Onitsfaceitshouldnotseemprobablethatmotivesofpersonalgain，intheformofpecuniaryorothermaterialinterest，wouldhaveaseriouspartinthematter。Inallprobabilitythereisinnocaseasensiblepecuniarygaintotheuniversityassuchfromitsexpendituresonpublicity，andthereisstilllessquestionofgaininanyotherthanthepecuniaryrespect。Thereisalsocommonlynoverysubstantialpecuniarygaintobederivedfromthisbusinesseitherbytheacademicheadorbythemembersoftheboard，——anexceptionalinstancetothecontrarywillnotvitiatethisgeneralproposition。Itallbringsnoappreciablepecuniaryreturntothem，particularlysofarasitisconcernedwiththepursuitofprestige;andapartfromexceptional，andthereforenegligible，casesitadmitsofnoappreciableconversionoffundstoprivateuse。Atthesametimeitseemsalmostanaffronttoentertainthenotionthattheseimpassivelypurposefulmenofaffairsaregreatlymovedbypersonalmotivesofvanity，vaingloriouslyseekingrenownforefficientlycarryingonatrafficinpublicitythathasnootherendthanrenownforefficientlycarryingiton。Andyetitwillbefoundextremelydifficulttotakeaccountofthefactsandatthesametimeavoidsuchanodiouslypersonalinterpretationofthem。
Such，indeed，wouldhavetobetheinferencedrawnbyanyonewhomightingenuouslytaketheavailablefactsattheirfacevalue，——notcountingasfactsthedutifulprotestationsoftheauthoritiestothecontrary。Butitshouldbekeptinmindthatatransparentingenuousnessisnotcharacteristicofbusinessphenomena，withintheuniversityorwithout。Adegreeofdeviation，or\"diplomacy，\"maybeforcedontheacademicmanagementbythecircumstancesoftheiroffice，particularlybytheone—eyedbusinesssenseoftheirgoverningboards。Indeed，admissionstosuchaneffectarenotaltogetherwanting。
Ratedastheyare，inthepopularapprehension，asgentlemenandscholars，andthemselvespresumablyacceptingthisratingassubstantiallycorrect，nofeatureoftheschemeofmanagementimposedontheacademicexecutivebybusinessprinciplesshould（presumably）besorepugnanttotheirsensibilitiesandtheirscholarlyjudgmentasthiscovertbutunremittingpursuitofaninnocuousnotoriety，coupledasitnecessarilyiswithasystematicmisdirectionoftheacademicforcestounscholarlyends;butprudentialreasonswilldecidethatthismustbetheirchiefendeavouriftheyaretoholdtheirownasacompetitiveuniversity。Shouldtheacademicheadallowhissenseofscholarlyfitnessandexpediencytohamperthisbusinessofreputablenotoriety，itis，perhapswithreason，fearedthatsuchremissnesswouldpresentlyleadtohisretirementfromoffice;atleastsomethingofthatkindseemsafairinferencefromtherunofthefacts。Hisplacewouldthenbesuppliedbyanincumbentdulyqualifiedonthisscoreofone—eyedbusinesssagacity，andonewhowouldknowhowtokeephisscholarlyimpulsesinhand。Itisatleastconceivablethattheapprehensionofsomesuchcontingencymayunderliecurrentuniversitymanagementatsomepoints，anditmaythereforeinsomeinstanceshavegiventheadministrationofacademicaffairsanairoflight—headedfutility，whenitshouldratherbecreditedwithasagaciouslydisingenuousyieldingtocircumstance。
Therunofthefactsasoutlinedabove，andthelineofinferencejustindicatedasfollowingfromthem，reflectnogreatcreditonthemanlyqualitiesoftheincumbentsofexecutiveoffice;butthealternative，asalsonotedabove，isscarcelypreferableeveninthatrespect，whileitwouldbeevenlessflatteringtotheirintellectualpowers。Yetthereappearstobenoavoidingthedilemmasopresented。Ofdisinterestedgroundsforthecommonrunofacademicpolicythereseemtobeonlythesetwolinestochoosebetween:——eitherashort—sightedandheadlongconformitytothevulgarprejudicethatdoesnotlookbeyond\"practical\"trainingandcompetitiveexpansion，coupledwithaboyishcravingforpopulardisplay;orastrategiccompromisewiththeeldersofthePhilistines，afutiledoingofevilinthehopethatsomegoodmaycomeofit。
Thislatterlineofapologyisadmissibleonlyinthosecaseswheretheuniversitycorporationisinanexceptionallyprecariouspositioninrespectofitsendowment，whereitisingreatneedandhasmuchtohopeforinthewayofpecuniarygainthroughstoopingtoconventionalprejudices，thatareofnoscholasticvalue，butthatareconceivedtobinditspotentialbenefactorsinaweboffatallyfragilebigotry;or，again，wheretheexecutiveisinsensibledangerofbeingsupersededbyanadministrationimbuedwith（conceivably）yetlowerandfeeblerscholarlyideals。