President Jordan appointed Chancellor

When Herbert Hoover became a member of the Board of Trustees in the fall of 1912 he took part in its activities with such characteristic energy, enthusiasm, and idealistic vision that the president of the Board, Timothy Hopkins, said: "we have got more ideas from Hoover in a week than we have had before in a year." It was at Hoover's suggestion that the Board honored President Jordan with appointment to the newly created position of Chancellor, effective Commencement Day, 23 May 1913. This appointment freed Dr. Jordan from the burdens of University administration so that in the coming three years (up to 1916 when he would reach the retirement age of 65) he might divide his time as he saw fit between work for the cause of international peace and educational studies outside or inside the University itself.

***

Professor John Casper Branner appointed President

It was again at Hoover's instance that the Board appointed Dr. John Casper Branner to succeed Dr. Jordan as President of the University, also effective 23 May 1913. Dr. Branner, Professor of Geology since the founding of the University in 1891, had been Vice President of the University since 1898, and Dr. John Maxson Stillman succeeded him in the vice presidency. Dr. Branner specified that he would serve as President for a period of only two years (that is until he reached the retirement age of 65), and Hoover proposed to the Trustees that Dr. Ray Lyman Wilbur should be Branner's successor as President of the University. ^{[13] [14]}

Herbert Hoover and Professor Branner were no strangers. During Hoover's student days they had developed a close and lasting relationship. The young Hoover entered Stanford with the first class of students in 1891, majoring in Geology under Professor Branner who held him in high regard and employed him as his office assistant. The Professor was much impressed with the young student's ability and never forgot how Hoover, when assigned a task, accomplished it quickly and efficiently. Initiative and dependability were qualities the Professor greatly admired.

On 29 May 1895 Hoover received his A. B. degree in Geology from Stanford University. Early in his senior year, a freshman named Lou Henry enrolled in the geology program at Stanford. She was a fellow native of Iowa which at once gave them some common ground and the more they were together in the classroom, on field trips and at social gatherings, the closer their friendship. Three years later, on 25 May 1898, Lou Henry also graduated from Stanford with an A. B. degree in Geology. She and Bert had by then a tacit agreement that after her graduation and his establishment as an engineer they would be married.

On 11 February 1899, in the living room of her family home in Monterey, Lou Henry and Herbert Hoover were married by Father Mestres the local parish priest with whom Lou had collaborated in community programs. Father Mestres at first demurred at performing the ceremony explaining that, since the couple were not Catholics, he could not do so without a special dispensation from the bishop of the diocese - who graciously gave his consent in response to the earnest appeal of Bert and Lou. ^{[15] [16]}

Hoover and Lou Henry regarded Professor Branner as their mentor and enjoyed a cordial relationship with him. Under the circumstances Hoover probably expected President Branner to be cooperative and support such policies as he and the other Trustees might adopt.

Such was decidedly not the case. The issue over which President Branner and the Trustees promptly clashed was the funding of the Department of Medicine. Dr. Branner had not favored acquiring Cooper Medical College and said that only one member of the faculty besides Dr. Jordan had supported the consolidation. When Dr. Jordan asked for Branner's opinion on the subject he said, "Let it alone; it is nothing but a lot of junk." Branner's appointment as President of the University did not change his negative view of the Medical Department, and it increased his concern for the welfare of the other departments.

At the time of the merger with Cooper Medical College, the trustees agreed that the new Medical Department should be assured of no more than $25,000 a year (such expenditure not to begin until after the end of five years) and that, beyond this amount, the already established departments of the University should have priority on funds. Dr. Jordan soon recognized that this restriction on funding the Medical Department was going to cause trouble but he was determined to get a strong academic program firmly established in the Department as soon as possible. To achieve this goal Dr. Jordan obtained approval from the Trustees, who were generally supportive of his aims, to allocate the statutory $25,000 to that portion of the work of the Department carried out in San Francisco, and to charge the salaries in anatomy, bacteriology and pharmacology (which were located on campus) to the University budget. In this and various other creative ways Dr. Jordan was able during his presidency, with the tacit approval of a compliant Board of Trustees, to obtain extra funds for the Medical Faculty whose stellar performance in San Francisco convinced the Trustees that their support was justified.

At the same time, however, the Trustees considered the University budget to be badly strained and, although President Jordan suggested various means of increasing income such as charging higher tuition and various special fees to the students, the Trustees decided that programmatic retrenchment was essential to balancing the budget. Hoover was in England at the time and the Board did not seek his advice but proceeded in his absence to adopt the following Resolution on 29 August 1913. ^[17]

Resolved, that in the opinion of this Board, the University funds and income will be insufficient to adequately extend and develop all departments of the University, and that it will therefore be necessary to select such courses of education as may be so developed to the highest point, abandoning or reducing other courses; and that the President is requested to submit to the University Committee of this Board his recommendations relative to such action by the Board.

The policy announced in this Resolution was not new. From the time when they took over the administration of the University from Mrs. Stanford in 1903 the Trustees had been seeking an opportunity to review the University Departments and reform or eliminate those considered weak or irrelevant. In the past, efforts by the Trustees along these lines had been successfully frustrated, sometimes by the President but more often by the Academic Council. Now the requirements of the new Medical Department had precipitated a financial crisis including a review of all Departments as a result of which the Medical Department would probably survive while some established Departments would be reduced or eliminated.

Incoming President Branner was confronted with the Trustees' unexpected and alarming resolution of August 29th. Furthermore, when he examined the books, he discovered that the Medical Department was already absorbing far more than the $ 25,000 annually agreed upon in the consolidation contract, and that its requirements were steadily growing. His immediate reaction was to attribute the critical state of the University's financial affairs to the Medical Department. He informed Hoover, upon the latter's return from England, that the University was rapidly approaching a collapse as a university, and that the Medical Department must either be endowed or its enormous and spiraling cost would swamp the institution. ^[18]

Before responding to the Board regarding the resolution of August 29th, Dr. Branner made the following appeal for advice to President Pritchett of the Carnegie Foundation to whom he wrote on November 17 and December 6, 1913: ^[19]

The Trustees, realizing that our funds are not equal to the task that the medical school imposes, are looking for a way out of the dilemma. They think it possible for me to so overhaul things here at the University that a lot of what they regard as purely ornamental departments can be done away with and that this will release funds enough to keep the medical school going. It is unnecessary to tell you that it cannot be done. Only very small economies are possible in the University. The medical school wants at least $100,000 a year, in addition to hospitals and equipment in an expensive city. . . Can you not give some encouragement to abandon this medical school? How can it be done? I'm ready enough to do anything that human effort can do. It will make an awful row, I know, but if I can save the University I don't mind either the row or the personal roasting I shall get. Some of the Trustees will stand by me, others will fight me to the finish, as will all the members of the medical faculty and their friends. I fancy that most of the faculty outside of the medical school will support me, but I am not sure about it at all.

Dr. Jordan looks on the medical school as the child of his old age, and the finest one in the family, but I am at liberty to disregard his personal views.

On 20 December 1913 President Branner finally replied formally to the University Committee of the Board of Trustees in response to the economy resolution of 29 August 1913. He insisted that no considerable economies were possible through departmental reforms such as proposed in the resolution. Most of the departments, he said, are "half-starved," with the exception of the Department of Medicine, and therein lies the problem. Not only is the Medical Department the most expensive but it is also the newest and the least essential. He then made the following recommendations: ^[20]

That the Medical Department, including anatomy and bacteriology, receive no further financial support from Stanford University after July 31, 1914.

That the entire equipment (of the Medical Department) be turned over to the University of California upon such terms as the Trustees may be able to arrange with the Regents of the University of California through a committee of experts suggested below. Or, if for any reason, such a disposal is impossible, that some such disposition be made of the Department and its appurtenances as will entirely relieve Stanford University from all expense in connection with it.

That a committee of three disinterested men, whose knowledge of medical education and administration will entitle their views to the highest respect and consideration, and who are not likely to be influenced by local interests, be appointed to settle the conditions of the transfer upon terms honorable and satisfactory to both units.

President Branner's blunt and uncompromising response to the Board's resolution of August 29th was unsettling to the Trustees. And they were further disconcerted by the action of the Advisory Board of the Academic Council whose members met on 26 December 1913 and promptly let it be known that they "approved unreservedly" of President Branner's report to the Board of 20 December 1913 and of the "recommendations contained therein for readjustment of the Medical Department."

In an effort to persuade Dr. Branner to moderate his position, the Trustees took steps to dispel the impression that cuts in departmental budgets were imminent. As President, Dr. Branner had requested an increase of about $ 62,000 in the budget for 1914-15 to meet the immediate needs of the University. After some deliberation, and swayed by the insistence of Trustee Hoover that the finances of the University were in much better condition than alleged in the Board's resolution of 29 August 1913, the Board met on 30 January 1914 and voted that the President's request for an increase of $ 62,000 could be granted.

However discomfited they may have been, the Trustees at their meeting on 30 January 1914 also acceded promptly to some of Dr. Branner's other wishes by taking the following actions: ^{[21] [22]}

1. Appointed a special committee of the Board consisting of Trustees Eels, Hopkins and Hoover to confer with a similar committee of the Regents of the University of California. (Of the three members of this committee one, in Dr. Branner's opinion, was amenable to reason (Eels); one was strongly in favor of Stanford's keeping its Medical Department (Hopkins);the third was Hoover, a close friend of Dean Wilbur, and therefore also likely to favor retaining the Department.)

2. Approved an attempt of the two medical deans to arrive at a possible basis of union.

3. Acquiesced in Dr. Branner's proposal to bring President Pritchett of the Carnegie Foundation and Dr. Welch of the Johns Hopkins Medical School to the Coast for a survey of the situation and conference with the Trustees and Regents.

There ensued over the next six month a confusing flurry of communications and consultations. Trustee Hoover was now taking an increasingly active role in defense of the Medical Department, and in settling the conflict provoked by the Board's resolution of August 29th. In a confidential letter to Branner on 16 February 1914, Hoover urged him to reconsider his position on the grounds of his having reacted under a "misapprehension" that the University budget was in a precarious state - an impression which should have been dispelled by the Board's granting of Branner's request for a budget increase of $62,000. In consideration of this latter action by the Board, Hoover strongly urged Brannan to withdraw his recommendations of 20 December 1913 so that the matter could be reconsidered at a later date under less difficult conditions.

In spite of Hoover's appeal, President Branner was adamant. On 19 February 1914 he informed Hoover that he would not withdraw his recommendations of 20 December 1913 which he had made in response to the explicit statement in the Trustees' resolution of 29 August 1913 that the University budget was overdrawn and that departmental retrenchments were required. He resented Hoover's suggestion that he had misinterpreted the Trustees' resolution and on that account should now back down. "If the problem was not properly stated by the Board,' Branner asserted, "then it lies with the Board , and not with me, to set the matter right."

If President Branner was in no mood either to withdraw or modify his recommendations of December 20th for termination and disposal of the Medical Department, Hoover was equally unyielding in his determination to fend off Branner's assault on the Department. In a lengthy letter to fellow-Trustee and friend Timothy Hopkins on 23 February 1914, just four days after the uncompromising letter from Brannan, Hoover declared that the situation was an "emergency" and listed a number of arguments for retaining the medical school. Among other things, Hoover insisted that "our institution can meet all present outlays out of its income."

Just four days later, on 27 February 1914 at their monthly meeting, the Board of Trustees adopted the following sharply worded resolution, prepared by Hoover, specifically rejecting Branner's recommendations of 20 December 1913 and essentially retracting the Board's ill-conceived economy resolution of 29 August 1913: ^{[23] [24] [25]}

Whereas, the President of the University, evidently acting under a misapprehension of the University's resources arising from the terms of the Trustees' resolution of August 29th, 1913, submitted on December 20, 1913 to the Board of Trustees recommendations that the Medical School of Stanford University, including the Departments of Anatomy and Bacteriology, receive no further financial support from the University after July 31, 1914; and that its entire equipment be turned over to the University of California upon such terms as the Trustees may be able to arrange with the Regents; and that, for that purpose, a committee of three disinterested men be appointed to settle the conditions of the transfer upon terms honorable and satisfactory to both universities.

And Whereas, the University Committee has considered these recommendations and is unable to agree that such course is now necessary

Now Resolved: That the University Committee reports to the Board of Trustees:

1. That in its opinion the financial condition of Stanford University does not now require, and may never require, such drastic action as the abandonment of medical education; and that for the abandonment of any important department the dignity and reputation of the University demand much longer preparation and notice than one semester.

2. That the University Committee is prepared to recommend some system of joint action with the University of California in the conduct of the two medical schools, if such a system can be suitably formulated and agreed upon; but that it does not approve turning over the entire equipment of the medical school to the University of California; and that, if the Medical School is ever to be abandoned, the only course open to the Trustees, in the opinion of this Committee, is to return the School and its property to the Cooper Medical College, from which we obtained it under pledge that we could carry it on.

Early in March 1914 Hoover returned to England, but the medical school controversy was far from over. Branner considered the Trustees' favorable action on his request for a budget increase of $62,000 to be merely temporizing. With respect to the Board's resolution of 27 February 1914, he wrote: ^[26]

The claim is made . . . .that we have money enough to care for all departments, medicine included. I am unable to speak confidently on the subject for it has been the policy of the Board hitherto not to allow the President to know about these financial details. . . One unfortunate feature of the situation is that the Medical Department is in San Francisco, thirty miles away from the University, that it is not in vital touch with the University, that it has the ear of the Trustees and that they agree about new buildings, and about equipment and construction and other matters concerning which the President is not consulted. The result is that large sums of our general funds are spent without the President knowing about it until after it is done, and even then by accident or courtesy.. . . .

(Later, on 12 March 1914, he wrote:) Now that the budget has been increased by $62,000 the Trustees seem to think I am silenced. But at least $10,000 of that increase is for the Medical Department, and it also has backdoor access to the treasury. It will cost next year $110,000 to $150,000.

During the spring of 1914 efforts to resolve the future status of the Medical School were proceeding along several lines. In response to the urging of Dr. Branner, President Pritchett came to California as a consultant to the Trustees on the future status of the Medical Department..

When President Pritchett arrived in March and met with the Trustee's Committee of Three, minus Hoover, he found that the Trustees had in their resolution of 27 February 1914 firmly decided to retain the Medical Department, and that they were not amenable to Pritchett's now-familiar advice to merge the clinical program of the Department with the University of California.

Pritchett's effort to influence the Trustees having failed, Dr. Branner suggested calling an outside expert on medical education to advise not merely upon the question of union with the University of California, but also upon the question of Stanford carrying on a separate medical school in case the union did not take place.

At the meeting of the Board of Trustees on 27 March 1914, President Branner was authorized to invite Dr. William Welch, first Dean and Professor of Pathology at Johns Hopkins, to come to San Francisco and make recommendations to Stanford University as to the best plan for it to pursue in regard to Union of the two Medical Schools.

Dr. Welch was called but, after some delay and upon talking with Drs. Rixford and Stillman in New York, decided there was nothing he could do, and declined the invitation.

Next to be invited to visit Stanford as a consultant to President Branner and the Trustees was Victor C. Vaughan, Dean of the Medical School of the University of Michigan. Dr. Vaughan accepted the invitation but was not able to reach California until 29 May 1914.

Meanwhile, Dean Wilbur made the following lengthy and perceptive Report to the Trustees, and engaged in Critical Correspondence with Dean Moffitt of the UC Medical School and President Timothy Hopkins of the Stanford Board of Trustees.