University of Virginia Library

Search this document 
History of the University of Virginia, 1819-1919;

the lengthened shadow of one man,
  
  
  
  
  
  

collapse section 
 I. 
 II. 
 III. 
 IV. 
 V. 
 VI. 
 VII. 
 VIII. 
 IX. 
 X. 
 XI. 
 XII. 
 XIII. 
 XIV. 
 XV. 
 XVI. 
 XVII. 
 XVIII. 
 XIX. 
 XX. 
 XXI. 
 XXII. 
XXII. Academic Schools—Continued
 XXIII. 
 XXIV. 
 XXV. 
 XXVI. 
 XXVII. 
 XXVIII. 
 XXIX. 
 XXX. 
 XXXI. 
 XXXII. 
 XXXIII. 
 XXXIV. 
 XXXV. 
 XXXVI. 
 XXXVII. 
 XXXVIII. 
 XXXIX. 
 XL. 
 XLI. 
 XLII. 
 XLIII. 
 XLIV. 
 XLV. 
 XLVI. 
 XLVII. 
 XLVIII. 
 XLIX. 
 L. 
 LI. 
 LII. 
 LIII. 
 LIV. 
 LV. 
 LVI. 
 LVII. 
 LVIII. 
 LIX. 
 LX. 
 LXI. 
 LXII. 
 LXIII. 
 LXIV. 
 LXV. 
 LXVI. 

 A. 
 B. 
  

XXII. Academic Schools—Continued

As has been shown in our history of the School of
Mathematics previous to 1900, that school had received
its principal characteristics from the stamp given to it
by the genius of three of its professors; namely, Bonnycastle,
who had been trained in an English college;
Courtenay, who had been educated in the United
States Military Academy at West Point; and Venable,
who had grafted upon the methods of these predecessors,
the methods of the German and French instructors
of the science. The course,—which led up to the
degree of master of arts,—at first was spread over
three years; the ground which it traversed consisted of
algebra, geometry, trigonometry, analytical geometry,
and differential and integral calculus; and to these were
added by Venable a course in mixed mathematics,—
which, however, attracted only a few students.

At the beginning of the Ninth Period, the work of
the school was protracted over five years; and there
were two professors engaged in delivering twenty-four
lectures weekly throughout the length of the
session. In the first year, the instruction was in elementary
algebra, geometry, and trigonometry; and in the
second, in elementary analytical geometry and elementary
differential and integral calculus; in the third, in
advanced analytical geometry, differential and integral
calculus, differential equations, and the history of
mathematics. During the last two years,—the fourth
and fifth,—the instruction became highly specialized,
as the avenue to the doctorate of philosophy.


137

Page 137

So large had the attendance now become that the
professors could not concentrate the amount of personal
attention upon the needs of their classes which
they thought imperative. It was said that not less than
twenty persons were occupied at Cornell University in
giving instruction upon the subjects which Professors
Echols and Page were teaching without assistance.
After the adoption of entrance requirements in the
autumn of 1905, the topics embraced in the entire round
of the school were arranged in eight courses. During
the session of 1909–10, more elementary texts were
introduced in the classes of the college department in
order to bring them into closer harmony with the differentiation
between the undergraduate and the graduate
sections. By the session of 1910–11, two new courses
had been added to those already covered. In consequence
of the exacting nature of Professor Page's duties
as dean of the University, a considerable part of the
instruction during the years coming just before 1915–16
was given, under his supervision, by young men who
held student-fellowships. In June, 1916, J. J., Luck,
a distinguished graduate of the School, was elected
adjunct professor in order to take charge of the classes
of the first year, so as to afford relief to the overburdened
senior professors. During the session of
1915–16, there were in operation five courses for undergraduates,
one for undergraduates and graduates, and
three for graduates alone. The first course for undergraduates
was divided into three terms. In each
ascending class, knowledge of the subject of the preceding
lower class was essential.

In the School of Applied Mathematics, the subjects
taught under the usual division of courses, namely, for
undergraduates, for undergraduates and graduates, and


138

Page 138
for graduates only, were general mechanics, analytical
mechanics, and mixed mathematics. There were
advanced courses in addition. The course in mixed
mathematics was designed for candidates for the degree
of doctor of philosophy; and no student was admitted
to it unless he had graduated in the school of pure
mathematics, or had enjoyed a previous preparation
commensurate therewith. In 1915–16, there were two
great divisions: the first course, assigned to undergraduates
and graduates, embraced theoretical mechanics;
and the second, assigned to graduates, embraced analytical
mechanics. The dean of this school was still
Professor Thornton.[5]


139

Page 139

In the School of Physics, in 1904–05, instruction was
given in elementary and practical physics. There were
two elementary courses,—one in general physics; the
other, in electricity. The advanced courses related to
mathematical physics and mathematical electricity, each
illustrated by tests in the laboratory. Ample facilities
existed for independent investigation. During the


140

Page 140
preceding fifty years, the original school had been
divided into three separate schools,—the School of
Physics, the School of Geology, and the School of
Biology; and it was now predicted that the original
school would throw off several more schools, just as the
planet Jupiter has thrown off moons; namely, a School
of Electricity, a School of Physical Chemistry, and a
School of Mathematical Physics. After 1907–08, when
the new admission requirements were in force, experimental

141

Page 141
physics were taught in the undergraduate classes;
electricity and magnetism in the classes for undergraduates
and graduates; and optics in the class for
graduates. By 1912–13, a course intended only for
prospective medical students had been introduced. This
work was confined to the most elementary lines. A
course in dynamics also was now given. The professors
in charge of this school were Professor Hoxton and
Adjunct Professor Sparrow.

The primary aim of the School of Astronomy has
been to impart such knowledge of the facts, principles,
and methods of the science as every man of liberal education
should possess. When the Board of Visitors assembled
in November, 1910, a discussion arose as to
whether the observatory was then fulfilling all the expectations
of the men who had built and endowed it. The
original condition attached to the observatory fund was
that the director should be called upon only to teach
practical and theoretical astronomy. This was interpreted
by Professor Stone as meaning such graduate
work as would adequately prepare the student for the
profession of an astronomer; and to this, he added independent
research,—which he continued to pursue until
1889, when the means to print the results unhappily
ran dry. It was the opinion of Mr. Hall McCormick, a
son of the founder, expressed in 1910, that the original
purpose of the gift was to enable the director to keep up
this original investigation for an indefinite time, as well
as to teach the graduate courses. Instead of doing this,
he said, the director, after 1889,—when astronomy
had been included, like the ordinary academic schools, in
the scheme of the degrees,—was required to devote a
large section of his time to drilling his classes in the college
or undergraduate courses. In consequence, the


142

Page 142
chair,—so Mr. McCormick asserted,—was converted
more or less into a professorship of cultural and descriptive
astronomy.

In a general reply to this statement, the Board of
Visitors declared that the work of teaching had always
been the principal duty expected of the director of the
school, and that his attention had only been diverted to
research in the interval of his performance of that duty.
Investigation had not been neglected, as was proven by
the achievements of the school in this province during
recent years.

After the retirement of Professor Stone, the vacant
chair was filled by the election of Professor S. A.
Mitchell, formerly a professor in the astronomical department
of Columbia University, and acting director
of the Yerkes Observatory in Chicago.

It has been said that the old astronomy was the
astronomy of the telescope and the eye; the new, the
astronomy of the spectroscope and the photographic
plate. During the last fifty years, the development of
astrophysics has gone beyond the development of every
other section of the science. This section is interested in
the nature of the heavenly bodies and not in their mutual
relations. "It inquires into their chemical make up,"
we are told, "investigates their physical state, their
stores of energy, their radiation and temperature. The
work of the modern astronomer is no longer that of a
star-gazer. He must be an expert photographer. His
work is not finished by daybreak. The workshop of
astrophysics includes the laboratory as well as the fully
equipped observatory."

The spectroscope had been employed in one course at
the University during the period of Professor Stone's
incumbency; but greater use of it was made after the


143

Page 143
election of Professor Mitchell, who had given close
study to astrophysical astronomy, without, however,
neglecting mathematical astronomy. By May, 1914,
he had a photographic attachment to the great reflector
in place; and it was found to give quite as accurate
measurements as the telescope at Yerkes Observatory.
In order to obtain the means to increase his staff, he
sought appointment to the Adams Research Fellowship
at Columbia University, and held the position during
five years. A solar plate-holder was given to the
observatory by Professor Poor of that institution, which
made it possible to continue the routine work in the daytime;
and a wireless apparatus was presented by John
Neilson, of New York. The income of the school was
increased by an annual donation from the McCormick
family of Chicago.

By 1916–17, the measures of the parallaxes of one
hundred stars had been completed by Professor
Mitchell. For his accuracy in preparing the observations
on meteors taken throughout the United States in
1916, Adjunct Professor Charles P. Olivier was chosen
secretary of the meteor committee of the American
Astronomical Society. An agreement was entered into
with Harvard University, under which the two universities
cooperated in observing the variable stars,—
Harvard, possessing a smaller telescope, watched a star
until it became too faint for observation further; and
then the University of Virginia took up the observation
and completed it.

In 1915–16, there were three divisions of study in this
school: the first, which was intended for undergraduates,
treated of general astronomy and modern astronomy;
the second, designed for undergraduates and graduates,
related to spherical and practical astronomy and celestial


144

Page 144
mechanics; the third, which was reserved for graduates,
had for its topics advanced practical astronomy, the
determination of the position of undisturbed bodies, and
the elements of undisturbed orbit, and the theory of
special perturbations, advanced celestial mechanics, and
photographic astronomy.

Prior to 1907, the instruction in the School of Chemistry
had been given by lecture alone. The original
method had been purely didactic, but, in time, it was
largely superseded by the laboratory method. Formerly,
Professor Mallet had offered a course in general
chemistry for undergraduates and the candidates for the
degrees in engineering. This course, with important
additions, was taken over by Professor Robert M. Bird,
who had previously filled with distinction a similar
chair in the University of Missouri. He was designated
the collegiate professor of chemistry and director of the
laboratory for undergraduate instruction in that particular
province. He practically established a new
department. The salient features of his school were
the importance of the laboratory instruction and the
differentiation between the work done by the engineering
students and the work done by the candidates for the baccalaureate
degree,—especially in the laboratory, which
was situated in the building standing at the south end
of West Range, formerly occupied by Miss Ross.

After the adoption of requirements for admission,
there were arranged three divisions relating to the
science of chemistry; namely, general chemistry, taught
by Professor Bird; industrial chemistry, taught by Professor
Mallet; and organic chemistry, as illustrated in
the laboratory,—which also was taught by Professor
Bird. In March, 1909, Professor Mallet was succeeded
by Professor Joseph H. Kastle.


145

Page 145

There were four bodies of pupils to be instructed
at this time: the academic students, who entered upon
the course in their pursuit of a liberal or disciplinary
education; the students in the department of engineering;
the medical students; and finally, the students
who were looking forward to becoming professional
analysts, assayers, and directors of chemical factories.
The Chemical Journal Club was established in 1909–10
for critical review and discussion of topics of interest
in current chemical literature, and also to nourish a
strong esprit de corps among the members of the school.
The session of 1914–15 was made memorable by the announcement
of a gift of fifty thousand dollars by John
B. Cobb for the erection of a great chemical laboratory.
Mr. Cobb's donation was exempt from all conditions
beyond the expression of the hope that due recognition
would be given to chemistry as applied to the agricultural
and manufacturing interests. An anonymous
benefactor presented, through the President of the Uni
versity, the supplementary sum of fifty thousand dollars.

 
[5]

It has been represented to us, by surviving pupils of Professor Leopold
J. Boeck, of the original School of Applied Mathematics, that
the reference to him in Dr. Culbreth's Recollections, which we quoted
in a note on page 361, in Volume III, offers a narrow and misleading
view of one of the most accomplished and many-sided men associated
with the history of the University of Virginia. In contradiction of that
view, the following brief outline of his career, furnished by one of these
pupils, would seem to indicate a very remarkable degree of manliness,
whatever the superficial impression that may have been left by the
difference between the Continental European, and the American, personal
bearing and manner: "Professor Boeck was a member of the
Polish nobility, but lost his estates during the Polish Revolution, at which
time he was a student in Germany. He accompanied General Bem, a
countryman of his, to Hungary as his Chief-of-Staff and afterwards became
the Chief-of-Staff and Secretary to the then Governor, Louis Kossuth.
He retained this position until after the treason of General Georgey
and the disastrous defeat at the battle of Temesvar, when he was
appointed Minister and Agent to the Sublime Porte at Constantinople.
Germany, Austria, and Russia demanded his extradition and surrender;
and to protect him, the Turks made him a prisoner of war. He was,
finally, given a parole at the urgent solicitation of the American minister.
Mr. Marsh, and was taken to Marseilles, France, aboard the U. S. S.
'Mississippi.' He proceeded to Paris, and became a professor at the
Sorbonne, and remained there until the 'Coup d'Etat' of Louis Napoleon.
During his stay in France, he was intimate with Victor Hugo and the
first literary characters of that country. After leaving France, he went
to England, and later on to the United States. Professor Boeck, soon
after his arrival in this country, established the first Technical Engineering
School, which he gave up to accept the call to the University of
Virginia. The latter years of his life were spent in Philadelphia, first
as a professor in the Kennedy School of Technology; and afterwards, he
was engaged on his great work, 'The Theory of Graphical Statics and
Dynamics, and its Applications to the Workshop and School.' The
first parts of this work were published, but his death interrupted its
completion."

The following impressive tributes to the character and conduct of
Professor Boeck, selected from many placed at our disposal, demonstrate
the esteem in which he was held by the men of distinction with
whom he was associated. The first is from the famous patriot, Kossuth,
of Hungary, and is dated December 13, 1849, when he was an exile.
"The undersigned certifies that Mr. Leopold J. Boeck, a native of Prussian
Poland, induced by his liberal convictions to take part in the
righteous self-defense of Hungary, has served with distinction in the
Hungarian Army of Transylvania, attached with the rank of Major
to the Staff of Lieutenant-General Bem, and being always employed in
the immediate suite of said General, acted as his Secretary of War,
dispatching his official correspondence in such an excellent manner, that
I, who, as Governor, was in uninterrupted correspondence with the gallant
General, was often tempted to envy him on account of his Secretary;
and, therefore, when, after the unfortunate catastrophe of Hungary,
Major Boeck,—not wishing to follow the example of his chief, who had
embraced the creed of Islamism,—parted from him after our emigration
to Widdin, I felt very happy to be able to receive him into my own
staff in the same capacity. And I only perform an act of the most
simple justice by stating that he has filled this confidential position,—
which demands as much firmness of character as ability,—with the greatest
energy, skill, faithfulness, discretion, and talent, showing me, at the
same time, in my unfortunate situation, when I hardly had any opportunity
to express my gratitude, so much disinterested affection, that, as
he now,—saved from this unpleasant position by the protection of the
Prussian minister,—parts from me, I deem it a duty of honor to acknowledge
myself his ever grateful friend, and to declare him to be a
man who will always respond to every accepted trust, and to every
confidence in as distinguished and as honorable a manner."

After Professor Boeck's withdrawal from the Faculty in the session of
1875–76, Professor Gildersleeve made the following reference to him in
writing: "Mr. L. J. Boeck, formerly professor of applied mathematics
in this institution, is a gentleman of rare attainments as a scholar, of
eminent ability as a professor, and of long experience as a teacher.
During our intercourse here, I have been more and more impressed with
his grasp of intellect, his range of knowledge, his power of illustration,
and his faculty of vivid statement."

"I have no hesitation in stating," said Professor Frank H. Smith, during
the same session, "that Professor L. J. Boeck is the most accomplished
teacher of engineering it has been my fortune to know. I have
heard a pupil of his lately speak in high terms of the great clearness of
his explanations. I have several times seen letters addressed to him by
his former students, after they had gone into the active practice of their
profession, in which they gave most hearty expression to their gratitude
for his instructions, and of their attachment to him as a man."
Professor Minor also spoke of Professor Boeck's "very remarkable capacity,
learning, and accomplishments."

One of the most distinguished pupils of Professor Boeck was Professor
Gaetano Lanza, long associated with the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology. Commenting on Dr. Culbreth's reference to Professor
Boeck's bearing and manner in the class-room, Professor Lanza writes
us as follows: "I will say that my acquaintance with Professor Boeck,
from the time that he came to the University, until 1871, when I left
Virginia, does not justify any such statement regarding him, as Dr.
Culbreth has made. I do not know the particular definition of dignity
in the minds of those who criticise Professor Boeck in this particular,
nor what they think its application should require; but, according to my
ideas, the criticism by Dr. Culbreth is incorrect and unfair. Being a
foreigner, Professor Boeck used some expressions which sounded strange
to American ears, such as "You understand, sir" when talking English,
and "Par exemple" when speaking French; but this and other idiosyncrasies
do not seem to me to be of sufficient importance to be mentioned
in the estimate of a man's ability as a teacher."

There is no minute in the official records of the University of Virginia
which justifies the slightest inference that the withdrawal of
Professor Boeck from the Faculty was involuntary, and not in harmony
with his own personal plans. The testimonials of such men as Professors
Gildersleeve, Minor, and Smith, were given after his retirement,
and indicate the undiminished good will in which his distinguished
colleagues held him.