 by-election for Halifax County, and became minister of health in August 1930 in the Conservative government of Premier G.S. Harrington. That gave Dalhousie an entree. In February 1933, being finally persuaded of the importance to the province of public health, the Nova Scotia government offered $5,000 a year on condition that Dalhousie raise a like amount somewhere else. As Stanley told Dr. Murphy, \u201cthe help comes in the very nick of time.\u201d It allowed Dalhousie to show local support to Rockefeller. Dr. Alan Gregg of the Rockefeller Foundation came to Halifax in May 1933, and the upshot was that the Foundation offered a matching grant, up to $8,800 a year, for five years, to support a Department of Preventive Medicine, built around the work of the Public Health Clinic.[footnote]Letter from G.H. Murphy to Carleton Stanley, 10 Feb. 1933 (two letters); Carleton Stanley to G.H. Murphy, 11 Feb. 1933, President\u2019s Office Fonds, \u201cProvincial Governments, Nova Scotia 1920-1935,\u201d UA-3, Box 272, Folder 3, Dalhousie University Archives; letter from Norma Thompson to Carleton Stanley, 12 May 1933, President's Office Fonds, \u201cRockefeller Grant for Teaching in Public Health and Preventive Medicine, 1933-1942,\u201d UA-3, Box 353, Folder 4, Dalhousie University Archives.[\/footnote]\r\n\r\nThat was how the Public Health Clinic grew in the 1930s. This noble ambition, as Stanley put it in 1937, was supported by large gifts by Carnegie and Rockefeller, by the public conscience of Dalhousie, and, not least, by the generosity of the city\u2019s doctors, dozens of whom served the clinic for many years without reward. However, the new arrangements merely eased Dalhousie\u2019s financial problems with the clinic; the City of Halifax\u2019s $2,500 was a woeful example of underfunding.[footnote]Submission by Dalhousie [to City of Halifax], Feb. 1934; Stanley\u2019s address to aldermen and the Board of Health, 23 Feb. 1937, Presdient's Office Fonds, \u201cCity of Halifax, 1932-1964,\u201d UA-3, Box 253, Folder 4, Dalhousie University Archives.[\/footnote]\r\n\r\nWhen Angus L. Macdonald and the Liberals defeated the Harrington government in the provincial election of August 1933, Dean Grant, adroit and assiduous, made sure that the new minister of health, Dr. Frank Davis of Bridgewater, saw something of public health practices. Davis was a country doctor and \u201chad his eyes opened very wide,\u201d Stanley said, to see what other cities like Toronto did.[footnote]Letter from Carleton Stanley to Dr. Alan Gregg, 20 Oct. 1933, President's Office Fonds, \u201cRockefeller Foundation 1921-1941,\u201d UA-3, Dalhousie University Archives.[\/footnote]\r\n\r\nAngus L. Macdonald (1890-1954), the new premier, was born in Cape Breton, the gold medallist at St. Francis Xavier in 1914, and joined the Canadian army. After the war he took his LL.B. at Dalhousie in 1921, worked for the attorney general, and came to Dalhousie in 1924 as professor of law, teaching statutes and rules of their interpretation. He found $2,500 a year thin going for a man newly married, and resigned in 1930 to go into private practice, becoming leader of the opposition Liberal party that year. He was elected for Halifax South in the Liberal sweep of August 1933.[footnote]For Angus L. Macdonald see President's Office Fonds, \u201cAngus Lewis MacDonald,\u201d UA-3, Box 95, Folder 34, Dalhousie University Archives; J. Murray Beck, Politics of Nova Scotia, Volume Two 1896-1988 (Tantallon 1988), p. 166.[\/footnote]\r\n\r\nAngus L. was not Nova Scotia\u2019s first Roman Catholic premier, but he was the longest lived politically. With brains, vigour, and not a little fighting skill in the Assembly, he was soon unassailable. He needed it, for he had had a feud with Bishop Morrison of Antigonish over, university federation. Angus L. explained it confidentially to Carleton Stanley in 1937. The Antigonish\u00a0Casket<\/em>\u00a0in 1922 had argued that St. Francis Xavier should not join university federation. It was impossible to get anyone in the Antigonish diocese to answer the\u00a0Casket<\/em>\u00a0articles, so Angus L. wrote a dozen pro-federation articles from his desk at the Dalhousie Law School. The\u00a0Casket<\/em>\u00a0refused to publish them, so Angus L. sent them to the Sydney\u00a0Post<\/em>. The bishop did not forgive what he viewed as reckless freedom. Angus L. wanted to get rid of the Maritime degree-granting colleges in favour of one first-class university in Halifax, with a college for Catholics, one for Baptists, and so on. He still did in 1937; a university could have been created, he told Stanley, like a Canadian Princeton, instead of what the Maritimes ended up with in 1937 - thirteen colleges each with their graduates going forth into the world believing they were university-trained. What they had, said Angus L., was \u201conly about equivalent to a first-rate high school.\u201d[footnote]This interesting letter is Angus L. Macdonald to Carleton Stanley, 22 Feb. 1937, personal and confidential, Carleton Stanley Fonds, Box 1, Folder 36, Dalhousie University Archives.[\/footnote]\r\n\r\nThe 1935 Dalhousie Act<\/strong>\r\nThe connections between Dalhousie and the government allowed it to seek a new act to bring its charter up to date. Opening up an institutional act is never entirely without risk. If the government is strong, or there is good will on both sides of the House, there is usually no difficulty. It had been discovered that the members of the Board of Governors had not been properly appointed. The reason was the power, given in the 1863 act, to the person or body endowing a chair to nominate a governor and name the professor. The board also nominated governors, and the two principles had become confused. This was briefly patched up in 1934, pursuant to a new act to be passed in 1935. A joint committee of board and Senate began meetings in October 1934. Hector Mclnnes, chairman of the board, decided simply to correct mistakes and bring the 1863 act up to date. The new act was not intended to provide a new constitution for the university, nor to alter the powers of board or president; it would merely regularize existing appointments, and \u201celiminate the antiquated right of nomination of donors\u201d of either governors or professors. The old right of the Church of Scotland to nominate a governor and appoint a professor lingered, now converted to the right of the United Church to nominate a governor.[footnote]The history of board appointments and their modes is given in Board of Governors Minutes, Appendix A, 14 June 1934, UA-1, Box 5, Folder 8, Dalhousie University Archives. Report of Senate Special Committee of Senate on the University Charter, 20 Nov. 1934, President\u2019s Office Fonds, \u201cSenate, 1906-1943,\u201d UA-3, Box 269, Folder 1, Dalhousie University Archives.[\/footnote]\r\n\r\nSenate members liked the idea of a wholly new act. Hugh Bell noted that for many years past Senate and board had been drawing apart; now was a good opportunity to pull them together again. Senate on the whole liked Bell\u2019s argument, but Senate did not get its way. The board wanted to end appointments to its board by the provincial cabinet, but it did not get its way either.[footnote]Board of Governors Minutes, 10 Nov. 1934, UA-1, Box 5, Folder 8, Dalhousie University Archives. The appointment of Dalhousie governors by governor-in-council was discussed at the committee stage of the Dalhousie bill. After being divided equally for and against, the committee decided in favour of the old system. (Those governors elected by alumni, alumnae, and appointed by King\u2019s and the United Church did not require such confirmation.) This information, retailed by Carleton Stanley, is in letter from Carleton Stanley to Hon. F.C. Alderdice, 30 Apr. 1935, President\u2019s Office Fonds, \u201cBoard of Governors Correspondence,\u201d UA-3, Box 176, Folder 2, Dalhousie University Archives. Alderdice was the newly appointed governor from Newfoundland.[\/footnote]\r\n\r\nThe board constituted by the 1935 act consisted of twenty-two governors appointed by governor-in-council, six Alumni representatives, three Alumnae, two representatives from King\u2019s College, the United Church governor, and the mayor of Halifax, ex officio - thirty-five in all. There were three new departures: an executive committee of the board was formally constituted; full-time professors were excluded from membership on the board; and as\u00a0quid pro quo<\/em>\u00a0for that, a formal attempt was made to bring board and Senate together on major issues of university policy. This last was Senate\u2019s idea. It had in mind the creation of a court, modelled on the University of Edinburgh, that would deal with such matters as annual expenditures, university policy, buildings, and the development of new departments. The board preferred ad hoc joint committees when necessary, but Senate stuck to its guns, and thus the compromise emerged creating what came to be called \u201cThe Six and Six.\u201d The wording is interesting:\r\n
\r\n
3.(1) The Board shall from time to time when any new department, building, project or policy arises for consideration, appoint a committee of its members to meet with a like committee of the Senate, which joint committee shall investigate the same and recommend to the Board its findings thereon.<\/div><\/blockquote>\r\nThe act required a statutory meeting of the Six and Six every October, at which anything pertaining to the welfare of the university could be discussed, and there could be ad hoc meetings at any time. Stanley claimed that the Six and Six clause was a result of the backstairs influence of G.F. Pearson. Indeed, said Stanley, the whole 1935 revision had been set going by that \u201carch-imp\u201d downtown. Certainly the 1935 act absorbed a great deal of Stanley\u2019s energies over the winter of 1934-5.[footnote]The 1934 act was chap. 17, but it was repealed by the 1935 one, 25-26 Geo. V, chap. 104. The development of the Six and Six idea is seen in Senate Minutes, 3 July, 20, 27 Nov. 1934; 5, 23 Feb., 9 Mar. 1935<\/a>, Dalhousie University Archives. For Stanley\u2019s views about Pearson\u2019s influence, see letter from Carleton Stanley to Webster, 20 Mar. 1935, President\u2019s Office Fonds, \u201cDr. Clarence Webster, 1934-1964,\u201d UA-3, Box 357, Folder 4, Dalhousie University Archives; letter from Carleton Stanley to Webster, 7 Mar. 1945, Carleton Stanley Fonds, MS-2-163, Box 3, Folder 120, Dalhousie University Archives.[\/footnote]\r\n\r\nWhat did not get into the 1935 act was a clause about the duties of the president. Stanley thought there was need for it. No one would know, he said, from the brief allusion to the president in the 1863 act that the president had what Stanley called \u201cundisputed prerogatives\u201d: to recommend all teaching appointments to the board; to busy himself with university finance; to preside at all faculty meetings if he wished; to represent Dalhousie before the public; and to oversee grounds, buildings, curricula, and discipline. Stanley also wanted a clause on academic tenure. \u201cIt is part of the unwritten law about Canadian Universities that anyone who secures a post as high as Associate Professor is appointed for life or on good behaviour.\u201d[footnote]Letter from Carleton Stanley to Hector Mclnnes, 31 July 1934, confidential, President\u2019s Office Fonds, \u201cHector Mclnnes 1931-1937,\u201d UA-3, Box 310, Folder 7, Dalhousie University Archives.[\/footnote]\u00a0Stanley got neither of these clauses. Common law lawyers resist setting down more than they have to. The powers of the president would remain undefined, and the tenure of professors the same. Stanley hated the Dalhousie charter. Five years later, out of temper both with board and Senate, Stanley told the chairman that what Dalhousie needed was \u201cthe abolition of the fatuous charter under which we operate.\u201d[footnote]Letter from Carleton Stanley to Laurie, 3 Dec. 1940, President's Office Fonds, \u201cCol. K.C. Laurie, 1939-1945,\u201d UA-3, Box 335, Folder 5, Dalhousie University Archives.[\/footnote]\r\n\r\nDismissing Murray Macneill<\/strong>\r\nIn 1936 Stanley managed to depose his b\u00eate noire, the registrar, Murray Macneill. Macneill would remain only United Church professor of mathematics. Probably no one will get to the bottom of that feud. That Macneill was devoted to Dalhousie and its reputation is patent; that he was difficult at times to get along with is true. There were minor incidents; Angus L. asked Macneill if he would act as Nova Scotia\u2019s civil service commissioner in his spare time. To Macneill\u2019s request for permission Stanley offered two months leave without pay. That was not what Macneill asked for, and Angus L. had to intervene. In 1936, having had no holiday for five years, Macneill asked permission to go to England for a few weeks to see his daughter, Janet Macneill Aitken. She had married Lord Beaverbrook\u2019s son, Peter Aitken, and had a new baby. The baby was fine: the marriage wasn\u2019t. There was an Imperial Universities\u2019 Conference on that summer, and it would save Macneill money if he could be one of Dalhousie\u2019s four delegates. To his request, Stanley replied crisply that Macneill could go but \u201cas to the representation of Dalhousie at the Conference of Imperial Universities, I have made other arrangements.\u201d[footnote]Letter from Murray Macneill to Carleton Stanley, 16 Oct. 1935; Carleton Stanley to Macneill, 19 Oct. 1935; Macneill to Carleton Stanley, 23 Oct. 1935; Angus L. Macdonald to Carleton Stanley, 30 Oct. 1935; Macneill to Carleton Stanley, 25 Feb. 1936; Carleton Stanley to Mcneill, 29 Feb. 1936, President's Office Fonds, UA-3, Box 98, Folder 3, Dalhousie University Archives.[\/footnote]\r\n\r\n[caption id=\"attachment_204\" align=\"alignnone\" width=\"605\"]\"Photograph<\/a> Murray Macneill, Professor of Mathematics, 1907-41; Registrar, Arts and Science, 1908-36; University Registrar, 1921-36. A student at Dalhousie during Lucy Maud Montgomery\u2019s year, 1895-6, he was said to be the model for Gilbert Blythe in Anne of Green Gables and was not pleased.[\/caption]\r\n\r\nThe immediate issue between Stanley and Macneill was Dalhousie\u2019s standards of admission. Stanley had changed from 1931-3 when he wanted to tighten them, to 1936 when he was willing to make them more flexible. One reason was Dalhousie\u2019s declining enrolment, down 24 per cent in Arts and Science between 1931-2 and 1935-6. There were many reasons for it, the depression not least, but one was the notorious competition for students between colleges in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick. Macneill for his part seems to have gone the other way, finding reasons for tightening Dalhousie\u2019s admission standards. Stanley and Macneill each seem to have been using the issue to get at the other.\r\n\r\nStanley had a list of some fifty-five students from Dalhousie and King\u2019s, the correspondence with whom proved to Stanley that they were being discouraged from coming to Dalhousie. There were complaints from A.H. Moore, president of King\u2019s, of Macneill\u2019s rigidity. King\u2019s was losing students, said Moore, and Macneill should not to be so choosy. Remember, he warned Stanley,\r\n
\r\n
that the majority of these principals and teachers is made up of Acadia graduates, and I would not put it by some of them that they would welcome more active requirements on our part in order that they might say to their students: \u201cTo enter Dalhousie or King\u2019s you will have to have all these, but with a smaller list of qualifications it will be possible for you to go to Acadia.\u201d[footnote]See letter from Carleton Stanley to Macneill, 15 Jan. 1934; Macneill to Carleton Stanley, 16 Jan. 1934. The feud surfaces again here. For the position of President A.H. Moore, see letter from Moore to Carleton Stanley, 19 Oct. 1935, 16 Mar. 1936; Carleton Stanley to Moore, 17 Mar. 1936. The quotation is from Moore to Carleton Stanley, 28 Mar. 1936, President\u2019s Office Fonds, \u201cKing\u2019s College, 1931-1945,\u201d UA-3, Box 342, Folder 5, Dalhousie University Archives.[\/footnote]<\/div><\/blockquote>\r\nIn view of \u201cthe intensive and persistent campaign that other schools are making for students,\u201d Stanley wrote, Macneill\u2019s attitude was \u201csimply madness... If we paid someone to keep students away, how could the salary be better earned?\u201d Thus he charged Murray Macneill with lack of support and cooperation, and asked the board to dismiss him as registrar.\r\n\r\nIn mid-May 1936 the executive of the board sat through two meetings and four hours listening to Stanley\u2019s complaints against Macneill. Some were not serious, some were explained, but most charges Macneill thought so ridiculous he would not answer them. What troubled the executive most was the bitter enmity between the two men. Nor would Macneill accept the board\u2019s offer to resign. He was in England when the board relieved him of his duties as registrar, on 30 May, effective the next day, notifying him by cable. His office staff were much upset at what they felt was very shabby treatment. Macneill, bitter and aggrieved, wrote the chairman of the board:\r\n
\r\n
My whole life has been devoted to Dalhousie University. My own feeling is that I have been charged with disloyalty without reason, and with very evident malice. The executive have apparently seen fit to agree to charges which I consider ridiculous and untrue... All I can ask now is to be allowed, for the few years that remain of my active life, to be of what service I can to the college I have always loved.<\/div><\/blockquote>\r\nThat meant his work as professor of mathematics, a position which of course he retained until his retirement in 1942. His family believed his dismissal as registrar quite broke his spirit. He was the second person thus broken by Dalhousie\u2019s philosopher-president. Dalhousie had been Macneill's whole life. Since 1907 the Macneill home at 83 Inglis Street had been a Dalhousie social centre. Every Sunday afternoon in term there would be a tea party, or in winter snowshoe or skating parties.[footnote]Letter from W.E. Thompson to Macneill, 15, 20 May 1936, President's Office Fonds, UA-3, Box 98, Folder 3, Dalhousie University Archives; Board of Governors Minutes, 14,18, 20 May 1936, UA-1, Box 5, Folder 8, Dalhousie University Archives. For attitudes of Macneill\u2019s staff, see letter from Beatrice R.E. Smith to Peter B. Waite, 22 Sept. 1992, Peter B. Waite Fonds, MS-2-718, Box 3, Folder 64, Dalhousie University Archives. For Macneill\u2019s reply, see Macneill to Hector Mclnnes, 28 July 1936, President's Office Fonds, UA-3, Box 98, Folder 3, Dalhousie University Archives. Family reaction comes from interview with Janet Macneill Piers, 17 Sept. 1992, at Chester, NS, Peter B. Waite Fonds, MS-2-718, Box 3, Folder 49, Dalhousie University Archives. See also Murray Macneill, \u201cMemoirs,\u201d p. 9.[\/footnote]\r\n\r\nAn immediate consequence of Macneill's dethronement was Stanley\u2019s discovery that he would need a dean of arts and science. Hitherto he had not had one, preferring to run his own show in that faculty. Professors Bennet and Johnston would be part-time co-registrars, and a dean would organize the faculty, by which Stanley meant setting agendas for meetings and preventing a waste of time in them. In June 1936 he persuaded Professor C.B. Nickerson of the Chemistry Department to accept the deanship for three years, at $1,000 a year extra pay. Nickerson had been at Dalhousie since 1918, was well connected, being married to Agnes Harrington, sister of the Gordon Harrington, the premier from 1930 to 1933. He was well liked by the staff, popular with students, ever ready with a genial comment or timely anecdote. He and his wife, with no children, were often chaperones at the many Dalhousie dances.\r\n\r\nProfile of Dalhousie Students<\/strong>\r\nIn 1933 it was said that Dalhousie had \u201ca dance a day.\u201d Stanley explained it to C.E Crandall, president of British United Press, Montreal, who thought his daughter Ruth at Shirreff Hall had too much social life. College life, said Stanley, had changed much since our time. What students called \u201cactivities\u201d bulked large. \u201cA dance a day\u201d was a slander on most students, but near the truth if one counted them up. \u201cIt\u2019s notorious that it is a small fraction of our students that keep all these dances going.\u201d Stanley asserted that of the nearly one hundred students who failed in three or more subjects in the spring of 1933, most were not the weaker students but those who went to all the dances.\r\n\r\nBy the time Ruth Crandall graduated in 1935, students had begun to realize something of the sacrifices it was taking to get them to university and keep them there. They were survivors rather than radicals. The typical Dalhousie student of the later 1930s came from a besieged but surviving family. Some parents borrowed money to send a daughter or a son to university because they passionately believed in higher education. There were a few students from wealthy families on Young Avenue, and a few others from blue-collar families, students who had managed to hang on by wits and determination beyond Grade 8. Students in general worked at their studies; law students worked harder at Dalhousie than they did at Toronto according to John Willis, who taught at both. But he also claimed that the law students of the 1930s were not as good as in former years. He attributed it partly to Dalhousie Law School accepting students they should have rejected, needing the fees. Willis also claimed that too many of his law students of the later 1930s were there because well-to-do fathers could afford to send them, there being so few jobs available.[footnote]Letter from Carleton Stanley to C.F. Crandall, Montreal, July 17 1933, Carleton Stanley Fonds, MS-2-163, Box 1, Folder B-24, Dalhousie University Archives. Much the best article on Dalhousie in this period is the analysis by Paul Axelrod, \u201cMoulding the Middle Class: Student Life at Dalhousie University in the 1930s,\u201d in Acadiensis 15, no. 1 (Autumn 1985), pp. 84-122, the reference here being to p. 89. For Henry Hicks, see below, chapter 9. For law, see John Willis, A History of Dalhousie Law School (Toronto 1979), pp. 140-1.[\/footnote]\r\n\r\nSo far as fathers\u2019 occupations can be traced, of 2,271 fathers of Dalhousie students during the 1930s, 28 per cent were professionals, 31 per cent businessmen. That was perhaps to be expected. But 21 per cent of Dalhousie students had fathers who were artisans, farmers, fishermen, skilled or semi-skilled workmen. The great majority of Dalhousie students were from backgrounds that can be described as middle class, for whom a university education was a major expense, especially where fathers were school teachers or clergymen. As to defining what middle class was, one easy (but treacherous) definition from the 1930s was that it was those families who used napkin rings. Upper-class families had fresh napkins every meal; lower-class families neither knew nor cared about napkins; middle-class families had napkins, cared very much, and washed those symbols of their respectability once a week. Middle-class students, once graduated, tended to move upwards within the middle class. But of the male graduates of Dalhousie between 1931 and 1940, 25 per cent cannot be traced, whereas of the group between 1921 and 1926, 92 per cent can be. That suggests that a group of Dalhousie graduates in the 1930s remained unemployed or worked at jobs they did not care to report on. Or perhaps they were killed in the Second World War.[footnote]Axelrod, \u201cDalhousie Students in the 1930s,\u201d pp. 90-4; the napkin ring principle was enunciated by Professor Lome Morgan, economic historian at Toronto in the 1940s. A much more sophisticated and modern analysis of the middle class is available in Paul Axelrod, Making a Middle Class (Montreal and Kingston), Appendix A, pp. 167-73.[\/footnote]\r\n\r\nWomen graduates improved their positions, but it was less through professional work as teachers, librarians, nurses and more by marriage. Tracing Dalhousie alumnae through the\u00a0Alumni Magazine<\/em>, as Paul Axelrod has done, suggests that only seventeen of the fifty-nine women who graduated in 1936 found professional work. Thus women who aspired to professional careers in the 1930s probably had a decidedly chancy time of it.\r\n\r\nWomen were 28 per cent of Dalhousie students in 1930, that figure going to 23.5 per cent in 1939. The reason was simple: as money got tighter, families opted for educating sons who could better anticipate a working career. Sons also found summer work more readily than daughters, and thus were less of a drain on family funds. Nevertheless it is noteworthy that 22 per cent of Dalhousie students in 1935 were women.\r\n\r\nFor the quarter of Dalhousie students that were women, Lucy Maud Montgomery, writing in a special co-ed issue of the\u00a0Gazette<\/em>\u00a0in February 1939<\/a>, had some shrewd advice. An old lady once told her, \u201cDon\u2019t marry as long as you can help it because when the right man comes along you can\u2019t help it.\u201d It was, said the author of\u00a0Anne of Green Gables<\/em>, the same with writing. And, she added, don\u2019t try to hit the public taste: \u201cThe public taste does not really like being hit. It prefers to be allured into some fresh pasture surprised.\u201d Finally, she said, write about what you know: \u201ctragedy is being enacted in the next yard. Comedy is playing across the street.\u201d That was advice the other 75 per cent of Dalhousie students could well profit from too.\r\n\r\nMale and female, Dalhousie students of the 1930s, based on averages for 1930-1, 1935-6, and 1939-40, were 67 per cent Nova Scotians. Students from the United States were prominent in medicine and dentistry. Jewish students, especially, found it difficult to crack the unvoiced principles of exclusion at American medical schools, so they came north. Dalhousie\u2019s Medical School, being class A, allowed Jewish students to graduate from Dalhousie and return to the United States and get state licences to practise.\r\n\r\nDalhousie students\u2019 religious affiliations in the 1930s had changed somewhat from the decade before. The new element was Jewish students - now 11 per cent of enrolment, up from almost nothing in the 1920s. Roman Catholic students were up slightly from 13 to 15 per cent. Anglicans increased from 14 to 23 per cent, the result of the addition of King\u2019s. Presbyterian students were the most serious concern. In the early 1920s they were 51 per cent of Dalhousie students. After the creation of the United Church in 1925, one should have expected an increase with former Methodist students added. Instead, the United Church students at Dalhousie were only 34 per cent, plus some students whose old Presbyterian families refused to accept the 1925 union, another 6 per cent.[footnote]Axelrod, \u201cDalhousie Students in the 1930s,\u201d p. 88, gives this analysis, based on Dalhousie registration books. For Lucy Maud Montgomery\u2019s editorial, see Dalhousie Gazette, 24 Feb. 1939<\/a>. The Dalhousie calendar for 1934-5<\/a> gives the origins of students. It lists the medical students for 1933-4; in the fifth year, of thirty-three students there is one American. The fourth year, with twenty-three students, has three Americans. The first year, with fifty-five students, has eighteen Americans.[\/footnote]\r\n\r\nThe decrease in the number of Pictou County students at Dalhousie worried President MacKenzie, who first made it public in his annual report for 1911-12, when Pictonians in arts and science had fallen from 18 per cent in 1891 to 13 per cent in 1911. By 1931 the figure was 8 per cent. The New Glasgow\u00a0Eastern Chronicle<\/em>\u00a0commented on it, attributing it to parents being happier with the sterner oversight of students at Antigonish, Wolfville, and Sackville. And less metropolitan temptations: F.B. Squire in the\u00a0Dalhousie Gazette<\/em>\u00a0suggested that Senate\u2019s attempts to ban student renting of hotel rooms at the Nova Scotian Hotel\u2019s Saturday night dances was not done for morality but to calm uneasy parents. It was also true, as the\u00a0Eastern Chronicle<\/em>\u00a0noted, that Dalhousie, a little like UNB, had no longer a distinct denominational background. Since \u201cDalhousie is one of Pictou\u2019s gifts to the welfare of Nova Scotia,\u201d more work was needed to recruit students in Pictou County. This and other pressures caused the chairman of the board, Hector Mclnnes, born and raised in Pictou County, to make three visits to Pictou to stir up relations, friends, and alumni in 1936 and early 1937.[footnote]New Glasgow Eastern Chronicle, 2, 11 Mar. 1937; letter from Carleton Stanley to Mclnnes, 16 Mar. 1937; Mclnnes to G.F. Pearson, 31 Mar. 1937, replying to Pearson\u2019s complaint of the falling off of Dalhousie registration, President\u2019s Office Fonds, \u201cHector Mclnnes, 1931-1937,\u201d UA-3, Box 310, Folder 7, Dalhousie University Archives. Dalhousie Gazette, 8 Feb. 1934<\/a>, letter from F.B. Squire.[\/footnote]\r\n\r\nThere were not enough scholarships. The Munro exhibitions and bursaries had gone with Munro\u2019s death in 1896, and nothing quite like their scale had been substituted since. The bursaries and scholarships that did exist were also less rich than before because of a diminution of dividends and bond interest. There was even a suggestion from the president that those who won scholarships and did not need the money return it to the university. By the end of the 1930s 11.6 per cent of Maritime students had entrance or undergraduate scholarships which averaged $113 a year. That was better than in the West but slightly below that in Ontario.[footnote]Axelrod, \u201cDalhousie Students in the 1930s,\u201d pp. 86-7; Senate Minutes, 13 May 1933<\/a>, Dalhousie University Archives.[\/footnote]\r\n\r\nStudent tuition costs in 1930 were about $112 a year in arts, rising to $125 in 1932 over President Stanley\u2019s objections. Arts classes were $25 each, sciences classes $40. A student needed about $300 for room and board in Halifax. Thus a year at Dalhousie, including books and personal expenses, would come to about $600. Henry Hicks was given a $500 prize when he graduated from Mount Allison in 1936, and used it to come to Dalhousie in 1936-7. It just about covered his expenses, which were \u201cfive hundred and forty-six dollars to attend Dalhousie then, and pay for my residence at Pine Hill Divinity Hall where I lived and even to take a girl to the supper dances at the Nova Scotian Hotel every other week or so.\u201d The sum of $546 may seem modest, but it has to be set against salaries then current. In 1937 a beginning bank clerk was paid $400 a year, an experienced typist $700.[footnote]The 1937 salaries are a personal reminiscence of the author.[\/footnote]\r\n\r\nHenry Hicks lived at Pine Hill; so had Larry MacKenzie, fifteen years before, as there were no men\u2019s residences. Male students were not expected to make their own way completely in the untender world of Halifax boarding houses; Dalhousie kept an avuncular eye on boarding and rooming houses used by its students. The dean of medicine reported in February 1935 on 214 houses for male students: ninety-one offered room and board, sixty-eight were rooms only, thirty-nine offered room with breakfast. For sleeping accommodation the dean reported that half provided double beds. There was nothing strange in the 1930s about men sleeping together; indeed, that was the way many of them had grown up. Three-quarters of the houses had what Dalhousie designated as good washing and toilet facilities - that is, bath, washbasin, and toilet for every six students. Stanley was not satisfied and kept hoping for $750,000 that would enable Dalhousie to build a men\u2019s residence; but it did not come.[footnote]Letter from H.G. Grant to Carleton Stanley, 5 Feb. 1935; Carleton Stanley to Grant, 9 Feb. 1935, Presdient's Office Fonds, UA-3, Dalhousie University Archives.[\/footnote]\r\n\r\nFor that reason a few modest branches of American fraternities appeared at Dalhousie in the 1930s. President MacKenzie had seen them coming and wondered how best to deal with them. Robert Falconer\u2019s advice from the University of Toronto was to ward them off, if possible, \u201cbut unless you can get residences for men, or keep the college small, they\u2019ll come.\u201d Sidney Smith told Stanley much the same in 1932, but Smith was positive, seeing fraternities\u2019 useful function as residences for men. They were self-governing largely, communal boarding houses run by the occupants, and usually owned by a small clutch of benevolent alumni. At first Stanley did not like them, but within a couple of years he had begun to find them useful. Dalhousie never recognized them, but neither did it ban them. By the end of the 1930s there were seven fraternities and two sororities. They tended to be anti-Jewish, the law fraternity specifically so; but there is no evidence that in Nova Scotia they were what they sometimes were in the United States, anti-Catholic. The\u00a0Gazette<\/em>, in October 1934<\/a>, gave an opinion that while fraternities raised hell now and then, and tended to play student power politics, on the other hand they were pleasant houses for men of like interests. President Stanley preferred them kept under control.[footnote]Letter from Falconer to A.S. MacKenzie, 21 Nov. 1924, President's Office Fonds, \u201cFraternities 1924-1961,\u201d UA-3, Box 308, Folder 9, Dalhousie University Archives; letter from Sidney Smith to Carleton Stanley, Feb. (n.d.) 1932, President's Office Fonds, \u201cFaculty of Law, 1921-1934,\u201d UA-3, Box 339, Folder 5, Dalhousie University Archives; Dalhousie Gazette, 12 Oct. 1934.<\/a>[\/footnote]\r\n\r\nThe president ran afoul of student opinion in the great badminton crisis of 1934. Mixed badminton Stanley himself suggested as a useful antidote to the erotic temptations of dancing, but he wanted the game taken seriously, with proper clothes, which meant white flannels for men and white skirts for women. One day he found a young woman playing badminton in shorts, and a ban on mixed badminton issued forthwith from the president\u2019s office. To the\u00a0Gazette<\/em>\u00a0it was irresistible:\r\n
\r\n
The boys and girls must play alone,\r\nThey cannot play together -\r\nYour father wouldn\u2019t sanction it,\r\nAnd neither would your mother.<\/div><\/blockquote>\r\nhe Halifax\u00a0Citizen<\/em>, a leftish local weekly, chimed in with an editorial; Hitler decreed what the German woman should wear, but \u201cPresident Stanley\u2019s dictatorial rule\u201d says what Dalhousie girls shouldn\u2019t wear. The\u00a0Citizen<\/em>\u00a0wondered what would happen about bathing suits should Dalhousie ever have a summer session! But Dalhousie students never liked downtown interference; they told the\u00a0Citizen<\/em>\u00a0to leave well alone, that it understood nothing of campus conditions.\r\n\r\nHowever, Dalhousie could not be kept out of the Halifax papers. During the League of Nations crisis of October 1935 over the issue of sanctions against Italy for its invasion of Abyssinia, the students conducted a poll, the results of which were illuminating. Of 850 students, 464 voted as follows:\r\n
\r\n
\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n
<\/td>\r\nYes<\/td>\r\nNo<\/td>\r\n<\/tr>\r\n
For economic sanctions against Italy<\/td>\r\n444<\/td>\r\n16<\/td>\r\n<\/tr>\r\n
For military sanctions against Italy<\/td>\r\n205<\/td>\r\n235<\/td>\r\n<\/tr>\r\n
Support of military measures for League<\/td>\r\n175<\/td>\r\n277<\/td>\r\n<\/tr>\r\n
For participation in war<\/td>\r\n157<\/td>\r\n289<\/td>\r\n<\/tr>\r\n<\/tbody>\r\n<\/table>\r\n<\/div><\/blockquote>\r\nThat made headlines in local papers, which concluded, rightly, that Dalhousie students wanted to punish Italy but did not want to have any part in the punishing. This was reinforced a few months later when the\u00a0Gazette<\/em>\u00a0insisted that Dalhousie students be neutral in any European conflict. \u201cWe have close sentimental ties binding us to Great Britain,\u201d said the\u00a0Gazette<\/em>, \u201cbut that is no reason why we should fight the battles of British Capitalism and Imperialism in all parts of the world.\u201d[footnote]On the badminton affair, see Dalhousie Gazette, 15, 22 Feb. 1934<\/a>; 7 Mar. 1935; Halifax Citizen, 16 Feb. 1934. On the Abyssinian crisis, see Dalhousie Gazette, 17 Oct. 1935<\/a>, 7 Feb. 1936<\/a>.[\/footnote]\r\n\r\nThat was something President Stanley approved of: students being students should be outspoken, revolutionary if need be. His concern, he told the students in October 1935, was if they were not revolutionary:\r\n
\r\n
My young friends, you should be. There is no other hope for the world. There are many things always to revolt and rebel against. Somewhere or other stupidity is always enthroned. Somewhere or other there are always wrongs to right. Sooner or later there is going to be a wholesale revolt on the part of the youth in North America against what is offered them, by selfish, commercial interests, in the name of amusement and entertainment. Suppose that you began a revolt here and now against the so-called music that I have been listening to for the last four years at Dalhousie, and against what I have for four years heard called in the name of dancing.<\/div><\/blockquote>\r\nBut Stanley would not be able to call out the students on that issue. Perhaps not on any issue. He found them ill informed and not well read. He interviewed personally all new students; many of the new men, for law, medicine and dentistry, from other colleges, had never read a book in their lives but the textbooks they had been obliged to read, or \u201cdetective stories and trashy novels.\u201d But Stanley\u2019s utterances on such an issue were not always to be trusted. A year later he was saying how solid Dalhousie students were, how they read books and debated serious questions. The difference was not, probably, that between the students of December 1937 and those of October 1938; it was, rather, the correspondent he was writing to. But it is true the world had become a more serious place after Munich.[footnote]Dalhousie Gazette, 1 Nov. 1935<\/a>; letter from Carleton Stanley to Chas. A. Maxwell, Salt Springs Pictou County, 17 Dec. 1937, Carleton Stanley Fonds, MS-2-163, Box 1, Folder B-40, Dalhousie University Archives. For a slightly more positive view of students, see letter from Carleton Stanley to Rev. Wm. T. Mercer, 6 Oct. 1938, of Dominion, Cape Breton, Carleton Stanley Fonds, MS-2-163, Box 1, Folder B-41, Dalhousie University Archives. This was however in a special context, for Mercer had written praising Stanley\u2019s 1938 address to the students, an address not well received in other quarters.[\/footnote]\r\n\r\n[caption id=\"attachment_207\" align=\"alignnone\" width=\"894\"]\"Photograph<\/a> At the Convocation Ball, May 1939. L. to r., President Carleton Stanley, Miss Muriel Woodbury, Mrs. H.A. MacDonald (a member of the board in the 1970s), Mrs. Isabel Stanley, T.H. Coffin (a member of the board in the 1990s), and Dr. W.W. Woodbury, Dean of Dentistry, 1935-47.[\/caption]\r\n\r\n
<\/div>\r\n
A German Refugee Founds the Institute of Public Affairs, 1936<\/strong><\/div>\r\n
Stanley defended and supported the cause of German refugees, whether Jewish or not. The day in January 1933 that Hindenburg asked Hitler to be chancellor, Dr. Lothar Richter and his wife decided to leave Germany with their young son. Born in 1894 in Silesia, Richter obtained two doctorates, in political science and in law. He was a senior official in the Ministry of Labour of the Weimar Republic, drafting its labour legislation; but with the Nazi party winning a plurality of seats in the 1933 elections, he correctly predicted future events and left for Britain. Through the Archbishop of Canterbury, Richter obtained a temporary post at Leeds University. Carleton Stanley heard about him from the archbishop. Since Dalhousie had no professor of German, when the Rockefeller committee in New York offered to pay his salary as a German refugee for several years, Stanley, impressed with Richter\u2019s qualifications, hired him sight unseen as professor of German. He and his family arrived in Halifax in August 1934.<\/div>\r\n
<\/div>\r\n
Richter was one of the best of his kind, a highly educated, hardworking, purposeful German civil servant. With all that, he was modest and he never ceased to be grateful to England for taking him in, and to Dalhousie and Canada for giving him a permanent home. He became a Canadian citizen as soon as he could. Before 1934 was out, Richter in his quiet way pointed out to Stanley the Rockefeller Foundation\u2019s support in several American universities for departments of public affairs, and that there was no such institution in Canada at all. Richter thought such a department could be organized at Dalhousie, not as a new department but by pooling the resources of existing ones - Political Science, Economics, History, Education, and Law. By that means, said Richter, Dalhousie could prepare students for the civil service, municipal politics, journalism; it could train civil servants already in harness. It could sponsor fact-finding studies that would help Nova Scotian municipalities.<\/div>\r\n
<\/div>\r\n
In 1935 the Rockefeller Foundation\u2019s Department of Social Science sent its director, Dr. Stacy May, to Halifax. He met Richter and others from the modest band of social scientists at Dalhousie and was impressed. The upshot was that the Rockefeller Foundation offered $60,000 ($15,000 a year for the first three years, then in diminishing amounts with Dalhousie contributing). It would begin on 1 September 1936, end on 31 August 1941.[footnote]Stacy May to Carleton Stanley, 12 June 1936, telegram, President\u2019s Office Fonds, \u201cRockefeller Foundation Grant for Study in Public Administration, 1936-1944,\u201d UA-3, Box 353, Folder 5, Dalhousie University Archives; letter from Norma S. Thompson to Carleton Stanley, 18 June 1936, President's Office Fonds, \u201cInstitute of Public Affairs, 1936-1939,\u201d UA-3, Box 351, Folder 3, Dalhousie University Archives.[\/footnote]<\/div>\r\n
\r\n\r\nDalhousie\u2019s Institute of Public Affairs owed its inception, its versatility, and its success to Lothar Richter himself. He was ingenious at bringing groups and interests together. It was his idea to get Sir Robert Borden to be honorary chairman of the institute. Borden met President Stanley in 1935 and was impressed with what Borden called his \u201cbroad outlook and splendid erudition.\u201d Thus Borden, now aged eighty-three, who had been declining similar invitations for the past few years, wrote Stanley: \u201cYour invitation, however, relates to a subject in which I am profoundly interested; and for that reason I have given it serious consideration. \u201d He hinted he could accept if the duties were nominal. They were. Richter also persuaded colleagues in other departments to work with him; he brought municipal officials, labour unions, and provincial governments on side; he tried to bring other universities to the institute. He got prominent civil servants to give lectures. Whatever Richter touched seemed to turn, magically, to sensible use and function. He started Public Affairs<\/em><\/a>, the second quarterly published by Dalhousie, in 1937.\r\n\r\nSome board members in 1937 were uneasy about this new venture in publishing. Why not merge the\u00a0Dalhousie Review<\/em><\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0Public Affairs<\/em>? asked Senator W.H. Dennis. Stanley replied that part of the Rockefeller grant was for Public Affairs. The reason why two other members of the board executive had asked the same question was that \u201cthere have been so many changes in the Executive of the Board that it is hard for that body to have a continuous memory.\u201d[footnote]Letter from Dugald Macgillivray to Carleton Stanley, 8 July 1935, reporting on a letter received from Sir Robert that day, President's Office Fonds, \u201cDugald Macgillivray, 1931-1938,\u201d UA-3, Box 310, Folder 3, Dalhousie University Archives; letter from Sir Robert Borden to Carleton Stanley, 4 Feb. 1937, President's Office Fonds, \u201cInstitute of Public Affairs, 1936-1939,\u201d UA-3, Box 351, Folder 3, Dalhousie University Archives. Borden died four months later. One of Richter\u2019s studies, of a Cape Breton community, \u201cThe Effect of Health Insurance on the Demand for Medical Services,\u201d was published in Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science 10, no. 2 (1944), pp. 179-205. Winnipeg Free Press, 8 Apr. 1942 has an editorial praising \u201cDalhousie\u2019s Experiment.\u201d[\/footnote]\r\n\r\nHe did indeed have a point. In 1937 the board had suffered a number of changes from death and retirement. H.E. Mahon, manager of the Montreal Trust, had died in April; Dugald Macgillivray of the Canadian Bank of Commerce, Carleton Stanley\u2019s favourite board member, who had supported the\u00a0Dalhousie Review<\/em>\u00a0in both a literary and financial sense since its inception, died suddenly in August. The bronze bust of Lord Dalhousie is his gift to the university. The chairman, Hector Mclnnes, died of a heart attack in June at the age of seventy-seven. He had graduated from Dalhousie Law School in 1888, was nominated secretary to the board in 1892, treasurer in 1898, appointed to the board in 1900, and succeeded Pearson as chairman in 1932. He had been a Dalhousian most of his adult life.\r\n\r\nThe board appointed as the new chairman a less judicious, more vigorous, younger lawyer-businessman, another Pictonian, James McGregor Stewart, who had come on the board in September 1929. Forty-eight years old, crippled by polio when young, Stewart had ability and ambition, those two essential elements of success. He had been gold medallist at Pictou Academy and went to Dalhousie, taking the University Medal in Law in 1914. A director of the Royal Bank of Canada since 1931, his erudition, legal and otherwise, was known nationally; he was reputed one of the best lawyers in the country. Stewart walked with crutches, and had an immensely powerful upper body; he smoked three packs of menthol cigarettes a day and drank Scotch in the same proportion. He was a marvellous poker player, his bluffing notorious. But he was a worker. \u201cIf you went out with the boys,\u201d he used to say, \u201cyou must get up with the men.\u201d He was a strong Conservative but his home was open to all parties. \u201cMany an evening,\u201d wrote his nephew, \u201cAngus L. Macdonald lustily roared out Scottish songs at J. McG.\u2019s piano.\u201d This was the man who would be chairman of the Dalhousie board for the next six years - tough, abrupt, capable.[footnote]Interview with Donald J. Morrison (nephew of J. McGregor Stewart), 3 Apr. 1990, Halifax, Peter B. Waite Fonds, MS-2-718, Box 3, Folder 44, Dalhousie University Archives; see also Morrison\u2019s sketch of his uncle\u2019s life, 29 Sept. 1990, Peter B. Waite Fonds.[\/footnote]\r\n\r\nAs J. McGregor Stewart took over, two other men died, partners in the pre-1931 Dalhousie. G.F. Pearson died in September 1938, his wife still bitter over what had happened in 1932. Eleven days later President MacKenzie, in hospital for a minor operation, succumbed to a stroke and died shortly afterward, on 2 October. Dalhousie went into mourning for MacKenzie; the\u00a0Gazette<\/em>\u00a0devoted a whole issue to him. Beneath his cool exterior MacKenzie was a loyal Dalhousian whose devotion was the more impressive because it was never paraded. R.J. Bean recalled an August day in 1923 when he and his wife first met MacKenzie in the Copley Plaza Hotel in Boston. Bean was so impressed with MacKenzie that, when invited to come and see Dalhousie, he said it was unnecessary - he was coming anyway. More personal notes came to MacKenzie\u2019s daughter Marjorie. An old friend from Bryn Mawr days wrote: \u201cHe was such fun!... I went to see you the day he brought you back from Indianapolis to Bryn Mawr [in 1897]. I know his gallant effort to keep his sorrow in the background... and to make your childhood a happy one.\u201d And it seems to have been just that. Another friend wrote about her Halifax childhood and Marjorie MacKenzie\u2019s, \u201csuch a happy time in my life when your Father, my Father, and Mr. Barnstead were such important, loved grown-ups and gave us the feeling everything was all right and would go on forever.\u201d Such indeed is the happy child\u2019s kingdom.[footnote]Dalhousie Gazette, 14 Oct. 1938<\/a>. Letters to Marjorie MacKenzie King on her father\u2019s death, are in A.S. MacKenzie Fonds: Ethel Walker Smith to Marjorie MacKenzie King, 30 Jan. 1939, from Havana; Esther Nichols to Marjorie MacKenzie King, 9 Oct. 1938, from New York, Arthur Stanley MacKenzie Fonds, MS-2-43, Dalhousie University Archives. The Mr. Barnstead was probably A.S. Barnstead (Dal. '93), deputy provincial secretary in the 1920s and 1930s and a member of the Dalhousie Board of Governors.[\/footnote]\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\nBut in the wicked world outside there were increasingly few hopes for that. The war that came in 1939 would test Dalhousie more sternly even than the 1914 war, and its classicist president. One can imagine Carleton Stanley, tall, slim, curly haired, coming out of his office in the Macdonald Library with bowler hat and umbrella, his black Newfoundland dog Pontus waiting for him on the steps, ready for a walk. At such times he would survey his campus a little absently, as if he could not quite have said whence he had come or whither he was going.[footnote]The portrait is partly from Donald J. Morrison, cited in note 48.[\/footnote]\u00a0That was an illusion: for Stanley was strong, stubborn, and determined. He would demonstrate those qualities over the next six years.","rendered":"

Business, the professions, influence the universities. Stanley\u2019s standards. The Medical Faculty and the Public Health Clinic. Angus L. Macdonald, Dalhousie law professor, premier of Nova Scotia. The 1935 Dalhousie Act. Stanley deposes the registrar. Dalhousie students as middle-class survivors. European affairs impinge on Dalhousie. Death of MacKenzie.<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Commercial Undermining of Liberal Education<\/strong>
\nBy the mid-1950s every college and university, in or out of Nova Scotia, was at grips with a problem that bore in upon them with pressure inexorable: the increasingly commercial test of old and tried intellectual values. Commerce cared little for Coleridge or Kant, and what was irrelevant to commerce and business began, increasingly, to seem to be so elsewhere. Thus the intellectual values of western culture came under attack, and in an insidious form, by being made to seem unimportant to life, living, and progress.<\/p>\n

The old core of the university was Arts and Science and the universities had accommodated professional schools with some reluctance. At Dalhousie the Law Faculty was started with a Munro professorship in 1883, and then in 1911 came the duty, as it seemed to Dalhousie, of having to take on Medicine and Dentistry, because there was no one else to do it. Robert Hutchins, president of the University of Chicago from 1928 to 1945, in The Higher Learning in America maintained that the only reason for including professional schools in a university was the influences that Arts and Science might bring to the dreariness of the professional disciplines:<\/p>\n

\n
Vocationalism leads, then, to triviality and isolation; it debases the course of study and the staff. It deprives the university of its only excuse for existence, which is to provide a haven where the search for truth may go on unhampered by utility or pressure for \u201cresults.\u201d[1]<\/sup><\/a><\/div>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Archibald MacMechan would have agreed. He pointed out in the midst of Dalhousie\u2019s Million Dollar campaign of 1920 that the university\u2019s growth was owing to the accretion of professional schools; while these were important even essential acquisitions, there had been \u201cno corresponding growth in the original Arts departments, which gave Dalhousie her standards and her reputation.\u201d A university of seven hundred students in 1920 with one solitary professor of history, one of modern languages, and one in mathematics, was starved.[2]<\/sup><\/a>\u00a0There was some improvement in the 1920s with modest reinforcement from King\u2019s in 1923, but the point was more relevant in 1930, with Dalhousie\u2019s registration running high (838 in 1928-9) and going higher (902 in 1929-30).<\/p>\n

President MacKenzie, scientist that he was, effortlessly made room at Dalhousie for Medicine and Dentistry, and found no intellectual difficulties in doing so. His problems were financial, and institutional, in getting Dalhousie\u2019s research criteria accepted by a conservative medical community. Atlee\u2019s appointment was a good example. Some of MacKenzie\u2019s fellow scientists thought the new sciences in medicine were not very good science, and were being built up at the cost of more worthy research. Humanities professors such as Carleton Stanley would find it still more difficult to appreciate the needs of medicine. Stanley was interested in science, especially biology. One of his more quixotic academic adventures was trying to establish an honours course in Greek and biology; the students would read Aristotle\u2019s science in Greek, and slowly work their way to the present day. The biologists managed to defeat it. A proper science course could not be built around the history of science; it had to be done around modern research, techniques, apparatus, and outlook.[3]<\/sup><\/a> MacKenzie, who had in his time been well out on the cutting edge of physics research, knew that; Carleton Stanley didn\u2019t. Stanley aimed in other directions. His outlook, with a big intellectual range, is set out in his annual report for 1940-1, from his 1941 convocation address:<\/p>\n

\n
But I do call university graduates illiterate who have not read, and who show no likelihood of reading later… at least some of the books which on one side or another give a man some inkling of the fabric of European civilisation. On the side of history, politics, law, for example, a man is illiterate who has not read Thucydides\u2019\u00a0History<\/em>, Aristotle\u2019s\u00a0Politics<\/em>, Hugo de Groot\u2019s\u00a0Law of Nations<\/em>, Guizot\u2019s\u00a0History of Civilization in Europe<\/em>, Bryce\u2019s\u00a0Holy Roman Empire<\/em>, and at least some of the work of Maitland or Vinogradoff on jurisprudence.[4]<\/sup><\/a><\/div>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Carleton Stanley\u2019s own major work was on Matthew Arnold, published by the University of Toronto Press in 1938. In\u00a0Culture and Anarchy<\/em>\u00a0(1869), Arnold described the middle class as Philistines, honest doers but not thinkers, with no real appreciation of arts and letters. Stanley, like Arnold, was trying to re-establish the authority of older disciplines which he now felt were in jeopardy. In some ways Stanley resembled Arnold\u2019s description of Oxford, a university Stanley knew well, \u201cwhispering from her towers the last enchantments of the middle Age[s]… Home of lost causes, and forsaken beliefs, and unpopular names, and impossible loyalties!\u201d[5]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

\"Photograph<\/a>
Carleton Stanley about 1936, President of Dalhousie, 1931-45: \u201ca well-read mind, a versatile intelligence, deployed with energy.\u201d<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Struggling to Raise Standards<\/strong>
\nStanley set out to reform some Dalhousie practices that he regarded as pernicious. The first was admitting students with incomplete matriculation, which they would make up during the next years. He discovered that one-quarter of Dalhousie\u2019s undergraduates had not completed matriculation, and many of them had been at Dalhousie three, four, or even five years. At his first meeting with the Arts Faculty in September 1931, he appointed a committee to study Dalhousie\u2019s curriculum. They reported in February 1932, recommending that students take all of Dalhousie\u2019s required classes, including make-up matriculation ones, before being allowed to take any electives. The committee\u2019s second recommendation, with more serious implications, was that the forthcoming 1932-3 calendar carry the prescription that English and five others of the eight matriculation subjects be required for admission to Dalhousie. \u201cIt is hoped,\u201d the committee added, \u201cthat in the near future complete matriculation required in eight subjects will be adhered to.\u201d But on motion of the registrar, Murray Macneill, that was deleted.[6]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

Here lay a developing quarrel between the president and the registrar. Stanley did not know Nova Scotia; Murray Macneill did. Of the thirty-five members of the Arts Faculty, assistant professor rank and above, twenty-six were from outside Nova Scotia. That had many advantages, in the style, knowledge, and experience of the professors; but it did have some disadvantages. Murray Macneill was a Maritimer, born in Maitland, Nova Scotia, brought up in St. John\u2019s, Newfoundland, and in Saint John, New Brunswick. He recognized what some others did not, that there were good reasons for students to come to Dalhousie with incomplete matriculation. It was not just students finding an easy back door into university, though there were some of those; it was because relatively few high schools in Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Newfoundland, or Prince Edward Island could properly prepare students in Grade 11 to pass provincial matriculation examinations. Macneill\u2019s was the position of George Trueman, president of Mount Allison (1923-45), who as a boy had been the victim of just such a school system. Trueman had grown up in Point de Bute, New Brunswick, near the Nova Scotia border, within sight of the Tantramar marshes. Trueman told Stanley in March 1934, \u201cin this sparsely settled country, any system that denies opportunity to those who have not been able to attend good high schools… is wrong.\u201d Outside of Halifax, the Dalhousie Faculty of Arts and Science recognized only a few good high schools in Nova Scotia capable of solid matriculation work.[7]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

Nevertheless, in 1933 the faculty agreed that beginning in September 1934 the Dalhousie minimum entrance requirement would be English, Algebra, a foreign language, plus four other matriculation subjects. These new rules would be sent to all Maritime provinces high schools and to Newfoundland schools. In this tightening of rules, Dalhousie wanted to carry the other colleges with her; but although there was talk of doing so, only St. Francis Xavier followed Dalhousie\u2019s lead. Stanley complained bitterly that some colleges, notably Acadia, were pouring graduates out into the school system as teachers without requiring either Latin or mathematics or a foreign language of any kind for a BA. What kind of teachers would such students make?[8]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

Dalhousie\u2019s restrictions on admission had an effect on enrolment, which dropped from 1,015 in 1931-2 to 846 in 1934-5. Mount Allison\u2019s enrolment stayed fairly consistent at about 400 between 1930 and 1935. That was owing, according to Stanley, to blatant recruiting; Mount Allison hired six young women as canvassers, who each had a car and were given five dollars for every student they secured. Acadia was alleged to have matched that with six dollars. The president of the University of New Brunswick, C.C. Jones, grumbled to Stanley in October 1934 about both colleges; one student had telegraphed President Jones, \u201cAm offered $100 by Mt. Allison, and $100 by Acadia. What do you offer?\u201d Jones replied, \u201cIf you are fully matriculated, we offer you the best education we can give you.\u201d That was not always good enough, UNB\u2019s registration was down 15 per cent in 1934-5, and according to Jones, there were many at both Acadia and Mount Allison whom UNB would not have admitted. Jones congratulated Dalhousie on doing what it had done, refurbishing standards, risking enrolment.[9]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

Privately Stanley had much fault to find with Dalhousie. The university had no economics professor; Stanley did not consider W.R. Maxwell at King\u2019s, with a Harvard MA, up to standard. Dalhousie had no professor of Greek, nor of German, although both subjects were taught; he thought the staff in mathematics weak (the head of the department was Murray Macneill); J.G. Adshead, with a first-class degree from Cambridge, was appointed in 1927 (King\u2019s), and Charles Walmsley also from Cambridge in 1929. Both were good lecturers, Adshead in particular. But neither were research-minded; distant frontiers had little appeal for them, and they swung easily into teaching routines under Murray Macneill. Stanley thought the Department of English, now that MacMechan was gone, no better.[10]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

However, as the result of submissions made by MacKenzie and Pearson in 1931, the Carnegie Foundation gave $125,000 in 1933 to endow a chair in geology. In 1932 Stanley appointed George Vibert Douglas, aged forty, a big, vibrant bear of a man, noisy, open-hearted and energetic, a Canadian from McGill, who had taught at Harvard, and had been on Shackleton\u2019s last Antarctic expedition in 1921. Douglas had been geologist for the Rio Tinto copper mine when the depression closed it down. \u201cIt would be hard to find,\u201d wrote L.C. Graton of Harvard recommending Douglas, \u201ca man more charged with dynamic energy, constructive ideas, absolute loyalty and concentrated sunshine.\u201d Douglas was Stanley\u2019s man from the day of his appointment to Dalhousie. Douglas stirred up the campus. One student recalled his first lecture in Geology 1 in 1932; Douglas could be heard coming, clumping down the hall in his walking boots, starting to lecture as he came through the door. He liked to throw open a window, fall or winter. He smoked a gnarled pipe, loaded with a Canadian tobacco called \u201cOld Chum,\u201d which he lit with long Eddy matches that were carried in a long waterproof cylinder. He was a character, knew it, and revelled in it. He was also a one-man department, giving eight separate courses. He was a good lecturer; if his science was occasionally rusty, the students liked him for his forthrightness and generosity, his ebullient air of imperturbable cheerfulness.<\/p>\n

Stanley wanted to appoint new men in whom he could rejoice; with him every new Dalhousie vacancy was a golden opportunity to find the best man available. Stanley saw Dalhousie, and many another Canadian university, cursed with the results of appointments made in a hurry: \u201cthe landscape is littered with misfits and experiments that never flowered or even burgeoned.\u201d He was not going to make that mistake. Moreover, he said, \u201cI must get people to reinforce my own plans.\u201d Those included trying to raise Dalhousie\u2019s standards. He was persuaded by his own experience, and perhaps that of his father-in-law, W.J. Alexander, that the Dalhousie graduates of 1885 to 1905 were far above the current crop. \u201cNot only were these men and women well educated,\u201d said Stanley, \u201cbut they nearly all had some nobility of soul. At least one could say that they formed a little nucleus of public conscience in the communities in which they lived.\u201d[11]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

Stanley\u2019s most outspoken public criticism was against the Nova Scotian (and Canadian) public schools, against weak teachers and bad textbooks, against the spurious pedagogy that in his view encouraged both. He sent his own son to Rothesay Collegiate, a private school in New Brunswick, in 1934. The printed annual reports of Dalhousie presidents are not noted for their charm or intellectual vigour; some, like President MacKenzie\u2019s, seem almost to have been deliberately pedestrian and low-key, as if the secret of successful development was understatement. Stanley\u2019s annual reports were quite the reverse – vigorous, trenchant, forthright; they called spades spades. He would quote Lucretius,\u00a0De Rerum Natura<\/em>, to explain why,<\/p>\n

\n
\n

…Medio de fonte leporum
\nSurgit amari aliquid quod in ipsis floribus angat.<\/p>\n

…In the midst of a fountain of delights
\nComes up bitterness that chokes their very beauties.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/blockquote>\n

His annual report for 1933-4 is a case in point, condemning public school education and all its works, and not sparing universities either:<\/p>\n

\n
But if so many teachers in the secondary schools are illiterate, and have to be spoonfed by pretentious editors, whose fault is that? Are the universities forever to be permitted to rail at the schools for sending them students who are dunces… ? If the teachers of French in our secondary schools cannot read a sentence of French so that a Frenchman would recognise the words, whose fault is that? Has it to do with the vicious importation [from the United States] of a certain kind of pedagogy which says openly, blatantly and continuously, \u201cit matters not whether teachers know what they teach, so long as they know how to teach it\u201d? This is equivalent to claiming that it does not matter whether you know\u00a0what<\/em>\u00a0to feed a baby so long as you know\u00a0how<\/em>\u00a0to feed it. Get the proper bottle and the proper nipple, and it does not matter whether you fill the bottle with cow\u2019s milk or arsenic, especially if you have taken a course in nutritional psychology.<\/div>\n<\/blockquote>\n

That was hard-hitting, but he won approval in New York at the Carnegie Foundation. James Bertram congratulated Stanley on his courage and force, and showed the address to one of the Carnegie trustees who said, \u201cThis is a fine blast, and I\u2019m sure President Stanley is right.\u201d Stanley sent Bertram\u2019s comment to F.B. McCurdy, chairman of the board\u2019s Finance Committee, to counter criticisms the report had, not surprisingly, earned for Stanley and Dalhousie. McCurdy wrote back, \u201cAm glad to read the above comment, though regretful that his important approval could be purchased only at the cost of so much local good will.\u201d Stanley was confident there was not much ill will. \u201cI don\u2019t believe it exists,\u201d he told McCurdy confidently, \u201coutside the minds of a few. And I have strong evidence that the few grow fewer.\u201d But he was wrong. By 1938 and a few more blasts, Stanley himself admitted that Dalhousie\u2019s only friend among the secondary schools of Nova Scotia was the Halifax Ladies College. There were times when Stanley could usefully have remembered Sir John A. Macdonald\u2019s old saw, that one caught more flies with honey than with vinegar.[12]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

By 1934 Dalhousie\u2019s financial position was better than many colleges, though it was serious enough. The depression had cut dividend and bond income, but Dalhousie\u2019s investments had been so well placed that losses on capital were slight compared to others. That was the good side. The bad side was current debt. The new gymnasium, built in 1931-2, cost $150,000, much of it borrowed, and it added substantially to Dalhousie\u2019s existing debt. As of 30 June 1938 the accumulated deficit was $201,170. How was one to prevent it rising further? McGill University had reduced its academic salaries by 10 per cent. Stanley had opposed that, and neither Pearson nor his successor Hector McInnes had suggested it. Mclnnes thought it could not be done without the consent of the professors. There was talk in 1936 of a campaign, but no real spirit for it. J.L. Hetherington, a member of the board, told R.B. Bennett:<\/p>\n

\n
The immediate Dalhousie constituency is somewhat lukewarm and suffering perhaps a bit from divided enthusiasm and an inferiority complex… it may be apparent to yourself that the staff is without personalities such as it had in former days. The Board, as well, unfortunately, is not conspicuous in leadership among its members, many of whom are now elderly men who have served their day.<\/div>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Hector Mclnnes, chairman since 1932, was seventy-six and there were several other prominent members in their seventies. But to Bennett it was not so much a question of age as impossibility. \u201cI know of no means,\u201d he told Hetherington, \u201cby which you can raise half a million dollars within the next few years.\u201d[13]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

The crunch was at the Medical Faculty. Its 1929-30 income was $90,611, but its expenses were $20,000 more. Of that deficit, $15,000 was incurred by the Public Health Clinic, which had been running annual deficits on almost the same scale for the past few years. The endowment needed to give $20,000 additional annual income was, at 4.5 per cent, $444,444. New money like that was nowhere in sight.[14]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

The head of the Public Health Clinic was the assistant dean of medicine, W.H. Hattie, who really functioned as dean. The dean himself, Dr. John Stewart, CBE, had been in the office since 1912 and had had an honourable career: assistant under Lister in Edinburgh, an able surgeon in Halifax, then head of Canadian Stationary Hospital No. 7 in the Great War. But by the end of the 1920s he was old and tired; Hattie was doing all the work, Stewart just signed the forms. Hattie was loyal, modest, and generous; his specialty was mental illness. He used to tell fourth-year medical students, many interested in surgery, that it might be ten years before they would see a patient needing a gall bladder operation, but they would see a psychiatric patient in their first hour of practice. In December 1931 Hattie died in harness; Stewart resigned six months later.[15]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

Dean H.G. \u201cPat\u201d Grant and the Medical Faculty<\/strong>
\nA new and active dean of medicine was now imperative. In November 1931 there was even consideration given to shutting down the Schools of Medicine and Dentistry altogether. President Stanley\u2019s position was straightforward. New as he was to the scene, having acquired as yet little authority with the board, he nevertheless took this position:<\/p>\n

\n
You can\u2019t cut limbs off the community like that without taking the community into your counsels. Since 1868, by something like a succession of miracles, you have maintained a Medical School here, and for many years a Dental School. You say the public is indifferent and has never offered you support. Have you let the public know that you need support?<\/div>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Perhaps, said Stanley, Nova Scotians think that the private endowments of Carnegie and Rockefeller, so talked about in the early 1920s, signified that Dalhousie did not need public money. Stanley concluded that through drift and the absence of any strong dean, the Public Health Clinic had been allowed to go on haemorrhaging the university.[16]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

The board girded itself up and faced the future, carrying its Medicine and its Dentistry burdens as best it could. And they found a new dean – a Nova Scotian, Harry Goudge Grant, forty-three years old, who had taken his MD from Dalhousie in 1912. He and Atlee had done postgraduate work in London together. Grant\u2019s specialty was preventive medicine, and he had become director of county health work in Virginia where he was epidemiologist since 1926. Grant would stay as dean for the next twenty-two years.<\/p>\n

Harry Grant (he was always called \u201cPat\u201d) was very different from Stewart or Hattie. He had little of their paternalism. One of Grant\u2019s younger colleagues, Dr. H.L. Scammell, remembered being in Fredericton with him, interviewing UNB students for Dalhousie Medical School. Scammell was much struck by the obliquity of Grant\u2019s questions. How did they spend their summers? What did they work at? What games did they like to play? Grant was trying to elucidate their character. He was a great ideas man; he rather liked leaping at suggestions. As this was combined with a generous and incurable optimism, Grant would often promise more than he could deliver. But he would try anyway. He persuaded the faculty, rather against its will, to make the fourth year of medicine a clinical year.[17]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

Of the income of the Medical Faculty for 1929-30, 41 per cent came from class fees. The cost of the whole faculty, per student, was $642. Income per Canadian student was about $180, American $320. It was not good arithmetic. Grant\u2019s first major exercise in December 1932 was to cut the 1933-4 budget of $71,000. He managed a 6 per cent cut, pointing out he did not think the faculty should be charged with a share of the cost of Shirreff Hall. He also reminded the board – it was neither the first nor the last time that a dean of medicine would find this threat useful – that \u201cOur Medical School is at present a class A medical school, and drastic economies within our various departments will undoubtedly result in our losing that status.\u201d<\/p>\n

Fundamentally, Stanley was angry with the whole medical question. McGill thought it had the best medical school in Canada, but it had been overtaken by Toronto, where politicians understood what Montreal millionaires did not, \u201cthat a medical school requires a mint of money.\u201d Dalhousie\u2019s undertakings in medicine were not the \u201cgallant and courageous endeavours\u201d Stanley had heard them called. \u201cThey were blunders by ignorant and stupid people who wanted to make a show. On top of that we undertook a Public Health Centre.\u201d[18]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

The clinic was the sore point with Stanley. President MacKenzie had warned the city in 1928 that Dalhousie would have to close it down if help were not forthcoming, but nothing was done about implementing the threat. In 1929 Hattie pointed out to the city what the clinic was and how important were its functions. The city opted for the happy thought that Dalhousie would not carry out its threat, that the clinic was needed for Dalhousie\u2019s own medical students. In part that surmise was correct.<\/p>\n

The clinic\u2019s purpose was simple, its functions many. None of the Halifax hospitals had out-patient departments. Rich and middle-class patients could find and pay their own doctors; but the only place the poor could go had been, for nearly a century, the Halifax Visiting Dispensary. In 1924 the dispensary accepted Dalhousie\u2019s invitation to take space in the new Public Health Clinic, with out-patient doctors supplied by Dalhousie. The Public Health Clinic also provided free accommodation to the Halifax Welfare Bureau and a VD clinic for the provincial Department of Health. Opening on 1 November 1924, the clinic handled nearly seven thousand cases in its first year, and by 1930 that had more than doubled.<\/p>\n

Great assistance in running the Public Health Clinic had come from the thirteen full-time nurses and one doctor of the Massachusetts-Halifax Health Commission. The commission, chaired by G.F. Pearson, had been an outgrowth of the Halifax explosion, but such outside philanthropy could not go on for ever. The commission announced that its work would end on 31 May 1928. From the thirteen full-time nurses the staff at the Public Health Clinic was reduced by 75 per cent.[19]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

The running of the Public Health Clinic was now wholly in Dalhousie\u2019s lap. President MacKenzie was worried about what responsibilities Dalhousie should retain, and there was uncertainty in the minds of some of the Dalhousie governors. The Public Health Clinic, said Dugald Macgillivray, \u201cwas always draped with a good deal of mystery and individual possession by both Pearson and MacKenzie, and what it meant or was to mean in cost to Dalhousie never gripped us.\u201d That suggests some deliberate obfuscation by Pearson, a strong public health man, confident doubtless that in time the City of Halifax would be willing to shoulder its proper responsibilities.[20]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

There was no doubt that the teaching value of the clinic was considerable, with its great variety of out-patient cases. Hattie had devised a follow-up arrangement whereby the medical students would visit out-patients in their homes and thus see the environments that had nurtured TB, infant mortality, and other public health problems. Those visits were a revelation to many students. Nevertheless, Dalhousie was now paying for the clinic from its own money, and Hattie\u2019s efforts to get the city to pay for any of it were unavailing.<\/p>\n

Halifax for its part was struggling to get back on its own feet. After the explosion of 6 December 1917 the task of rebuilding the city was taken over by governmental and philanthropic boards. The Halifax Relief Commission was established by the Dominion government early in 1918 to provide permanent care for the injured and crippled, and to rebuild the shattered north end of Halifax and parts of Dartmouth. The city was going to be hard up for some time yet; its tax base had shrunk, some of it permanently, and swaths of property belonging to two governments, the armed services, educational institutions, churches, and cemeteries were wholly exempt from taxes. Thus Dalhousie\u2019s request to have the city fund the Public Health Clinic was put off as long as possible.[21]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

This problem of the Public Health Clinic was the first thing Carleton Stanley encountered in September 1931. The Board of Governors recognized the importance of the clinic\u2019s work, but where could it find the money without adding to Dalhousie\u2019s burgeoning debt? Over the years Dalhousie had already contributed more than $100,000 to the clinic. It had done much to bring medical students face to face with health and preventive medicine as a social question. But as Dean Grant pointed out in a letter to the papers two years later, \u201cIt can be said without fear of contradiction that in no other place in the world is it [the medical care of the sick poor] done by a University.\u201d Carleton Stanley claimed that the knowledge so gained from the clinic had not done much public good, for \u201cthe slums that send us patients… are allowed to remain.\u201d[22]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

The president and the new dean of medicine went to New York in the autumn of 1932 to make an appeal to the Rockefeller Foundation for funding for a Department of Preventive Medicine. The City of Halifax was approached for $10,000 annually for the clinic; the best it could manage was $2,500. The Nova Scotia government was asked for $5,000 per annum, and it proved more generous. It happened that Dalhousie\u2019s professor of clinical surgery, Dr. G.H. Murphy, was elected in a 1929 by-election for Halifax County, and became minister of health in August 1930 in the Conservative government of Premier G.S. Harrington. That gave Dalhousie an entree. In February 1933, being finally persuaded of the importance to the province of public health, the Nova Scotia government offered $5,000 a year on condition that Dalhousie raise a like amount somewhere else. As Stanley told Dr. Murphy, \u201cthe help comes in the very nick of time.\u201d It allowed Dalhousie to show local support to Rockefeller. Dr. Alan Gregg of the Rockefeller Foundation came to Halifax in May 1933, and the upshot was that the Foundation offered a matching grant, up to $8,800 a year, for five years, to support a Department of Preventive Medicine, built around the work of the Public Health Clinic.[23]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

That was how the Public Health Clinic grew in the 1930s. This noble ambition, as Stanley put it in 1937, was supported by large gifts by Carnegie and Rockefeller, by the public conscience of Dalhousie, and, not least, by the generosity of the city\u2019s doctors, dozens of whom served the clinic for many years without reward. However, the new arrangements merely eased Dalhousie\u2019s financial problems with the clinic; the City of Halifax\u2019s $2,500 was a woeful example of underfunding.[24]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

When Angus L. Macdonald and the Liberals defeated the Harrington government in the provincial election of August 1933, Dean Grant, adroit and assiduous, made sure that the new minister of health, Dr. Frank Davis of Bridgewater, saw something of public health practices. Davis was a country doctor and \u201chad his eyes opened very wide,\u201d Stanley said, to see what other cities like Toronto did.[25]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

Angus L. Macdonald (1890-1954), the new premier, was born in Cape Breton, the gold medallist at St. Francis Xavier in 1914, and joined the Canadian army. After the war he took his LL.B. at Dalhousie in 1921, worked for the attorney general, and came to Dalhousie in 1924 as professor of law, teaching statutes and rules of their interpretation. He found $2,500 a year thin going for a man newly married, and resigned in 1930 to go into private practice, becoming leader of the opposition Liberal party that year. He was elected for Halifax South in the Liberal sweep of August 1933.[26]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

Angus L. was not Nova Scotia\u2019s first Roman Catholic premier, but he was the longest lived politically. With brains, vigour, and not a little fighting skill in the Assembly, he was soon unassailable. He needed it, for he had had a feud with Bishop Morrison of Antigonish over, university federation. Angus L. explained it confidentially to Carleton Stanley in 1937. The Antigonish\u00a0Casket<\/em>\u00a0in 1922 had argued that St. Francis Xavier should not join university federation. It was impossible to get anyone in the Antigonish diocese to answer the\u00a0Casket<\/em>\u00a0articles, so Angus L. wrote a dozen pro-federation articles from his desk at the Dalhousie Law School. The\u00a0Casket<\/em>\u00a0refused to publish them, so Angus L. sent them to the Sydney\u00a0Post<\/em>. The bishop did not forgive what he viewed as reckless freedom. Angus L. wanted to get rid of the Maritime degree-granting colleges in favour of one first-class university in Halifax, with a college for Catholics, one for Baptists, and so on. He still did in 1937; a university could have been created, he told Stanley, like a Canadian Princeton, instead of what the Maritimes ended up with in 1937 – thirteen colleges each with their graduates going forth into the world believing they were university-trained. What they had, said Angus L., was \u201conly about equivalent to a first-rate high school.\u201d[27]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

The 1935 Dalhousie Act<\/strong>
\nThe connections between Dalhousie and the government allowed it to seek a new act to bring its charter up to date. Opening up an institutional act is never entirely without risk. If the government is strong, or there is good will on both sides of the House, there is usually no difficulty. It had been discovered that the members of the Board of Governors had not been properly appointed. The reason was the power, given in the 1863 act, to the person or body endowing a chair to nominate a governor and name the professor. The board also nominated governors, and the two principles had become confused. This was briefly patched up in 1934, pursuant to a new act to be passed in 1935. A joint committee of board and Senate began meetings in October 1934. Hector Mclnnes, chairman of the board, decided simply to correct mistakes and bring the 1863 act up to date. The new act was not intended to provide a new constitution for the university, nor to alter the powers of board or president; it would merely regularize existing appointments, and \u201celiminate the antiquated right of nomination of donors\u201d of either governors or professors. The old right of the Church of Scotland to nominate a governor and appoint a professor lingered, now converted to the right of the United Church to nominate a governor.[28]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

Senate members liked the idea of a wholly new act. Hugh Bell noted that for many years past Senate and board had been drawing apart; now was a good opportunity to pull them together again. Senate on the whole liked Bell\u2019s argument, but Senate did not get its way. The board wanted to end appointments to its board by the provincial cabinet, but it did not get its way either.[29]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

The board constituted by the 1935 act consisted of twenty-two governors appointed by governor-in-council, six Alumni representatives, three Alumnae, two representatives from King\u2019s College, the United Church governor, and the mayor of Halifax, ex officio – thirty-five in all. There were three new departures: an executive committee of the board was formally constituted; full-time professors were excluded from membership on the board; and as\u00a0quid pro quo<\/em>\u00a0for that, a formal attempt was made to bring board and Senate together on major issues of university policy. This last was Senate\u2019s idea. It had in mind the creation of a court, modelled on the University of Edinburgh, that would deal with such matters as annual expenditures, university policy, buildings, and the development of new departments. The board preferred ad hoc joint committees when necessary, but Senate stuck to its guns, and thus the compromise emerged creating what came to be called \u201cThe Six and Six.\u201d The wording is interesting:<\/p>\n

\n
3.(1) The Board shall from time to time when any new department, building, project or policy arises for consideration, appoint a committee of its members to meet with a like committee of the Senate, which joint committee shall investigate the same and recommend to the Board its findings thereon.<\/div>\n<\/blockquote>\n

The act required a statutory meeting of the Six and Six every October, at which anything pertaining to the welfare of the university could be discussed, and there could be ad hoc meetings at any time. Stanley claimed that the Six and Six clause was a result of the backstairs influence of G.F. Pearson. Indeed, said Stanley, the whole 1935 revision had been set going by that \u201carch-imp\u201d downtown. Certainly the 1935 act absorbed a great deal of Stanley\u2019s energies over the winter of 1934-5.[30]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

What did not get into the 1935 act was a clause about the duties of the president. Stanley thought there was need for it. No one would know, he said, from the brief allusion to the president in the 1863 act that the president had what Stanley called \u201cundisputed prerogatives\u201d: to recommend all teaching appointments to the board; to busy himself with university finance; to preside at all faculty meetings if he wished; to represent Dalhousie before the public; and to oversee grounds, buildings, curricula, and discipline. Stanley also wanted a clause on academic tenure. \u201cIt is part of the unwritten law about Canadian Universities that anyone who secures a post as high as Associate Professor is appointed for life or on good behaviour.\u201d[31]<\/sup><\/a>\u00a0Stanley got neither of these clauses. Common law lawyers resist setting down more than they have to. The powers of the president would remain undefined, and the tenure of professors the same. Stanley hated the Dalhousie charter. Five years later, out of temper both with board and Senate, Stanley told the chairman that what Dalhousie needed was \u201cthe abolition of the fatuous charter under which we operate.\u201d[32]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

Dismissing Murray Macneill<\/strong>
\nIn 1936 Stanley managed to depose his b\u00eate noire, the registrar, Murray Macneill. Macneill would remain only United Church professor of mathematics. Probably no one will get to the bottom of that feud. That Macneill was devoted to Dalhousie and its reputation is patent; that he was difficult at times to get along with is true. There were minor incidents; Angus L. asked Macneill if he would act as Nova Scotia\u2019s civil service commissioner in his spare time. To Macneill\u2019s request for permission Stanley offered two months leave without pay. That was not what Macneill asked for, and Angus L. had to intervene. In 1936, having had no holiday for five years, Macneill asked permission to go to England for a few weeks to see his daughter, Janet Macneill Aitken. She had married Lord Beaverbrook\u2019s son, Peter Aitken, and had a new baby. The baby was fine: the marriage wasn\u2019t. There was an Imperial Universities\u2019 Conference on that summer, and it would save Macneill money if he could be one of Dalhousie\u2019s four delegates. To his request, Stanley replied crisply that Macneill could go but \u201cas to the representation of Dalhousie at the Conference of Imperial Universities, I have made other arrangements.\u201d[33]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

\"Photograph<\/a>
Murray Macneill, Professor of Mathematics, 1907-41; Registrar, Arts and Science, 1908-36; University Registrar, 1921-36. A student at Dalhousie during Lucy Maud Montgomery\u2019s year, 1895-6, he was said to be the model for Gilbert Blythe in Anne of Green Gables and was not pleased.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

The immediate issue between Stanley and Macneill was Dalhousie\u2019s standards of admission. Stanley had changed from 1931-3 when he wanted to tighten them, to 1936 when he was willing to make them more flexible. One reason was Dalhousie\u2019s declining enrolment, down 24 per cent in Arts and Science between 1931-2 and 1935-6. There were many reasons for it, the depression not least, but one was the notorious competition for students between colleges in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick. Macneill for his part seems to have gone the other way, finding reasons for tightening Dalhousie\u2019s admission standards. Stanley and Macneill each seem to have been using the issue to get at the other.<\/p>\n

Stanley had a list of some fifty-five students from Dalhousie and King\u2019s, the correspondence with whom proved to Stanley that they were being discouraged from coming to Dalhousie. There were complaints from A.H. Moore, president of King\u2019s, of Macneill\u2019s rigidity. King\u2019s was losing students, said Moore, and Macneill should not to be so choosy. Remember, he warned Stanley,<\/p>\n

\n
that the majority of these principals and teachers is made up of Acadia graduates, and I would not put it by some of them that they would welcome more active requirements on our part in order that they might say to their students: \u201cTo enter Dalhousie or King\u2019s you will have to have all these, but with a smaller list of qualifications it will be possible for you to go to Acadia.\u201d[34]<\/sup><\/a><\/div>\n<\/blockquote>\n

In view of \u201cthe intensive and persistent campaign that other schools are making for students,\u201d Stanley wrote, Macneill\u2019s attitude was \u201csimply madness… If we paid someone to keep students away, how could the salary be better earned?\u201d Thus he charged Murray Macneill with lack of support and cooperation, and asked the board to dismiss him as registrar.<\/p>\n

In mid-May 1936 the executive of the board sat through two meetings and four hours listening to Stanley\u2019s complaints against Macneill. Some were not serious, some were explained, but most charges Macneill thought so ridiculous he would not answer them. What troubled the executive most was the bitter enmity between the two men. Nor would Macneill accept the board\u2019s offer to resign. He was in England when the board relieved him of his duties as registrar, on 30 May, effective the next day, notifying him by cable. His office staff were much upset at what they felt was very shabby treatment. Macneill, bitter and aggrieved, wrote the chairman of the board:<\/p>\n

\n
My whole life has been devoted to Dalhousie University. My own feeling is that I have been charged with disloyalty without reason, and with very evident malice. The executive have apparently seen fit to agree to charges which I consider ridiculous and untrue… All I can ask now is to be allowed, for the few years that remain of my active life, to be of what service I can to the college I have always loved.<\/div>\n<\/blockquote>\n

That meant his work as professor of mathematics, a position which of course he retained until his retirement in 1942. His family believed his dismissal as registrar quite broke his spirit. He was the second person thus broken by Dalhousie\u2019s philosopher-president. Dalhousie had been Macneill’s whole life. Since 1907 the Macneill home at 83 Inglis Street had been a Dalhousie social centre. Every Sunday afternoon in term there would be a tea party, or in winter snowshoe or skating parties.[35]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

An immediate consequence of Macneill’s dethronement was Stanley\u2019s discovery that he would need a dean of arts and science. Hitherto he had not had one, preferring to run his own show in that faculty. Professors Bennet and Johnston would be part-time co-registrars, and a dean would organize the faculty, by which Stanley meant setting agendas for meetings and preventing a waste of time in them. In June 1936 he persuaded Professor C.B. Nickerson of the Chemistry Department to accept the deanship for three years, at $1,000 a year extra pay. Nickerson had been at Dalhousie since 1918, was well connected, being married to Agnes Harrington, sister of the Gordon Harrington, the premier from 1930 to 1933. He was well liked by the staff, popular with students, ever ready with a genial comment or timely anecdote. He and his wife, with no children, were often chaperones at the many Dalhousie dances.<\/p>\n

Profile of Dalhousie Students<\/strong>
\nIn 1933 it was said that Dalhousie had \u201ca dance a day.\u201d Stanley explained it to C.E Crandall, president of British United Press, Montreal, who thought his daughter Ruth at Shirreff Hall had too much social life. College life, said Stanley, had changed much since our time. What students called \u201cactivities\u201d bulked large. \u201cA dance a day\u201d was a slander on most students, but near the truth if one counted them up. \u201cIt\u2019s notorious that it is a small fraction of our students that keep all these dances going.\u201d Stanley asserted that of the nearly one hundred students who failed in three or more subjects in the spring of 1933, most were not the weaker students but those who went to all the dances.<\/p>\n

By the time Ruth Crandall graduated in 1935, students had begun to realize something of the sacrifices it was taking to get them to university and keep them there. They were survivors rather than radicals. The typical Dalhousie student of the later 1930s came from a besieged but surviving family. Some parents borrowed money to send a daughter or a son to university because they passionately believed in higher education. There were a few students from wealthy families on Young Avenue, and a few others from blue-collar families, students who had managed to hang on by wits and determination beyond Grade 8. Students in general worked at their studies; law students worked harder at Dalhousie than they did at Toronto according to John Willis, who taught at both. But he also claimed that the law students of the 1930s were not as good as in former years. He attributed it partly to Dalhousie Law School accepting students they should have rejected, needing the fees. Willis also claimed that too many of his law students of the later 1930s were there because well-to-do fathers could afford to send them, there being so few jobs available.[36]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

So far as fathers\u2019 occupations can be traced, of 2,271 fathers of Dalhousie students during the 1930s, 28 per cent were professionals, 31 per cent businessmen. That was perhaps to be expected. But 21 per cent of Dalhousie students had fathers who were artisans, farmers, fishermen, skilled or semi-skilled workmen. The great majority of Dalhousie students were from backgrounds that can be described as middle class, for whom a university education was a major expense, especially where fathers were school teachers or clergymen. As to defining what middle class was, one easy (but treacherous) definition from the 1930s was that it was those families who used napkin rings. Upper-class families had fresh napkins every meal; lower-class families neither knew nor cared about napkins; middle-class families had napkins, cared very much, and washed those symbols of their respectability once a week. Middle-class students, once graduated, tended to move upwards within the middle class. But of the male graduates of Dalhousie between 1931 and 1940, 25 per cent cannot be traced, whereas of the group between 1921 and 1926, 92 per cent can be. That suggests that a group of Dalhousie graduates in the 1930s remained unemployed or worked at jobs they did not care to report on. Or perhaps they were killed in the Second World War.[37]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

Women graduates improved their positions, but it was less through professional work as teachers, librarians, nurses and more by marriage. Tracing Dalhousie alumnae through the\u00a0Alumni Magazine<\/em>, as Paul Axelrod has done, suggests that only seventeen of the fifty-nine women who graduated in 1936 found professional work. Thus women who aspired to professional careers in the 1930s probably had a decidedly chancy time of it.<\/p>\n

Women were 28 per cent of Dalhousie students in 1930, that figure going to 23.5 per cent in 1939. The reason was simple: as money got tighter, families opted for educating sons who could better anticipate a working career. Sons also found summer work more readily than daughters, and thus were less of a drain on family funds. Nevertheless it is noteworthy that 22 per cent of Dalhousie students in 1935 were women.<\/p>\n

For the quarter of Dalhousie students that were women, Lucy Maud Montgomery, writing in a special co-ed issue of the\u00a0Gazette<\/em>\u00a0in February 1939<\/a>, had some shrewd advice. An old lady once told her, \u201cDon\u2019t marry as long as you can help it because when the right man comes along you can\u2019t help it.\u201d It was, said the author of\u00a0Anne of Green Gables<\/em>, the same with writing. And, she added, don\u2019t try to hit the public taste: \u201cThe public taste does not really like being hit. It prefers to be allured into some fresh pasture surprised.\u201d Finally, she said, write about what you know: \u201ctragedy is being enacted in the next yard. Comedy is playing across the street.\u201d That was advice the other 75 per cent of Dalhousie students could well profit from too.<\/p>\n

Male and female, Dalhousie students of the 1930s, based on averages for 1930-1, 1935-6, and 1939-40, were 67 per cent Nova Scotians. Students from the United States were prominent in medicine and dentistry. Jewish students, especially, found it difficult to crack the unvoiced principles of exclusion at American medical schools, so they came north. Dalhousie\u2019s Medical School, being class A, allowed Jewish students to graduate from Dalhousie and return to the United States and get state licences to practise.<\/p>\n

Dalhousie students\u2019 religious affiliations in the 1930s had changed somewhat from the decade before. The new element was Jewish students – now 11 per cent of enrolment, up from almost nothing in the 1920s. Roman Catholic students were up slightly from 13 to 15 per cent. Anglicans increased from 14 to 23 per cent, the result of the addition of King\u2019s. Presbyterian students were the most serious concern. In the early 1920s they were 51 per cent of Dalhousie students. After the creation of the United Church in 1925, one should have expected an increase with former Methodist students added. Instead, the United Church students at Dalhousie were only 34 per cent, plus some students whose old Presbyterian families refused to accept the 1925 union, another 6 per cent.[38]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

The decrease in the number of Pictou County students at Dalhousie worried President MacKenzie, who first made it public in his annual report for 1911-12, when Pictonians in arts and science had fallen from 18 per cent in 1891 to 13 per cent in 1911. By 1931 the figure was 8 per cent. The New Glasgow\u00a0Eastern Chronicle<\/em>\u00a0commented on it, attributing it to parents being happier with the sterner oversight of students at Antigonish, Wolfville, and Sackville. And less metropolitan temptations: F.B. Squire in the\u00a0Dalhousie Gazette<\/em>\u00a0suggested that Senate\u2019s attempts to ban student renting of hotel rooms at the Nova Scotian Hotel\u2019s Saturday night dances was not done for morality but to calm uneasy parents. It was also true, as the\u00a0Eastern Chronicle<\/em>\u00a0noted, that Dalhousie, a little like UNB, had no longer a distinct denominational background. Since \u201cDalhousie is one of Pictou\u2019s gifts to the welfare of Nova Scotia,\u201d more work was needed to recruit students in Pictou County. This and other pressures caused the chairman of the board, Hector Mclnnes, born and raised in Pictou County, to make three visits to Pictou to stir up relations, friends, and alumni in 1936 and early 1937.[39]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

There were not enough scholarships. The Munro exhibitions and bursaries had gone with Munro\u2019s death in 1896, and nothing quite like their scale had been substituted since. The bursaries and scholarships that did exist were also less rich than before because of a diminution of dividends and bond interest. There was even a suggestion from the president that those who won scholarships and did not need the money return it to the university. By the end of the 1930s 11.6 per cent of Maritime students had entrance or undergraduate scholarships which averaged $113 a year. That was better than in the West but slightly below that in Ontario.[40]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

Student tuition costs in 1930 were about $112 a year in arts, rising to $125 in 1932 over President Stanley\u2019s objections. Arts classes were $25 each, sciences classes $40. A student needed about $300 for room and board in Halifax. Thus a year at Dalhousie, including books and personal expenses, would come to about $600. Henry Hicks was given a $500 prize when he graduated from Mount Allison in 1936, and used it to come to Dalhousie in 1936-7. It just about covered his expenses, which were \u201cfive hundred and forty-six dollars to attend Dalhousie then, and pay for my residence at Pine Hill Divinity Hall where I lived and even to take a girl to the supper dances at the Nova Scotian Hotel every other week or so.\u201d The sum of $546 may seem modest, but it has to be set against salaries then current. In 1937 a beginning bank clerk was paid $400 a year, an experienced typist $700.[41]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

Henry Hicks lived at Pine Hill; so had Larry MacKenzie, fifteen years before, as there were no men\u2019s residences. Male students were not expected to make their own way completely in the untender world of Halifax boarding houses; Dalhousie kept an avuncular eye on boarding and rooming houses used by its students. The dean of medicine reported in February 1935 on 214 houses for male students: ninety-one offered room and board, sixty-eight were rooms only, thirty-nine offered room with breakfast. For sleeping accommodation the dean reported that half provided double beds. There was nothing strange in the 1930s about men sleeping together; indeed, that was the way many of them had grown up. Three-quarters of the houses had what Dalhousie designated as good washing and toilet facilities – that is, bath, washbasin, and toilet for every six students. Stanley was not satisfied and kept hoping for $750,000 that would enable Dalhousie to build a men\u2019s residence; but it did not come.[42]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

For that reason a few modest branches of American fraternities appeared at Dalhousie in the 1930s. President MacKenzie had seen them coming and wondered how best to deal with them. Robert Falconer\u2019s advice from the University of Toronto was to ward them off, if possible, \u201cbut unless you can get residences for men, or keep the college small, they\u2019ll come.\u201d Sidney Smith told Stanley much the same in 1932, but Smith was positive, seeing fraternities\u2019 useful function as residences for men. They were self-governing largely, communal boarding houses run by the occupants, and usually owned by a small clutch of benevolent alumni. At first Stanley did not like them, but within a couple of years he had begun to find them useful. Dalhousie never recognized them, but neither did it ban them. By the end of the 1930s there were seven fraternities and two sororities. They tended to be anti-Jewish, the law fraternity specifically so; but there is no evidence that in Nova Scotia they were what they sometimes were in the United States, anti-Catholic. The\u00a0Gazette<\/em>, in October 1934<\/a>, gave an opinion that while fraternities raised hell now and then, and tended to play student power politics, on the other hand they were pleasant houses for men of like interests. President Stanley preferred them kept under control.[43]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

The president ran afoul of student opinion in the great badminton crisis of 1934. Mixed badminton Stanley himself suggested as a useful antidote to the erotic temptations of dancing, but he wanted the game taken seriously, with proper clothes, which meant white flannels for men and white skirts for women. One day he found a young woman playing badminton in shorts, and a ban on mixed badminton issued forthwith from the president\u2019s office. To the\u00a0Gazette<\/em>\u00a0it was irresistible:<\/p>\n

\n
The boys and girls must play alone,
\nThey cannot play together –
\nYour father wouldn\u2019t sanction it,
\nAnd neither would your mother.<\/div>\n<\/blockquote>\n

he Halifax\u00a0Citizen<\/em>, a leftish local weekly, chimed in with an editorial; Hitler decreed what the German woman should wear, but \u201cPresident Stanley\u2019s dictatorial rule\u201d says what Dalhousie girls shouldn\u2019t wear. The\u00a0Citizen<\/em>\u00a0wondered what would happen about bathing suits should Dalhousie ever have a summer session! But Dalhousie students never liked downtown interference; they told the\u00a0Citizen<\/em>\u00a0to leave well alone, that it understood nothing of campus conditions.<\/p>\n

However, Dalhousie could not be kept out of the Halifax papers. During the League of Nations crisis of October 1935 over the issue of sanctions against Italy for its invasion of Abyssinia, the students conducted a poll, the results of which were illuminating. Of 850 students, 464 voted as follows:<\/p>\n

\n
\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
<\/td>\nYes<\/td>\nNo<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
For economic sanctions against Italy<\/td>\n444<\/td>\n16<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
For military sanctions against Italy<\/td>\n205<\/td>\n235<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Support of military measures for League<\/td>\n175<\/td>\n277<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
For participation in war<\/td>\n157<\/td>\n289<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<\/div>\n<\/blockquote>\n

That made headlines in local papers, which concluded, rightly, that Dalhousie students wanted to punish Italy but did not want to have any part in the punishing. This was reinforced a few months later when the\u00a0Gazette<\/em>\u00a0insisted that Dalhousie students be neutral in any European conflict. \u201cWe have close sentimental ties binding us to Great Britain,\u201d said the\u00a0Gazette<\/em>, \u201cbut that is no reason why we should fight the battles of British Capitalism and Imperialism in all parts of the world.\u201d[44]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

That was something President Stanley approved of: students being students should be outspoken, revolutionary if need be. His concern, he told the students in October 1935, was if they were not revolutionary:<\/p>\n

\n
My young friends, you should be. There is no other hope for the world. There are many things always to revolt and rebel against. Somewhere or other stupidity is always enthroned. Somewhere or other there are always wrongs to right. Sooner or later there is going to be a wholesale revolt on the part of the youth in North America against what is offered them, by selfish, commercial interests, in the name of amusement and entertainment. Suppose that you began a revolt here and now against the so-called music that I have been listening to for the last four years at Dalhousie, and against what I have for four years heard called in the name of dancing.<\/div>\n<\/blockquote>\n

But Stanley would not be able to call out the students on that issue. Perhaps not on any issue. He found them ill informed and not well read. He interviewed personally all new students; many of the new men, for law, medicine and dentistry, from other colleges, had never read a book in their lives but the textbooks they had been obliged to read, or \u201cdetective stories and trashy novels.\u201d But Stanley\u2019s utterances on such an issue were not always to be trusted. A year later he was saying how solid Dalhousie students were, how they read books and debated serious questions. The difference was not, probably, that between the students of December 1937 and those of October 1938; it was, rather, the correspondent he was writing to. But it is true the world had become a more serious place after Munich.[45]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

\"Photograph<\/a>
At the Convocation Ball, May 1939. L. to r., President Carleton Stanley, Miss Muriel Woodbury, Mrs. H.A. MacDonald (a member of the board in the 1970s), Mrs. Isabel Stanley, T.H. Coffin (a member of the board in the 1990s), and Dr. W.W. Woodbury, Dean of Dentistry, 1935-47.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n
<\/div>\n
A German Refugee Founds the Institute of Public Affairs, 1936<\/strong><\/div>\n
Stanley defended and supported the cause of German refugees, whether Jewish or not. The day in January 1933 that Hindenburg asked Hitler to be chancellor, Dr. Lothar Richter and his wife decided to leave Germany with their young son. Born in 1894 in Silesia, Richter obtained two doctorates, in political science and in law. He was a senior official in the Ministry of Labour of the Weimar Republic, drafting its labour legislation; but with the Nazi party winning a plurality of seats in the 1933 elections, he correctly predicted future events and left for Britain. Through the Archbishop of Canterbury, Richter obtained a temporary post at Leeds University. Carleton Stanley heard about him from the archbishop. Since Dalhousie had no professor of German, when the Rockefeller committee in New York offered to pay his salary as a German refugee for several years, Stanley, impressed with Richter\u2019s qualifications, hired him sight unseen as professor of German. He and his family arrived in Halifax in August 1934.<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
Richter was one of the best of his kind, a highly educated, hardworking, purposeful German civil servant. With all that, he was modest and he never ceased to be grateful to England for taking him in, and to Dalhousie and Canada for giving him a permanent home. He became a Canadian citizen as soon as he could. Before 1934 was out, Richter in his quiet way pointed out to Stanley the Rockefeller Foundation\u2019s support in several American universities for departments of public affairs, and that there was no such institution in Canada at all. Richter thought such a department could be organized at Dalhousie, not as a new department but by pooling the resources of existing ones – Political Science, Economics, History, Education, and Law. By that means, said Richter, Dalhousie could prepare students for the civil service, municipal politics, journalism; it could train civil servants already in harness. It could sponsor fact-finding studies that would help Nova Scotian municipalities.<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
In 1935 the Rockefeller Foundation\u2019s Department of Social Science sent its director, Dr. Stacy May, to Halifax. He met Richter and others from the modest band of social scientists at Dalhousie and was impressed. The upshot was that the Rockefeller Foundation offered $60,000 ($15,000 a year for the first three years, then in diminishing amounts with Dalhousie contributing). It would begin on 1 September 1936, end on 31 August 1941.[46]<\/sup><\/a><\/div>\n
\n

Dalhousie\u2019s Institute of Public Affairs owed its inception, its versatility, and its success to Lothar Richter himself. He was ingenious at bringing groups and interests together. It was his idea to get Sir Robert Borden to be honorary chairman of the institute. Borden met President Stanley in 1935 and was impressed with what Borden called his \u201cbroad outlook and splendid erudition.\u201d Thus Borden, now aged eighty-three, who had been declining similar invitations for the past few years, wrote Stanley: \u201cYour invitation, however, relates to a subject in which I am profoundly interested; and for that reason I have given it serious consideration. \u201d He hinted he could accept if the duties were nominal. They were. Richter also persuaded colleagues in other departments to work with him; he brought municipal officials, labour unions, and provincial governments on side; he tried to bring other universities to the institute. He got prominent civil servants to give lectures. Whatever Richter touched seemed to turn, magically, to sensible use and function. He started Public Affairs<\/em><\/a>, the second quarterly published by Dalhousie, in 1937.<\/p>\n

Some board members in 1937 were uneasy about this new venture in publishing. Why not merge the\u00a0Dalhousie Review<\/em><\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0Public Affairs<\/em>? asked Senator W.H. Dennis. Stanley replied that part of the Rockefeller grant was for Public Affairs. The reason why two other members of the board executive had asked the same question was that \u201cthere have been so many changes in the Executive of the Board that it is hard for that body to have a continuous memory.\u201d[47]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

He did indeed have a point. In 1937 the board had suffered a number of changes from death and retirement. H.E. Mahon, manager of the Montreal Trust, had died in April; Dugald Macgillivray of the Canadian Bank of Commerce, Carleton Stanley\u2019s favourite board member, who had supported the\u00a0Dalhousie Review<\/em>\u00a0in both a literary and financial sense since its inception, died suddenly in August. The bronze bust of Lord Dalhousie is his gift to the university. The chairman, Hector Mclnnes, died of a heart attack in June at the age of seventy-seven. He had graduated from Dalhousie Law School in 1888, was nominated secretary to the board in 1892, treasurer in 1898, appointed to the board in 1900, and succeeded Pearson as chairman in 1932. He had been a Dalhousian most of his adult life.<\/p>\n

The board appointed as the new chairman a less judicious, more vigorous, younger lawyer-businessman, another Pictonian, James McGregor Stewart, who had come on the board in September 1929. Forty-eight years old, crippled by polio when young, Stewart had ability and ambition, those two essential elements of success. He had been gold medallist at Pictou Academy and went to Dalhousie, taking the University Medal in Law in 1914. A director of the Royal Bank of Canada since 1931, his erudition, legal and otherwise, was known nationally; he was reputed one of the best lawyers in the country. Stewart walked with crutches, and had an immensely powerful upper body; he smoked three packs of menthol cigarettes a day and drank Scotch in the same proportion. He was a marvellous poker player, his bluffing notorious. But he was a worker. \u201cIf you went out with the boys,\u201d he used to say, \u201cyou must get up with the men.\u201d He was a strong Conservative but his home was open to all parties. \u201cMany an evening,\u201d wrote his nephew, \u201cAngus L. Macdonald lustily roared out Scottish songs at J. McG.\u2019s piano.\u201d This was the man who would be chairman of the Dalhousie board for the next six years – tough, abrupt, capable.[48]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

As J. McGregor Stewart took over, two other men died, partners in the pre-1931 Dalhousie. G.F. Pearson died in September 1938, his wife still bitter over what had happened in 1932. Eleven days later President MacKenzie, in hospital for a minor operation, succumbed to a stroke and died shortly afterward, on 2 October. Dalhousie went into mourning for MacKenzie; the\u00a0Gazette<\/em>\u00a0devoted a whole issue to him. Beneath his cool exterior MacKenzie was a loyal Dalhousian whose devotion was the more impressive because it was never paraded. R.J. Bean recalled an August day in 1923 when he and his wife first met MacKenzie in the Copley Plaza Hotel in Boston. Bean was so impressed with MacKenzie that, when invited to come and see Dalhousie, he said it was unnecessary – he was coming anyway. More personal notes came to MacKenzie\u2019s daughter Marjorie. An old friend from Bryn Mawr days wrote: \u201cHe was such fun!… I went to see you the day he brought you back from Indianapolis to Bryn Mawr [in 1897]. I know his gallant effort to keep his sorrow in the background… and to make your childhood a happy one.\u201d And it seems to have been just that. Another friend wrote about her Halifax childhood and Marjorie MacKenzie\u2019s, \u201csuch a happy time in my life when your Father, my Father, and Mr. Barnstead were such important, loved grown-ups and gave us the feeling everything was all right and would go on forever.\u201d Such indeed is the happy child\u2019s kingdom.[49]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

But in the wicked world outside there were increasingly few hopes for that. The war that came in 1939 would test Dalhousie more sternly even than the 1914 war, and its classicist president. One can imagine Carleton Stanley, tall, slim, curly haired, coming out of his office in the Macdonald Library with bowler hat and umbrella, his black Newfoundland dog Pontus waiting for him on the steps, ready for a walk. At such times he would survey his campus a little absently, as if he could not quite have said whence he had come or whither he was going.[50]<\/sup><\/a>\u00a0That was an illusion: for Stanley was strong, stubborn, and determined. He would demonstrate those qualities over the next six years.<\/p>\n

  1. For Hutchins\u2019s view, see Robert Hutchins, The Higher Learning in America (New Haven 1936), pp. 42-3. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  2. MacMechan\u2019s criticism of Arts funding is in Morning Chronicle, 14 Sept. 1920, with supporting editorial comment. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  3. F. Ronald Hayes, \u201cTwo Presidents, Two Cultures, and Two Wars: A Portrait of Dalhousie as a Microcosm of Twentieth-Century Canada,\u201d Dalhousie Review 54, no. 3 (Autumn 1974), pp. 405-17<\/a>. Hayes was appointed to Dalhousie in place of Gowanloch in 1930; he saw something of MacKenzie\u2019s, and all of Stanley\u2019s and Kerr\u2019s presidencies. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  4. Stanley\u2019s 1941 convocation address is in President\u2019s Report, 1940-1, p. 80. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  5. The Arnold quotation is from the preface to Arnold\u2019s Essay in Criticism First Series (1865). ↵<\/a><\/li>
  6. Letter from Carleton Stanley to F.W. Patterson, 24 Apr. 1933, President\u2019s Office Fonds, \u201cAcadia 1921-1963,\u201d UA-3, Box 63, Folder 2, Dalhousie University Archives; Carleton Stanley to W.N. Wickwire, 17 Dec. 1938, President's Office Fonds, \u201cCampaigns 1939,\u201d UA-3, Dalhousie University Archives; Faculty of Arts Minutes, 4, 19 Apr., 29 Sept. 1931; 18 Feb. 1932, Dalhousie University Archives. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  7. Arts Minutes, 6 Mar. 1934, Dalhousie University Archives; letter from Trueman to Carleton Stanley, 22 Mar. 1934, President\u2019s Office Fonds, \u201cMount Allison University 1923-1945,\u201d UA-3, Box 285, Folder 6, Dalhousie University Archives. John Reid, Mount Allison: A History, to 1963, vol. II: 1914-1963 (Toronto 1984), pp. 141-2, has a pertinent elaboration of this point. Officially accredited schools for Grade 11 and Grade 12, outside of Halifax, were Kentville, New Glasgow, Glace Bay, Yarmouth, and Pictou. Some others were accredited for Grade 11 only. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  8. Arts Minutes, 4 Apr. 1933, Dalhousie University Archives; letter from Carleton Stanley to R.H. Coats and J. Robbins of Dominion Bureau of Statistics, 23 Mar. 1937, private and confidential, President\u2019s Office Fonds, \u201cConference of Canadian Universities, 1936-1939,\u201d UA-3, Box 256, Folder 3, Dalhousie University Archives. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  9. Letter from Carleton Stanley to Clarke, 29 Oct. 1934, President\u2019s Office Fonds, \u201cProfessor Fred Clarke, 1931-1945,\u201d UA-3, Box 253, Folder 6, Dalhousie University Archives. Clarke was with the Department of Education, McGill University. Letter from Carleton Stanley to Governors, 27 Oct. 1934, confidential, reporting conversation with C.C. Jones, 26 Oct. 1934, President's Office Fonds, \u201cBoard of Governors Correspondence,\u201d UA-3, Box 176, Folder 2, Dalhousie University Archives. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  10. A.J. Tingley has a brief, useful history, Mathematics at Dalhousie (1992). ↵<\/a><\/li>
  11. For G.V. Douglas, see letter from L.C. Graton, of Harvard Laboratory of Mining Geology to Carleton Stanley, 4 Dec. 1931, UA-3, Box 90, Folder 12, Dalhousie University Archives. There is an excellent departmental history of geology by G.C. Milligan, who knew Douglas well, On the Rocks: the Training of Geologists at Dalhousie (Dalhousie 1995), pp. 26-34. Also interview with D.H. McNeill ('33), 6 Dec. 1995., Peter B. Waite Fonds, MS-2-718, Box 3, Folder 38, Dalhousie University Archives. Stanley\u2019s idea about appointments is suggested in letter from Carleton Stanley to Clarke, 26 Apr. 1935, President\u2019s Office Fonds, \u201cProfessor Fred Clarke, 1931-1945,\u201d UA-3, Box 253, Folder 6, Dalhousie University Archives. For comments on the graduates of his father-in-law\u2019s time, see letter from Carleton Stanley to Sir Edward Beatty, 15 Sept. 1935, Carleton Stanley Fonds, Box 1, Folder 32, Dalhousie University Archives; Carleton Stanley to Chas. A. Maxwell, Salt Springs, Pictou County, 17 Dec. 1937, Carleton Stanley Fonds, Box 1, Folder 40, Dalhousie University Archives. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  12. Titus Lucretius Cams, De Rerum Natura, Book iv, lines 1, 133; Dalhousie University, President\u2019s Report for the Year July 1st, 1933-June 30th, 1934, pp. 5-6. On sending his son to Rothesay, Stanley wrote to Allan Gillingham, a Newfoundland Rhodes scholar then at New College, Oxford: \u201cHalifax had become completely impossible. The teachers are illiterate women struggling with classes of fifty-five and sixty, even in high school grades.\u201d Letter from Carleton Stanley to Gillingham, 19 June 1935, President\u2019s Office Fonds, \u201cAllan Gillingham 1932-1944,\u201d UA-3, Box 345, Folder 3, Dalhousie University Archives. Gillingham became professor of classics and German as well as secretary of the faculty of Memorial College. See photograph no. 7 in Malcolm Macleod, A Bridge Built Halfway: A History of Memorial University College, 1925-1950 (Montreal and Kingston 1990), after p. xvi. Letter from Carleton Stanley to R.J. Messender, Bridgetown, NS, 8 Aug. 1939, President\u2019s Office Fonds, \u201cCampaigns, 1939,\u201d UA-3, Dalhousie University Archives; letter from James Bertram to Carleton Stanley, 18 Sept. 1934, \u201cBoard of Governors Correspondence,\u201d UA-3, Box 176, Folder 2, Dalhousie University Archives; McCurdy\u2019s note on it is 26 Sept. 1934, with Stanley\u2019s rejoinder the next day. F.B. McCurdy (1875-1952) was head of a Halifax financial firm and had been on the Dalhousie board since September 1928. He was MP for Colchester, 1911-21, and minister of public works, 1920-1. About the Halifax Ladies College, Stanley said: \u201cIt is the only remaining friend to us among the Secondary Schools.\u201d Letter from Carleton Stanley to J. McGregor Stewart, 4 Mar. 1938, Carleton Stanley Fonds, Box 2, Folder 79, Dalhousie University Archives. Stewart was at this point chairman of the Board of Governors. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  13. See President\u2019s Reports, 1933-4 et seq., especially 1938-9 which has a consolidated balance sheet as of 30 June 1939, Dalhousie University Archives. For Bennett, see UNB Archives, R.B. Bennett Papers, vol. 908, no. 2, 569337-9, J.L. Hetherington to Bennett, 6 May 1936; Bennett to Hetherington, 9 May 1936. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  14. Income and Expenditures for 1929-30, dated 14 Nov. 1930, confidential, President\u2019s Office Fonds, \u201cMedical Faculty, 1921-1931,\u201d UA-3, Box 279, Folder 1, Dalhousie University Archives. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  15. Carleton Stanley\u2019s funeral oration of 7 Dec. 1931 (for W.H. Hattie), President's Office Fonds, \u201cWilliam Harop Hattie,\u201d UA-3, Box 93, Folder 5, Dalhousie University Archives. Pearson complained of the attendance at Hattie\u2019s funeral. Of 1,075 staff and students, there were between 125 and 150 people present. Pearson thought this was too few. Stanley suggested that every year Dalhousie would gradually grow to seem less like the compact community that Pearson had once known. (Pearson to Carleton Stanley, 7 Dec. 1931; Carleton Stanley to Pearson, 12 Dec. 1931, President's Office Fonds, \u201cWilliam Harop Hattie,\u201d UA-3, Box 93, Folder 5, Dalhousie University Archives.) For Hattie and mental illness, see R.O. Jones, \u201cEarly Recognition of Mental Illness,\u201d Nova Scotia Medical Bulletin 34 (1955), p. 324. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  16. Letter from Carleton Stanley to A.A. Dysart (premier, 1935-40), 5 May 1939, recounting events of November 1931, Presdient's Office Fonds, \u201cProvincial Government of New Brunswick, 1935-1947,\u201d UA-3, Box 271, Folder 7, Dalhousie University Archives. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  17. H.B. Atlee, C.B. Stewart, and H.L. Scammell, \u201cHarry Goudge Grant 1889-1954,\u201d Nova Scotia Medical Bulletin 33 (1954), pp. 169-70; letter from Wilson G. Smillie, School of Public Health, Harvard University, to Carleton Stanley, 10 Mar. 1932, on Grant: \u201cExcellent judgment, fine mind, and would make you an excellent Dean.\u201d President's Office Fonds, \u201cHarry Goudge Grant,\u201d UA-3, Box 92, Folder 14, Dalhousie University Archives. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  18. President\u2019s Office Correspondence, A-575, \u201cFaculty of Medicine 1931-1945,\u201d Grant to Carleton Stanley , 8 Dec. 1932; A- 736, \u201cDugald MacGillivray, 1931-1938,\u201d Carleton Stanley to Macgillivray, 1 Apr. 1937. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  19. See the speech of Premier Murray on laying the cornerstone of the Public Health Clinic in November 1922, Halifax Echo, 9 Nov. 1922. See also two articles: W.H. Hattie, \u201cPublic Health Clinic Correlates Preventive and Curative Practice,\u201d in The Modem Hospital 25, no. 2 (August 1925); and Dr. Franklin Royer, \u201cA method of teaching the public health point of view to the medical student,\u201d in Journal of the American Medical Association, 15 May 1926. In the Australian journal, Health (Sept. 1926), Dr. Royer raised the question of the medical profession\u2019s antipathy to public health. These are also in President\u2019s Office Fonds, \u201cPublic Health Clinic, 1926-1929,\u201d UA-3, Box 265, Folder 3, Dalhousie University Archives, and Halifax Mail, 25 Nov. 1926. For a modern review, see John G. Reid, \u201cHealth, Education, Economy: Philanthropic Foundations in the Atlantic Region in the 1920s and 1930s,\u201d Acadiensis 14, no. 1 (Autumn 1984), pp. 64-83. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  20. Letter from Dugald Macgillivray to Carleton Stanley, 29 June 1933, from Annapolis Royal, President\u2019s Office Fonds, \u201cDugald Macgillivray, 1931-1938,\u201d UA-3, Box 310, Folder 3, Dalhousie University Archives. There is some evidence that G.F. Pearson arranged to have the Public Health Clinic established on the Dalhousie campus. William Buxton, \u201cPrivate Wealth and Public Health: Rockefeller Philanthropy, the Massachusetts Relief Commission and the Halifax Explosion,\u201d in Colin Howell and A. Ruffman, eds., Ground Zero: Perspectives on the 1917 Explosion in Halifax Harbour (Halifax 1994). ↵<\/a><\/li>
  21. The history of this development has been admirably told in Janet F. Kitz, Shattered City: The Halifax Explosion and the Road to Recovery (Halifax 1989), pp. 125-212. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  22. Board of Governors Minutes, 8 Sept. 1931; President\u2019s Office Correspondence, A-856, \u201cPublic Health Clinic, 1930-1943,\u201d Carleton Stanley to W.H. Hattie, 9 Sept. 1931; draft letter, Carleton Stanley to Hector Mclnnes, dated 9 Sept. 1932, probably for a submission to the Rockefeller Foundation. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  23. Letter from G.H. Murphy to Carleton Stanley, 10 Feb. 1933 (two letters); Carleton Stanley to G.H. Murphy, 11 Feb. 1933, President\u2019s Office Fonds, \u201cProvincial Governments, Nova Scotia 1920-1935,\u201d UA-3, Box 272, Folder 3, Dalhousie University Archives; letter from Norma Thompson to Carleton Stanley, 12 May 1933, President's Office Fonds, \u201cRockefeller Grant for Teaching in Public Health and Preventive Medicine, 1933-1942,\u201d UA-3, Box 353, Folder 4, Dalhousie University Archives. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  24. Submission by Dalhousie [to City of Halifax], Feb. 1934; Stanley\u2019s address to aldermen and the Board of Health, 23 Feb. 1937, Presdient's Office Fonds, \u201cCity of Halifax, 1932-1964,\u201d UA-3, Box 253, Folder 4, Dalhousie University Archives. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  25. Letter from Carleton Stanley to Dr. Alan Gregg, 20 Oct. 1933, President's Office Fonds, \u201cRockefeller Foundation 1921-1941,\u201d UA-3, Dalhousie University Archives. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  26. For Angus L. Macdonald see President's Office Fonds, \u201cAngus Lewis MacDonald,\u201d UA-3, Box 95, Folder 34, Dalhousie University Archives; J. Murray Beck, Politics of Nova Scotia, Volume Two 1896-1988 (Tantallon 1988), p. 166. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  27. This interesting letter is Angus L. Macdonald to Carleton Stanley, 22 Feb. 1937, personal and confidential, Carleton Stanley Fonds, Box 1, Folder 36, Dalhousie University Archives. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  28. The history of board appointments and their modes is given in Board of Governors Minutes, Appendix A, 14 June 1934, UA-1, Box 5, Folder 8, Dalhousie University Archives. Report of Senate Special Committee of Senate on the University Charter, 20 Nov. 1934, President\u2019s Office Fonds, \u201cSenate, 1906-1943,\u201d UA-3, Box 269, Folder 1, Dalhousie University Archives. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  29. Board of Governors Minutes, 10 Nov. 1934, UA-1, Box 5, Folder 8, Dalhousie University Archives. The appointment of Dalhousie governors by governor-in-council was discussed at the committee stage of the Dalhousie bill. After being divided equally for and against, the committee decided in favour of the old system. (Those governors elected by alumni, alumnae, and appointed by King\u2019s and the United Church did not require such confirmation.) This information, retailed by Carleton Stanley, is in letter from Carleton Stanley to Hon. F.C. Alderdice, 30 Apr. 1935, President\u2019s Office Fonds, \u201cBoard of Governors Correspondence,\u201d UA-3, Box 176, Folder 2, Dalhousie University Archives. Alderdice was the newly appointed governor from Newfoundland. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  30. The 1934 act was chap. 17, but it was repealed by the 1935 one, 25-26 Geo. V, chap. 104. The development of the Six and Six idea is seen in Senate Minutes, 3 July, 20, 27 Nov. 1934; 5, 23 Feb., 9 Mar. 1935<\/a>, Dalhousie University Archives. For Stanley\u2019s views about Pearson\u2019s influence, see letter from Carleton Stanley to Webster, 20 Mar. 1935, President\u2019s Office Fonds, \u201cDr. Clarence Webster, 1934-1964,\u201d UA-3, Box 357, Folder 4, Dalhousie University Archives; letter from Carleton Stanley to Webster, 7 Mar. 1945, Carleton Stanley Fonds, MS-2-163, Box 3, Folder 120, Dalhousie University Archives. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  31. Letter from Carleton Stanley to Hector Mclnnes, 31 July 1934, confidential, President\u2019s Office Fonds, \u201cHector Mclnnes 1931-1937,\u201d UA-3, Box 310, Folder 7, Dalhousie University Archives. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  32. Letter from Carleton Stanley to Laurie, 3 Dec. 1940, President's Office Fonds, \u201cCol. K.C. Laurie, 1939-1945,\u201d UA-3, Box 335, Folder 5, Dalhousie University Archives. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  33. Letter from Murray Macneill to Carleton Stanley, 16 Oct. 1935; Carleton Stanley to Macneill, 19 Oct. 1935; Macneill to Carleton Stanley, 23 Oct. 1935; Angus L. Macdonald to Carleton Stanley, 30 Oct. 1935; Macneill to Carleton Stanley, 25 Feb. 1936; Carleton Stanley to Mcneill, 29 Feb. 1936, President's Office Fonds, UA-3, Box 98, Folder 3, Dalhousie University Archives. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  34. See letter from Carleton Stanley to Macneill, 15 Jan. 1934; Macneill to Carleton Stanley, 16 Jan. 1934. The feud surfaces again here. For the position of President A.H. Moore, see letter from Moore to Carleton Stanley, 19 Oct. 1935, 16 Mar. 1936; Carleton Stanley to Moore, 17 Mar. 1936. The quotation is from Moore to Carleton Stanley, 28 Mar. 1936, President\u2019s Office Fonds, \u201cKing\u2019s College, 1931-1945,\u201d UA-3, Box 342, Folder 5, Dalhousie University Archives. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  35. Letter from W.E. Thompson to Macneill, 15, 20 May 1936, President's Office Fonds, UA-3, Box 98, Folder 3, Dalhousie University Archives; Board of Governors Minutes, 14,18, 20 May 1936, UA-1, Box 5, Folder 8, Dalhousie University Archives. For attitudes of Macneill\u2019s staff, see letter from Beatrice R.E. Smith to Peter B. Waite, 22 Sept. 1992, Peter B. Waite Fonds, MS-2-718, Box 3, Folder 64, Dalhousie University Archives. For Macneill\u2019s reply, see Macneill to Hector Mclnnes, 28 July 1936, President's Office Fonds, UA-3, Box 98, Folder 3, Dalhousie University Archives. Family reaction comes from interview with Janet Macneill Piers, 17 Sept. 1992, at Chester, NS, Peter B. Waite Fonds, MS-2-718, Box 3, Folder 49, Dalhousie University Archives. See also Murray Macneill, \u201cMemoirs,\u201d p. 9. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  36. Letter from Carleton Stanley to C.F. Crandall, Montreal, July 17 1933, Carleton Stanley Fonds, MS-2-163, Box 1, Folder B-24, Dalhousie University Archives. Much the best article on Dalhousie in this period is the analysis by Paul Axelrod, \u201cMoulding the Middle Class: Student Life at Dalhousie University in the 1930s,\u201d in Acadiensis 15, no. 1 (Autumn 1985), pp. 84-122, the reference here being to p. 89. For Henry Hicks, see below, chapter 9. For law, see John Willis, A History of Dalhousie Law School (Toronto 1979), pp. 140-1. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  37. Axelrod, \u201cDalhousie Students in the 1930s,\u201d pp. 90-4; the napkin ring principle was enunciated by Professor Lome Morgan, economic historian at Toronto in the 1940s. A much more sophisticated and modern analysis of the middle class is available in Paul Axelrod, Making a Middle Class (Montreal and Kingston), Appendix A, pp. 167-73. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  38. Axelrod, \u201cDalhousie Students in the 1930s,\u201d p. 88, gives this analysis, based on Dalhousie registration books. For Lucy Maud Montgomery\u2019s editorial, see Dalhousie Gazette, 24 Feb. 1939<\/a>. The Dalhousie calendar for 1934-5<\/a> gives the origins of students. It lists the medical students for 1933-4; in the fifth year, of thirty-three students there is one American. The fourth year, with twenty-three students, has three Americans. The first year, with fifty-five students, has eighteen Americans. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  39. New Glasgow Eastern Chronicle, 2, 11 Mar. 1937; letter from Carleton Stanley to Mclnnes, 16 Mar. 1937; Mclnnes to G.F. Pearson, 31 Mar. 1937, replying to Pearson\u2019s complaint of the falling off of Dalhousie registration, President\u2019s Office Fonds, \u201cHector Mclnnes, 1931-1937,\u201d UA-3, Box 310, Folder 7, Dalhousie University Archives. Dalhousie Gazette, 8 Feb. 1934<\/a>, letter from F.B. Squire. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  40. Axelrod, \u201cDalhousie Students in the 1930s,\u201d pp. 86-7; Senate Minutes, 13 May 1933<\/a>, Dalhousie University Archives. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  41. The 1937 salaries are a personal reminiscence of the author. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  42. Letter from H.G. Grant to Carleton Stanley, 5 Feb. 1935; Carleton Stanley to Grant, 9 Feb. 1935, Presdient's Office Fonds, UA-3, Dalhousie University Archives. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  43. Letter from Falconer to A.S. MacKenzie, 21 Nov. 1924, President's Office Fonds, \u201cFraternities 1924-1961,\u201d UA-3, Box 308, Folder 9, Dalhousie University Archives; letter from Sidney Smith to Carleton Stanley, Feb. (n.d.) 1932, President's Office Fonds, \u201cFaculty of Law, 1921-1934,\u201d UA-3, Box 339, Folder 5, Dalhousie University Archives; Dalhousie Gazette, 12 Oct. 1934.<\/a> ↵<\/a><\/li>
  44. On the badminton affair, see Dalhousie Gazette, 15, 22 Feb. 1934<\/a>; 7 Mar. 1935; Halifax Citizen, 16 Feb. 1934. On the Abyssinian crisis, see Dalhousie Gazette, 17 Oct. 1935<\/a>, 7 Feb. 1936<\/a>. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  45. Dalhousie Gazette, 1 Nov. 1935<\/a>; letter from Carleton Stanley to Chas. A. Maxwell, Salt Springs Pictou County, 17 Dec. 1937, Carleton Stanley Fonds, MS-2-163, Box 1, Folder B-40, Dalhousie University Archives. For a slightly more positive view of students, see letter from Carleton Stanley to Rev. Wm. T. Mercer, 6 Oct. 1938, of Dominion, Cape Breton, Carleton Stanley Fonds, MS-2-163, Box 1, Folder B-41, Dalhousie University Archives. This was however in a special context, for Mercer had written praising Stanley\u2019s 1938 address to the students, an address not well received in other quarters. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  46. Stacy May to Carleton Stanley, 12 June 1936, telegram, President\u2019s Office Fonds, \u201cRockefeller Foundation Grant for Study in Public Administration, 1936-1944,\u201d UA-3, Box 353, Folder 5, Dalhousie University Archives; letter from Norma S. Thompson to Carleton Stanley, 18 June 1936, President's Office Fonds, \u201cInstitute of Public Affairs, 1936-1939,\u201d UA-3, Box 351, Folder 3, Dalhousie University Archives. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  47. Letter from Dugald Macgillivray to Carleton Stanley, 8 July 1935, reporting on a letter received from Sir Robert that day, President's Office Fonds, \u201cDugald Macgillivray, 1931-1938,\u201d UA-3, Box 310, Folder 3, Dalhousie University Archives; letter from Sir Robert Borden to Carleton Stanley, 4 Feb. 1937, President's Office Fonds, \u201cInstitute of Public Affairs, 1936-1939,\u201d UA-3, Box 351, Folder 3, Dalhousie University Archives. Borden died four months later. One of Richter\u2019s studies, of a Cape Breton community, \u201cThe Effect of Health Insurance on the Demand for Medical Services,\u201d was published in Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science 10, no. 2 (1944), pp. 179-205. Winnipeg Free Press, 8 Apr. 1942 has an editorial praising \u201cDalhousie\u2019s Experiment.\u201d ↵<\/a><\/li>
  48. Interview with Donald J. Morrison (nephew of J. McGregor Stewart), 3 Apr. 1990, Halifax, Peter B. Waite Fonds, MS-2-718, Box 3, Folder 44, Dalhousie University Archives; see also Morrison\u2019s sketch of his uncle\u2019s life, 29 Sept. 1990, Peter B. Waite Fonds. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  49. Dalhousie Gazette, 14 Oct. 1938<\/a>. Letters to Marjorie MacKenzie King on her father\u2019s death, are in A.S. MacKenzie Fonds: Ethel Walker Smith to Marjorie MacKenzie King, 30 Jan. 1939, from Havana; Esther Nichols to Marjorie MacKenzie King, 9 Oct. 1938, from New York, Arthur Stanley MacKenzie Fonds, MS-2-43, Dalhousie University Archives. The Mr. Barnstead was probably A.S. Barnstead (Dal. '93), deputy provincial secretary in the 1920s and 1930s and a member of the Dalhousie Board of Governors. ↵<\/a><\/li>
  50. The portrait is partly from Donald J. Morrison, cited in note 48. ↵<\/a><\/li><\/ol><\/div>","protected":false},"author":5,"menu_order":4,"template":"","meta":{"pb_show_title":"on","pb_short_title":"","pb_subtitle":"","pb_authors":[],"pb_section_license":""},"chapter-type":[],"contributor":[],"license":[],"part":23,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/digitaleditions.library.dal.ca\/livesofdalv2\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/35"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/digitaleditions.library.dal.ca\/livesofdalv2\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/digitaleditions.library.dal.ca\/livesofdalv2\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/chapter"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/digitaleditions.library.dal.ca\/livesofdalv2\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/5"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/digitaleditions.library.dal.ca\/livesofdalv2\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/35\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":138,"href":"https:\/\/digitaleditions.library.dal.ca\/livesofdalv2\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/35\/revisions\/138"}],"part":[{"href":"https:\/\/digitaleditions.library.dal.ca\/livesofdalv2\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/parts\/23"}],"metadata":[{"href":"https:\/\/digitaleditions.library.dal.ca\/livesofdalv2\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/35\/metadata\/"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/digitaleditions.library.dal.ca\/livesofdalv2\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=35"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"chapter-type","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/digitaleditions.library.dal.ca\/livesofdalv2\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapter-type?post=35"},{"taxonomy":"contributor","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/digitaleditions.library.dal.ca\/livesofdalv2\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/contributor?post=35"},{"taxonomy":"license","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/digitaleditions.library.dal.ca\/livesofdalv2\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/license?post=35"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}