Content deleted Content added
m Reverted edit by Genericusername57 (talk) to last version by Jarble |
→External links: briefly extended [CAB] wikilink ref |
||
| (8 intermediate revisions by 7 users not shown) | |||
Line 21:
| relatives = [[Lowell family]]
}}
'''Abbott Lawrence Lowell''' (December 13, 1856 – January 6, 1943) was an American
With an "aristocratic sense of mission and self-certainty,"<ref>Yeomans, 80</ref> Lowell cut a large figure in American education and to some extent in public life as well. At Harvard University his years as president saw a remarkable expansion of the university in terms of the size of its physical infrastructure, its student body, and its endowment. His reform of undergraduate education established the system of [[Major (academics)|majoring]] in a particular discipline that became the standard in American education.
Line 38:
Lowell graduated from [[Noble and Greenough School]] in 1873 and attended [[Harvard College]] where he presented a thesis for honors in mathematics that addressed using [[quaternion]]s to treat [[quadric]]s<ref>A.L. Lowell (1878) [https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/35671#page/248/mode/1up Surfaces of the second order, as treated by quaternions], [[Proceedings of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences]] 13:222–50, from [[Biodiversity Heritage Library]]</ref> and graduated in 1877. While at Harvard, he was a member of the [[Hasty Pudding Theatricals|Hasty Pudding]].{{Citation needed|date=October 2010}} He graduated from [[Harvard Law School]] in 1880 and practiced law from 1880 to 1897 in partnership with his cousin, [[Francis Cabot Lowell (judge)|Francis Cabot Lowell]], with whom he wrote ''Transfer of Stock in Corporations'', which appeared in 1884.<ref name="EB1911">{{EB1911|inline=1|wstitle=Lowell, Abbott Lawrence|volume=17|pages=73–74}}</ref> On June 19, 1879, while a law student, he married a distant cousin, Anna Parker Lowell in [[King's Chapel]] in Boston and honeymooned in the Western U.S.<ref>''New York Times'': [https://www.nytimes.com/1943/01/07/archives/a-l-lowell-dies-harvardexhead-president-of-university-19091933.html "A. L. Lowell Dies; Harvard Ex-Head"];''New York Times'' January 7, 1943; Henry Aaron Yeomans, ''Abbott Lawrence Lowell, 1856–1943'' (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1948), 50–51</ref>
His first scholarly publications appeared before he undertook an academic career. ''Essays on Government'' appeared in 1889, designed to counter the arguments [[Woodrow Wilson]] made in his ''Congressional Government''. The two volumes of ''Governments and Parties in Continental Europe'' followed in 1896.<ref name="EB1911"/> Lowell was elected a Fellow of the [[American Academy of Arts and Sciences]], joining his father and brother, in 1897.<ref name="AAAS">{{cite web|title=Book of Members, 1780–2010: Chapter L|url=http://www.amacad.org/publications/BookofMembers/ChapterL.pdf|publisher=American Academy of Arts and Sciences|access-date=April 7, 2011}}</ref><ref>Yeomans, 53</ref> He became a trustee of [[Massachusetts Institute of Technology|MIT]] in 1897.<ref>Michael Shinagel, ''"The Gates Unbarred:" A History of University Extension at Harvard, 1910–2009'' (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2009), 15</ref> In 1899 Lowell was elected a member of the [[American Antiquarian Society]].<ref>[http://www.americanantiquarian.org/memberlistl American Antiquarian Society Members Directory]</ref> In 1909, he was elected to the [[American Philosophical Society]].<ref>{{Cite web |title=APS Member History |url=https://search.amphilsoc.org/memhist/search?creator=A.+Lawrence+Lowell&title=&subject=&subdiv=&mem=&year=&year-max=&dead=&keyword=&smode=advanced |access-date=2023-12-14 |website=search.amphilsoc.org}}</ref>
==Harvard University==
Line 45:
From relatively early in his professional career, Lowell worried about the role of racial and ethnic minorities in American society. As early as 1887, he wrote of the Irish: "What we need is not to dominate the Irish, but to absorb them ... We want them to become rich, and send their sons to our colleges, to share our prosperity and our sentiments. We do not want to feel that they are among us and yet not really part of us." He believed that only a homogeneous society could safeguard the achievements of American democracy. Sometime before 1906, he became an honorary vice-president of the [[Immigration Restriction League]], an organization that promoted literacy tests and tightened enforcement of immigration laws. In 1910, he wrote approvingly in private of excluding Chinese immigrants entirely and of Southern states that denied the franchise to black citizens. Publicly he consistently adopted assimilation as the solution to absorbing other groups, limiting their numbers to levels he believed would allow American society to absorb them without being changed itself, a stance that "fused liberal and racist ideas in making the case for exclusion."<ref>Daniel J. Tichenor, ''Dividing Lines: The Politics of Immigration Control in America'' (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2002), 7, 38, 120, 147, 315; Richard Norton Smith, ''The Harvard Century: The Making of a University to a Nation'' (NY: Simon and Schuster, 1986), 85–86</ref>
He was an early member of the [[American Academy of Arts and Letters]].<ref>{{cite book|chapter=American Academy of Arts and Letters|title=World Almanac and Encyclopedia 1919|date=May 22, 2024 |location=New York|publisher=The Press Publishing Co. (The New York World)|chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=faBtNh34xREC&pg=PA216|page=216}}</ref> In 1909, he became president of the [[American Political Science Association]]. That same year, he succeeded [[Charles William Eliot]] as president of Harvard University, a post he held for 24 years until his retirement in 1933.<ref>Ferris Greenslet, ''The Lowells and Their Seven Worlds'' (Boston, Houghton Mifflin, 1946)</ref>
Lowell received an honorary doctorate from the [[University of Leiden]] (the Netherlands) on 30 August 1919.<ref>Jaarboek der Rijksuniversiteit te Leiden 1920 : Promotiën 15 September 1919 tot 10 Juli 1920, Faculteit der Rechtsgeleerdheid, b. Doctoraat Staatswetenschap, p. 128.</ref>
Line 68:
When the schoolteachers asked why they were not entitled to the same bachelor's degree as the Harvard College students, Lowell defended the distinction. Though courses were comparable, the programs and requirements were different, since the many specialized courses required of the College students could not be offered in the Extension Program. He meant the Associate in Arts degree to be distinctive. When Lowell learned in 1933 that other American schools had begun to award the Associate in Arts degree to students after the equivalent of just two years of work, he felt betrayed. He wrote: "the name of Associate in Arts has been degraded, probably beyond recovery, by wicked, thievish, and otherwise disreputable institutions." Harvard responded with a new Adjunct in Arts.<ref>Shinagel, 24, 36–38, 52–54</ref>
===Opposition to Brandeis nomination===▼
In 1916, President [[Woodrow Wilson]] nominated [[Louis Brandeis]], a private attorney renowned as a liberal opponent of monopolies and proponent of social reform legislation, to serve as an Associate Justice of the [[Supreme Court of the United States]]. As public opinion on the nomination divided along ideological lines, Lowell joined the Republican establishment, particularly that of his [[Boston Brahmin]] class, in opposition. He joined 54 others in signing a letter claiming that Brandeis lacked the requisite "legal temperament and capacity." An editorial in the ''Harvard Alumni Bulletin'' criticized him for needlessly involving the university in a political dispute. Some students organized their own petition in favor of the nomination. Though some opposition to Brandeis was rooted in antisemitism, Brandeis himself viewed Lowell's opposition as driven by social class prejudice. Writing in private in 1916, Brandeis described men like Lowell "who have been blinded by privilege, who have no evil purpose, and many of whom have a distinct public spirit, but whose environment—or innate narrowness—have obscured all vision and sympathy with the masses."<ref>Alpheus Thomas Mason, ''Brandeis: A Free Man's Life'' (NY: Viking Press, 1956), 472–473, 505–506; Yeomans writes that Lowell believed that Brandeis did not "enjoy professionally the confidence of the Massachusetts Bar." Yeomans, 326–327. Another scholar writes: "Lowell did not oppose Brandeis because he was a Jew per se, rather because he was not the proper kind of Jew." Oliver B. Pollack, "Antisemitism, the Harvard Plan, and the Roots of Reverse Discrimination," ''Jewish Social Studies'', v. 45 (1983), 114. See also: ''New York Times'': [https://www.nytimes.com/1916/02/13/archives/contend-brandeis-is-unfit-dr-lowell-and-54-bostonians-submit.html "Contend Brandeis is 'Unfit'" Feb. 13, 1916], accessed December 31, 2009; ''New York Times'': [https://www.nytimes.com/1916/02/29/archives/harvard-men-for-brandeis-students-send-petition-urging-his.html "Harvard Men for Brandeis," Feb. 29, 1916], accessed December 31, 2009</ref>▼
===Internationalism and the League of Nations===▼
Following the outbreak of World War I in 1914, Lowell helped found a civic organization to promote international cooperation to prevent future wars. It was meant to be non-partisan but was inevitably drawn into partisan politics as the subject of American participation in the League of Nations dominated post-war politics. Lowell described himself as "an inconsistent Republican" or "an independent of Republican antecedents." By the time the debate ended, many questioned that independence.<ref>''New York Times'': [https://www.nytimes.com/1919/03/20/archives/lodge-and-lowell-debate-covenant-both-ask-changes-senator.html "Lodge And Lowell Debate Covenant," March 20, 1919], accessed January 2, 2010; ''New York Times'': [https://www.nytimes.com/1920/10/18/archives/woodbury-rebukes-lowell-for-stand-declares-he-signed-utterly-false.html "Woodbury Rebukes Lowell for Stand," Oct. 18, 1920], accessed Jan 2, 2010; Lowell voted for Democrats Wilson in 1916 and Cleveland years earlier, Yeomans, 462</ref>▼
At a convention at [[Philadelphia]]'s [[Independence Hall (United States)|Independence Hall]] on June 17, 1915, with former President [[William Howard Taft]] presiding, one hundred noteworthy Americans announced the formation of the [[League to Enforce Peace]]. They proposed an international agreement in which participating nations would agree to "jointly use their economic and military force against any one of their number that goes to war or commits acts of hostility against another." The founders included [[Alexander Graham Bell]], Rabbi [[Stephen Samuel Wise|Stephen S. Wise]], [[James Gibbons (bishop)|James Cardinal Gibbons]] of Baltimore, and [[Edward Filene]] on behalf of the recently founded [[United States Chamber of Commerce|U.S. Chamber of Commerce]]. Lowell was elected to the Executive Committee.<ref>''New York Times'': [https://www.nytimes.com/1915/06/18/archives/league-to-enforce-peace-is-launched-american-branch-of-proposed.html "League to Enforce Peace is Launched," June 18, 1915], accessed January 2, 2010</ref>▼
The initial efforts of the League to Enforce Peace aimed at creating public awareness through magazine articles and speeches. Then-President Wilson's specific proposal for the League of Nations met resistance from the Republican-controlled Senate and the opposition led by Senator [[Henry Cabot Lodge]] of Massachusetts. Lowell watched the high-minded debate deteriorate until the ideal of international cooperation was "sacrificed to party intrigue, personal antipathy, and pride of authorship."<ref>Yeomans, 454</ref> Lowell and the League to Enforce Peace tried to hold the middle ground. He cared little about Wilson's specific plan or the details of the reservations or amendments Lodge wanted to attach for the Senate to give its assent. Lowell believed American participation was the greater goal, the exact nature of the organization secondary.<ref>Yeomans, 430–443</ref>▼
[[File:HenryCabotLodgeSr.jpg|thumb|Senator Henry Cabot Lodge]]▼
One of the most widely publicized confrontations saw Lowell debate Lodge, the League's most prominent opponent, in Boston's [[Symphony Hall, Boston|Symphony Hall]] on March 19, 1919, with Massachusetts Governor [[Calvin Coolidge]] presiding. That debate proved gentlemanly, since Lowell believed that the resolution of the policy dispute required Wilson and Lodge to compromise.<ref>''New York Times'': [https://www.nytimes.com/1919/03/20/archives/lodge-and-lowell-debate-covenant-both-ask-changes-senator.html "Lodge and Lowell Debate Covenant," March 20, 1919], accessed January 2, 2010</ref> Lowell had sharper exchanges with the die-hard Republican isolationist Senator [[William Borah]] of Idaho. Lowell repeatedly argued that [[George Washington's Farewell Address]] and its stricture against entangling alliances held no relevance for the present. Senator Borah saw a lack of patriotism: "There are a vast number of people supporting the league of nations who never let an opportunity go by of belittling ... everything that is truly American: and Dr. Lowell is one of them." The Harvard president replied in kind:<ref>Yeomans, 446–447; Lowell questioned the value of the Spanish–American War as well. Yeomans, 447; Smith, 80</ref>▼
<blockquote>I yield neither to Senator Borah nor to any other man in admiration of the Farewell Address and of the great Fathers of the Republic; but I would not use them as a cover for party politics. Never did I sneer at the Farewell Address; but I believe that the greatness of Washington was due to his looking the facts of his day in the face, and determining his conduct thereby, instead of by utterances, however wise of a hundred and fifty years before. I will trust the American people not to mistake short-sightedness for patriotism or narrow-mindedness for love of country.</blockquote>▼
In the summer of 1919, the League to Enforce Peace published a book of essays modeled on the [[Federalist Papers]] called ''The Covenanter: An American Exposition of the Covenant of the League of Nations''. Lowell authored 13 of its 27 essays. The ''New York Times'' called it a "masterly analysis" and thought it perfectly suited for a broad public: "This—thank Heaven—is a brochure for the lazy-minded!"<ref>''New York Times'': [https://www.nytimes.com/1919/07/27/archives/the-truth-about-the-league-of-nations-a-masterly-analysis-of-the.html "The Truth about the League of Nations," July 27, 1919], accessed January 2, 2010</ref>▼
As the election of 1920 approached, the Republican nominee, [[Warren Harding]], campaigned on the domestic issues that united his party and sent confusing signals about his support for a League of Nations. With the election just weeks away, whole groups of League proponents chose different sides. One entire organization of independent voters chose [[James M. Cox|James Cox]], the Democratic candidate, who favored the League but showed no more flexibility than President Wilson. Lowell and many other prominent League supporters backed Harding, publishing a statement that became known as the "Letter of the 31 Republicans" on October 14, 1920. Lowell could not express his reasoning publicly. In his view, the League's proponents, and especially the League's Republican proponents, needed to control public perception of Harding's victory, which everyone knew was certain. They could not allow the election to appear as a victory of anti-League Republicans over pro-League Democrats. If the League lost a referendum in that way, there would be no hope for its revival under the new administration.<ref>David Pietrusza, ''1920: The Year of Six Presidents'' (NY: Carroll & Graf, 2007), 323–325; ''New York Times'': [https://www.nytimes.com/1920/10/10/archives/hamilton-holt-now-in-harding-revolt-editor-enrolled-as-republican.html "Hamilton Holt now in Harding Revolt," Oct. 10, 1920], accessed January 2, 2010; ''New York Times'': [https://www.nytimes.com/1920/10/15/archives/league-men-explain-support-of-harding-thirtyone-mostly-republicans.html "League Men Explain Support of Harding," Oct. 15, 1920], accessed January 2, 2010</ref>▼
The claim in the "Statement of 31 Republicans" that a Harding victory meant brighter prospects for the League of Nations was badly received by some League proponents. Lowell came in for attack precisely because of his earlier claims to independence. One Harvard graduate, who had just formed the [[New Hampshire]] committee to raise funds for the University's [[Financial endowment#College and university endowments|endowment]], wrote: "One can understand a Republican partisan and respect him. One can understand a Democratic partisan and respect him. But how can any man explain this recent act of yours consistently with the dignity, gravity, high character and devotion to truth which should attach to the President of Harvard College?"<ref>''New York Times'': [https://www.nytimes.com/1920/10/18/archives/woodbury-rebukes-lowell-for-stand-declares-he-signed-utterly-false.html "Woodbury Rebukes Lowell for Stand," October 18, 1920], accessed January 2, 2010; see also ''New York Times'': [https://www.nytimes.com/1920/10/24/archives/president-lowells-position.html "President Lowell's Position," Oct. 24, 1920], accessed January 2, 2010</ref> Charged with sacrificing his principles to expediency, Lowell admitted he had but provided his own definition of expediency: "striving to find the most effective way of achieving a principle—refusing to beat one's head uselessly against a wall to attack an entrenchment in face instead if taking it by a turning movement."<ref>Yeomans, 461–482, expediency 477; Pietrusza, 325</ref>▼
Harding as president disappointed proponents of the League, but Lowell never regretted his decision to endorse him. He did view the work of the League to Enforce Peace more critically. Its oratory had failed to engage the public at large, he thought, so public opinion remained "indifferent" to its call for muscular internationalism, leaving isolation or at least inaction to win the day.<ref>Yeomans, 443</ref>▼
===Academic freedom===
[[File:LawrenceLowellHarvardUniversityByJohnAWilson.jpg|thumb|Lowell by [[John A. Wilson (sculptor)|John A. Wilson]]]]
During [[World War I]], when American universities were under great pressure to demonstrate their unambiguous commitment to the American war effort, Harvard under Lowell established a distinguished record of independence.
He similarly defended a student's anti-German poem with a statement of principle in defense of free speech within the academic community. In 1915, [[Kuno Meyer]] a professor at the [[Humboldt University of Berlin|University of Berlin]] who was considering a temporary Harvard appointment, protested the publication of an undergraduate's satirical poem in a college magazine. Lowell replied that freedom of speech played a different role in American universities than in their German counterparts. "We have endeavored to maintain the right of all members of the university to express themselves freely, without censorship or supervision by the authorities of the university, and have applied this rule impartially to those who favor Germany and those who favor the Allies—to the former in the face of a pretty violent agitation for muzzling professors by alumni of the university and outsiders."<ref>''New York Times'': [https://www.nytimes.com/1915/04/29/archives/lowell-replies-to-kuno-meyer-says-student-was-responsible-for-war.html "Lowell Replies To Kuno Meyer," Apr. 29, 1915], accessed January 6, 2010</ref><ref>{{Cite EB1922|wstitle=Lowell, Abbott Lawrence}}</ref>
Line 105 ⟶ 81:
===Purge of homosexuals===
{{Main|Secret Court of 1920}}
In 1920, the brother of a student who had recently
===Excluding African-Americans from the Freshman Halls===
{{quote box
| quote
| source = —A. Lawrence Lowell
| width
| align | bgcolor = #EDEDED }}
Line 132 ⟶ 111:
Lowell then found another way to accomplish his goal, this time less publicly. He first won approval from the Harvard Board of Overseers for a new policy that would, in addition to traditional academic criteria, use letters from teachers and interviews to assess an applicant's "aptitude and character," thus introducing discretion in the place of the strict top seventh rule. He even persuaded one doubtful Overseer that this would not support discrimination against Jews as a group, but merely "careful discernment of differences among individuals." When Lowell gained final approval of these modifications in 1926 and appointed a compliant Admissions Committee, he had won his way.<ref>Karabel, 101ff. See also: ''New York Times'': [https://www.nytimes.com/1923/01/16/archives/dr-lowell-denies-attack-on-jews-harvards-president-says-that-forum.html "Dr. Lowell Denies Attack on Jews," January 16, 1923], accessed December 27, 2009. The charge that "an informal (and deeply resented) quota on Jewish students was instituted in the 1920s during the presidency of A. Lawrence Lowell" is inaccurate, if not entirely untrue. ''New York Times'': [https://www.nytimes.com/1986/07/20/magazine/the-harvard-factor.html "The Harvard Factor," July 20, 1986], accessed December 27, 2009</ref> When Lowell left his position in 1933, Jews made up 10% of the undergraduate population.<ref>Stephan Thernstrom, "'Poor but Hopeful Scholars'," in Bernard Bailyn et al., ''Glimpses of Harvard Past'' (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1986), 127–128</ref>
== Public stances ==
▲===Opposition to Brandeis nomination===
▲In 1916, President [[Woodrow Wilson]] nominated [[Louis Brandeis]], a private attorney renowned as a liberal opponent of monopolies and proponent of social reform legislation, to serve as an Associate Justice of the [[Supreme Court of the United States]]. As public opinion on the nomination divided along ideological lines, Lowell joined the Republican establishment, particularly that of his [[Boston Brahmin]] class, in opposition. He joined 54 others in signing a letter claiming that Brandeis lacked the requisite "legal temperament and capacity." An editorial in the ''Harvard Alumni Bulletin'' criticized him for needlessly involving the university in a political dispute. Some students organized their own petition in favor of the nomination. Though some opposition to Brandeis was rooted in antisemitism, Brandeis himself viewed Lowell's opposition as driven by social class prejudice. Writing in private in 1916, Brandeis described men like Lowell "who have been blinded by privilege, who have no evil purpose, and many of whom have a distinct public spirit, but whose environment—or innate narrowness—have obscured all vision and sympathy with the masses."<ref>Alpheus Thomas Mason, ''Brandeis: A Free Man's Life'' (NY: Viking Press, 1956), 472–473, 505–506; Yeomans writes that Lowell believed that Brandeis did not "enjoy professionally the confidence of the Massachusetts Bar." Yeomans, 326–327. Another scholar writes: "Lowell did not oppose Brandeis because he was a Jew per se, rather because he was not the proper kind of Jew." Oliver B. Pollack, "Antisemitism, the Harvard Plan, and the Roots of Reverse Discrimination," ''Jewish Social Studies'', v. 45 (1983), 114. See also: ''New York Times'': [https://www.nytimes.com/1916/02/13/archives/contend-brandeis-is-unfit-dr-lowell-and-54-bostonians-submit.html "Contend Brandeis is 'Unfit'" Feb. 13, 1916], accessed December 31, 2009; ''New York Times'': [https://www.nytimes.com/1916/02/29/archives/harvard-men-for-brandeis-students-send-petition-urging-his.html "Harvard Men for Brandeis," Feb. 29, 1916], accessed December 31, 2009</ref>
▲===Internationalism and the League of Nations===
▲Following the outbreak of World War I in 1914, Lowell helped found a civic organization to promote international cooperation to prevent future wars. It was meant to be non-partisan but was inevitably drawn into partisan politics as the subject of American participation in the League of Nations dominated post-war politics. Lowell described himself as "an inconsistent Republican" or "an independent of Republican antecedents." By the time the debate ended, many questioned that independence.<ref>''New York Times'': [https://www.nytimes.com/1919/03/20/archives/lodge-and-lowell-debate-covenant-both-ask-changes-senator.html "Lodge And Lowell Debate Covenant," March 20, 1919], accessed January 2, 2010; ''New York Times'': [https://www.nytimes.com/1920/10/18/archives/woodbury-rebukes-lowell-for-stand-declares-he-signed-utterly-false.html "Woodbury Rebukes Lowell for Stand," Oct. 18, 1920], accessed Jan 2, 2010; Lowell voted for Democrats Wilson in 1916 and Cleveland years earlier, Yeomans, 462</ref>
▲At a convention at [[Philadelphia]]'s [[
▲The initial efforts of the League to Enforce Peace aimed at creating public awareness through magazine articles and speeches. Then-President Wilson's specific proposal for the League of Nations met resistance from the Republican-controlled Senate and the opposition led by Senator [[Henry Cabot Lodge]] of Massachusetts. Lowell watched the high-minded debate deteriorate until the ideal of international cooperation was "sacrificed to party intrigue, personal antipathy, and pride of authorship."<ref>Yeomans, 454</ref> Lowell and the League to Enforce Peace tried to hold the middle ground. He cared little about Wilson's specific plan or the details of the reservations or amendments Lodge wanted to attach for the Senate to give its assent. Lowell believed American participation was the greater goal, the exact nature of the organization secondary.<ref>Yeomans, 430–443</ref>
▲[[File:HenryCabotLodgeSr.jpg|thumb|Senator Henry Cabot Lodge]]
▲One of the most widely publicized confrontations saw Lowell debate Lodge, the League's most prominent opponent, in Boston's [[Symphony Hall, Boston|Symphony Hall]] on March 19, 1919, with Massachusetts Governor [[Calvin Coolidge]] presiding. That debate proved gentlemanly, since Lowell believed that the resolution of the policy dispute required Wilson and Lodge to compromise.<ref>''New York Times'': [https://www.nytimes.com/1919/03/20/archives/lodge-and-lowell-debate-covenant-both-ask-changes-senator.html "Lodge and Lowell Debate Covenant," March 20, 1919], accessed January 2, 2010</ref> Lowell had sharper exchanges with the die-hard Republican isolationist Senator [[William Borah]] of Idaho. Lowell repeatedly argued that [[George Washington's Farewell Address]] and its stricture against entangling alliances held no relevance for the present. Senator Borah saw a lack of patriotism: "There are a vast number of people supporting the league of nations who never let an opportunity go by of belittling ... everything that is truly American: and Dr. Lowell is one of them." The Harvard president replied in kind:<ref>Yeomans, 446–447; Lowell questioned the value of the Spanish–American War as well. Yeomans, 447; Smith, 80</ref>
▲<blockquote>I yield neither to Senator Borah nor to any other man in admiration of the Farewell Address and of the great Fathers of the Republic; but I would not use them as a cover for party politics. Never did I sneer at the Farewell Address; but I believe that the greatness of Washington was due to his looking the facts of his day in the face, and determining his conduct thereby, instead of by utterances, however wise of a hundred and fifty years before. I will trust the American people not to mistake short-sightedness for patriotism or narrow-mindedness for love of country.</blockquote>
▲In the summer of 1919, the League to Enforce Peace published a book of essays modeled on the [[Federalist Papers]] called ''The Covenanter: An American Exposition of the Covenant of the League of Nations''. Lowell authored 13 of its 27 essays. The ''New York Times'' called it a "masterly analysis" and thought it perfectly suited for a broad public: "This—thank Heaven—is a brochure for the lazy-minded!"<ref>''New York Times'': [https://www.nytimes.com/1919/07/27/archives/the-truth-about-the-league-of-nations-a-masterly-analysis-of-the.html "The Truth about the League of Nations," July 27, 1919], accessed January 2, 2010</ref>
▲As the election of 1920 approached, the Republican nominee, [[Warren Harding]], campaigned on the domestic issues that united his party and sent confusing signals about his support for a League of Nations. With the election just weeks away, whole groups of League proponents chose different sides. One entire organization of independent voters chose [[James M. Cox|James Cox]], the Democratic candidate, who favored the League but showed no more flexibility than President Wilson. Lowell and many other prominent League supporters backed Harding, publishing a statement that became known as the "Letter of the 31 Republicans" on October 14, 1920. Lowell could not express his reasoning publicly. In his view, the League's proponents, and especially the League's Republican proponents, needed to control public perception of Harding's victory, which everyone knew was certain. They could not allow the election to appear as a victory of anti-League Republicans over pro-League Democrats. If the League lost a referendum in that way, there would be no hope for its revival under the new administration.<ref>David Pietrusza, ''1920: The Year of Six Presidents'' (NY: Carroll & Graf, 2007), 323–325; ''New York Times'': [https://www.nytimes.com/1920/10/10/archives/hamilton-holt-now-in-harding-revolt-editor-enrolled-as-republican.html "Hamilton Holt now in Harding Revolt," Oct. 10, 1920], accessed January 2, 2010; ''New York Times'': [https://www.nytimes.com/1920/10/15/archives/league-men-explain-support-of-harding-thirtyone-mostly-republicans.html "League Men Explain Support of Harding," Oct. 15, 1920], accessed January 2, 2010</ref>
▲The claim in the "Statement of 31 Republicans" that a Harding victory meant brighter prospects for the League of Nations was badly received by some League proponents. Lowell came in for attack precisely because of his earlier claims to independence. One Harvard graduate, who had just formed the [[New Hampshire]] committee to raise funds for the University's [[Financial endowment#College and university endowments|endowment]], wrote: "One can understand a Republican partisan and respect him. One can understand a Democratic partisan and respect him. But how can any man explain this recent act of yours consistently with the dignity, gravity, high character and devotion to truth which should attach to the President of Harvard College?"<ref>''New York Times'': [https://www.nytimes.com/1920/10/18/archives/woodbury-rebukes-lowell-for-stand-declares-he-signed-utterly-false.html "Woodbury Rebukes Lowell for Stand," October 18, 1920], accessed January 2, 2010; see also ''New York Times'': [https://www.nytimes.com/1920/10/24/archives/president-lowells-position.html "President Lowell's Position," Oct. 24, 1920], accessed January 2, 2010</ref> Charged with sacrificing his principles to expediency, Lowell admitted he had but provided his own definition of expediency: "striving to find the most effective way of achieving a principle—refusing to beat one's head uselessly against a wall to attack an entrenchment in face instead if taking it by a turning movement."<ref>Yeomans, 461–482, expediency 477; Pietrusza, 325</ref>
▲Harding as president disappointed proponents of the League, but Lowell never regretted his decision to endorse him. He did view the work of the League to Enforce Peace more critically. Its oratory had failed to engage the public at large, he thought, so public opinion remained "indifferent" to its call for muscular internationalism, leaving isolation or at least inaction to win the day.<ref>Yeomans, 443</ref>
===Advisory Committee on Sacco and Vanzetti trial===
Line 138 ⟶ 143:
After two weeks of hearing witnesses and reviewing evidence, the trio produced a report largely authored by Lowell that criticized the judge in the case but deemed the trial fair. A defense attorney later noted ruefully that the release of the Committee's report "abruptly stilled the burgeoning doubts among the leaders of opinion in New England."<ref>Ehrmann, 539;</ref> Supporters of the convicted men denounced the Committee. [[Harold Laski]] said the decision represented Lowell's "loyalty to his class." The affair dogged Lowell for the rest of his life. In 1936, on the day when Harvard's 300th anniversary was celebrated, 28 Harvard alumni attacked Lowell for his role in the case, including editor [[Malcolm Cowley]], scholar [[Newton Arvin]], and author [[John Dos Passos]].<ref>Bruce Watson, ''Sacco and Vanzetti: The Men, the Murders, and the Judgment of Mankind'' (NY: Viking, 2007), 311–315, 325–327, 356; ''New York Times'': [https://www.nytimes.com/1978/02/01/archives/lowells-papers-on-sacco-and-vanzetti-are-released-a-letter-from.html "Lowell's Papers on Sacco and Vanzetti Are Released," February 1, 1978], accessed December 28, 2009; ''New York Times'': [https://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=FA0A10F73F58107A93CBA81782D85F428385F9& "Assail Dr. Lowell on Sacco Decision," September 19, 1936], accessed December 28, 2009. See also the critique of Lowell by one of the defense attorneys, who believed Lowell was biased and took on a prosecutorial role, even finding evidence of guilt that professional prosecutors had discarded. He also believed the Committee members were simply unqualified: "No member of the Committee had the essential sophistication that comes with experience in the trial of criminal cases. ... The high positions in the community held by the members of the Committee obscured the fact that they were not really qualified to perform the difficult task assigned to them." Ehrmann, 255–256, 375, 512, 525ff.</ref>
==
[[File:Mem6.jpg|thumb|Memorial Church]]
Lowell's health declined slowly and his lifelong hearing problems worsened. He resigned his position as Harvard's president on November 21, 1932, and served through the following summer.<ref>Yeomans, 535; Smith, 98</ref> During his years as president, enrollment at the College expanded from 3,000 to 8,000 and its endowment grew from $23 to $123 million. Lowell's construction projects, some based on the Freshman Halls and the College system, but including Widener Library, the Memorial Church and many others, had transformed the university's infrastructure.<ref>''New York Times'': [https://www.nytimes.com/1943/01/07/archives/a-l-lowell-dies-harvardexhead-president-of-university-19091933.html "A. L. Lowell Dies; Harvard Ex-Head"], accessed January 6, 2010</ref> Also among the new campus buildings of Lowell's tenure was the [[President's House (Harvard)|President's House]] (later called Loeb House) at 17 Quincy Street, which Lowell commissioned from his cousin [[Guy Lowell]]. It remained the residence of succeeding Harvard Presidents until 1971.
Line 186 ⟶ 191:
{{commons category|Abbott Lawrence Lowell}}
{{wikisource author}}
* {{Gutenberg author | id=
* {{Internet Archive author |sname=Abbott Lawrence Lowell}}
* [https://books.google.com/books?vid=OCLC05078726 ''The Historic Genealogy of the Lowells of America from 1639 to 1899''] is available for free download at Google Books.
*{{Cite CAB|wstitle=Lowell, Abbott Lawrence|short=
{{s-start}}
{{s-aca}}
Line 229 ⟶ 234:
[[Category:Corresponding Fellows of the British Academy]]
[[Category:Harvard Extension School faculty]]
[[Category:Members of the American Academy of Arts and Letters]]
[[Category:Members of the American Philosophical Society]]
| |||