Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

H. B. Shaw: I would like to make a suggestion that the object of this No. 6 could to my mind be better determined by each institution getting a picture of what its graduates do after graduation. And I think you would find coöperation from the employers of those graduates, particularly those who employed them in considerable numbers.

J. P. J. Williams: I suppose that most of you know perhaps that the Engineering Council at the present time has a committee working on the question of classification of engineers, and they are making a deliberate attempt to place engineers in various classifications in connection with the matter of compensation.

I would like to call attention also to Dr. J. A. L. Waddell's suggestion in the symposium which the Engineering NewsRecord had recently. He suggested that the S. P. E. E. should appoint a committee composed of eight men, four pro.fessors of the engineering college and four practising engineers;

and it occurs to me in this connection that that kind of a combination committee should be appointed which will bring together the academic efforts of the professors and the demands of the practising engineers.

(The motion, duly made and seconded, was then put before the members for vote and was carried.)

The President: The motion is made to refer it to the council, the matter of arranging for carrying out this resolution.

(The motion, duly made and seconded, was then put before the members for vote and was carried.)

[ocr errors]

MILITARY TRAINING IN ENGINEERING

SCHOOLS.

BY COL. F. J. MORROW,

Chairman, Committee on Education and Special Training of the War

Department.

In April, 1917, when the United States entered the war it was but little prepared to undertake military operations against a first-class power. The National Defense Act of 1916 had increased the size of the Regular Army to 175,000 men, to be provided in five annual increments. But one of these increments had been added. In every one of the scientific and technical branches, the Army was deficient both as to personnel and material. Agitation favoring military preparedness had been carried on by a small group who saw clearly that our participation in the world conflict could not be much longer postponed, but the great mass of the people did not see the necessity for it. They saw in preparedness the spectre of militarism, and to militarism they attributed the conflagration which had burst forth in Europe in 1914. With the entry of America into the war it became necessary to immediately devise a scheme which would give us the immense army of trained men necessary to make our participation effective. To the eternal credit of our legislators they declined to be satisfied with voluntary service. The passage of the draft law effectively democratized our military effort. It brought home to the American people the idea that every citizen who shared in the benefits of our democratic system must be prepared in his turn to render military service. The passage of the draft law was made possible largely through the influence of thousands of business and professional men who had come to realize the ineffectiveness and waste of effort involved in any other system. Perhaps the most effective work along this line was done by those who had attended the Plattsburgh camps. The value of that movement can hardly be overstated. The men who went there became convinced that the making of a soldier is more than the mere uniforming and equipping of the citizen. The consciousness of this fact carried with it the realization that America had very few trained men to lead a large Army and in consequence those business men exerted their influence to correct this state of affairs.

To be reasonably well prepared for a war which can not be honorably avoided, does not mean that we must burden ourselves with a military system so vast that it threatens our democratic ideals or our republican institutions. There is a happy mean between the bristling menace of Prussian militarism and the helpless impotence of China. It is an inspiring thing that an unmilitary, undisciplined and peaceful people should have been able to raise, equip and transport across the ocean, a gigantic and formidable army. The fact that we succeeded in accomplishing this task must not blind us to the danger we incur if we surrender ourselves to the snug thought that we shall always be able to successfully duplicate that feat. The United States in 1917, and Great Britain in 1914, were able to create immense armies because they were given time for organization, and for the manufacture of equipment and munitions. The boundless resources of America and the deep-rooted loyalty and patriotism of our people would have availed humanity but little had not French, British, Russian, Italian and Belgian armies and the steel walls of the British fleet held off the foe until the hammer, which was to crush him, could be forged at home.

The day has passed when the 3,000 miles of rolling Atlantic and the vast expanse of the Pacific will insure to America her "splendid isolation" and absolute immunity from foreign invasion. Only a few days have passed since we have read in the papers of the latest aërial achievements which bring America and Europe within sixteen hours of each other's shores.

Intelligent and far-sighted statesmanship charged with the direction of our national affairs must determine what measures will provide that balance in national preparedness to which I have referred.

Perhaps no government in the world is more sensitively responsive to the trend of public opinion than our own when it is once clearly manifested. The power of public opinion in determining the policy of the executive and legislative branches is most potent. Most of our newspapers are reflectors rather than moulders of the views of the people. The direction and guidance of the great force known as public opinion, lies largely in the educated men and women of the country, and the educated men and women of America are the products of our collegiate institutions. The college graduate has, therefore, a heavy responsibility and his teachers have a greater one. Can it be denied that at the door of our educators lies a part of the responsibility for the public opinion which approved—or at least failed to forcibly disapprove—the state of unpreparedness of our country previous to the war?

Few of the leading educators had seen the writing on the wall, the need for military training in the schools was not appreciated, and some were actively engaged in discouraging any preparation for national defense. Many thousands of graduates were going forth annually and entering into the life of the nation without having acquired any preparation for any particular form of service.

Today, with the experience of the war behind us, necessity for a closer affiliation of the colleges and the War Department seems to be generally appreciated. Past deficiencies and the heavy price which must inevitably be paid for the neglect of thorough preparations are clearly recognized. It can be said that our country in times gone by did not benefit itself from its participation in previous wars; that as soon as the sad experience had passed we began promptly to forget it and to conduct ourselves as though there would never be another.

It is an encouraging sign of the times that today there is a determination that we shall take permanent advantage this time of our deficiencies in preparation. One form in which this determination manifests itself is in the preparation of college men for possible future service. In your hands lies the opportunity for developing in your graduates a spirit and capacity for service. The educational world should feel a responsibility for imparting to America's youth an intelligent understanding of our country's problems of defense.

The Government has established a liberal, comprehensive and workable system to assist schools and colleges, and it desires to coöperate with them, sharing the problems of instruction and largely assuming the financial burdens. It does this through the Reserve Officers' Training Corps.

The R. 0. T. C., as it is commonly called, had its inception in the National Defense Act of June 3, 1916, and in the fall of that year it began to function. Before the close of the first academic year came the declaration of war and thousands of the students, including practically all the cadet officers, flocked to the training camps and the recruiting offices. The organization finished the year as best it could and prepared to carry on in the fall of 1917 with the instruction largely in the hands of retired officers who were recalled to active duty for this purpose. Towards the close of the war the R. O. T. C. had been largely replaced in the colleges and universities by the Students' Army Training Corps which had taken over 102 of the 123 units nominally in existence. With the signing of the armistice and the subsequent demobilization of the S. A. T. C. these units were automatically restored to their former status and the growth of the R. O. T. C. from then on has been rapid.

Since November 11, 324 new units have been approved and are now in the various stages of organization. Over and above the 494 units now in existence, there are 89 applications on file.

The 494 units which I have mentioned above are distributed through 336 institutions in every state in the Union

[ocr errors]
« ZurückWeiter »