(1883). The end of the fourth decennium permits us to see the organization of our association. And the close of the fifth finds us here and now-in full psychological array, shall we say? To the chronicler, at least, the decennia accentuate themselves by reason of the paramount importance of the events which have brought us together. Our hoped-for historian will probably find himself in a position to point out the importance of these fifty years as residing in their revolutionary results in defining the conception and the method of psychology. Prior to this era, psychology was well regarded as a waif; it was not received by the students of facts, and it was gingerly given a berth by the great chasers after world categories. The revolution which has given us a 'scientific' psychology, the historian will have to say, proceeded in two directions. First, it developed a general type of method, which wrought the great change from a speculative defense of the application of certain theoretical interpretations of every variety of inner experience, to a factual, inductive, measurable, experimental mode of approach to that same experience. The central significance of this change is amply seen in the contrast presented by the fact that modern psychology finds its object is constant with that inner experience-the soul of man remaining the same, so we may assume-but the conclusions of the study of it-how different from the conclusions of any era which has preceded! No less has its influence been exerted in the direction of creating essentially new problems concerning the behavior of mind. Second, it has introduced a basal conception which has shifted from the individualistic, or substantial view of the system builder, to that of the functional, phenomenal view of cosmic evolution, irrespective of the particular formulation given to that idea. In

stead of continuing to regard mind as a point of persistent regard with the old psychology, the 'new' has demanded that the 'process' interpretation shall alone be considered fruitful. The revolution in psychological method arose and flourished in Germany; that in conception is the contribution largely of English thinking, which took its definite shape about 1855. The flowering of the former has given us 'experimental' psychology; of the latter, 'genetic' psychology. Such, it seems to me, must be looked upon as the polarization of the psychological thinking which it is given to us to perpetuate or radically to modify.

It may seem to be a piece of venturesome youthfulness and daring jingoism to speak of 'American' psychology, and to define for a science precise boundaries both in space and in time. That this is but a superficial impression is to be seen readily from our desire to emphasize the domestication of the term 'psychology' within our national borders, which has practicallynot essentially-occurred within the time limit of the decennium just ended. In the past, American psychology sailed under the terms of 'mental and moral philosophy,' which have even now some fixed and secure anchorages. It, too, was molded chiefly by the theologians, whose line of intellectual descent runs back almost without break to Scottish realism. The good thing in this step-motherly care over psychology consisted in the wholesome fact that that form of speculation attributed a rather definable degree of primacy and reality to human consciousness, which are so fundamental to the genuine psychological attitude. And that was about the only good thing in this theological fostering.

That one may venture to speak of an 'American' psychology is to be regarded as a recognition of an undoubted

effort on this side of the Atlantic to renounce our former mode of intellectual dependence upon some foreign system, or upon some old-world thinker. At the same time, no one can be more ready than ourselves loudly to decry jingoism in science. For science, happily, knows no nationality. It is the common heritage, in sharing which no form of social prejudice can despoil us. It is fully possible, however, for the development of a science within a national border to give a definite contribution to the type. of life therein. growing, and especially is this a hopeful probability the nearer the science approaches the needs of a complete science of man.

The chief justification for our speaking of American psychology is to be found in the fact that our association is just ten years old, and resides in the desire to contribute modestly to the celebration of the decennium by passing in review the work of the association and its influences upon the situation of psychology presented in the United States. Accept the name of cur organization, and the adjective in our theme follows as an appropriate sequence. Moreover, it ought to be a good tonic to insist on the value of psychology accruing through the use of the adjective marking nationality.

Inasmuch as the appearance of the American Psychological Association was not a Minerva-like birth, it is proper that a glance should be given to the stock in trade possessed by psychology ten years

the adaptation of instruments to test reactions of the simpler order, and the close correlation between the data of cerebral

physiology and well-established groups of mental phenomena, tended at first to bring psychological advances into into disrepute among those outside its own domain who might have a care for its fortunes, and to gain for these results, in the mouths of theologians and other convenient idealists, the opprobrious epithet of 'materialistic.' The helpfulness of man's self-study for his own development was dangerously neglected in these criticisms, and even the pittance of a culture value to the pursuit of this subject was barely allowed to its chief defenders.

Nevertheless, the decade brought forth noteworthy achievements, both in American scholarship and in American educational institutions. The first American attempt at exact psychological demonstration probably occurred at Harvard in our centennial year. The first laboratory for psychology in America was opened in 1883 by President G. Stanley Hall, as professor of psychology and pedagogy in the Johns Hopkins University. The same year witnessed sporadic efforts here and there to study and to teach something of physiological psychology. The waning of the old and the dawning of the new modes of psychologizing were interestingly marked in three books which appeared in 1886 and 1887: McCosh's 'Psychology: The Cognitive Powers, Bowne's 'Introduction to Psychological Theory' and Dewey's 'Psychology.' The first tried in a well-intentioned way, at least, to realize the shifting of the center of psychology; the second fought the one-sided materialistic issues of forty years earlier; and the third seriously welded the newer facts of science into the system of absolutism and made psychology a museum of well-balanced definitions. These

imperfect or combative tendencies practically came to their American end in the year 1887, when the American Journal of Psychology was founded by President Hall, and Professor George Trumbull Ladd published his 'Elements of Physiological Psychology.' This was the first book to present a careful, synthetic statement of psycho-physical facts in the English language. Through the double reason of their priority in time and their scientific saneness, these two foundations have had the most influence upon the tenor of later American psychology: the one by its emphasis upon research, the other for the academic presentation of the new subject and interpretations of the higher manifestations of mind. For the virtues of a science are largely to be sought in the two directions of original investigation and adequate teaching. The following year, 1888, witnessed the establishment of the first American chair for psychology alone with a laboratory at the University of Pennsylvania, with Professor J. McKeen Cattell in the chair. Here, also, I believe, was given the first instruction in experimental psychology to undergraduate students. Our stock in trade was increased in the two years following by the appearance of Professor J. Mark Baldwin's 'Handbook of Psychology' (first part, 1889), and Professor William James's long-awaited "The Principles of Psychology' (1890). Here at last came a mighty

reinforcement to the psychological impetus,

which had been dealing so long in 'first things,' and whose momentum was growing so rapidly; and here came also that added rich flavor which has placed American psychology upon the high pedestal of literary expression, and made it most palatable to the popular mind, while being descriptively in close accord with the facts.

In 1891, our esteemed president began the publication of his splendidly organized and selected work, 'A Laboratory Course in Physiological Psychology.' This second great American step in the adoption of a pedagogical method was sure to be taken, and thus early did a pioneer selective teacher enable the transformed science to take its accredited position among university studies.

In these varied ways of laboratories, chairs and systematic literature, American psychology took on a splendid and resistless form of organization in the universities and colleges, whence radiated the multiple specialties which were developed by those who followed the leadership of these agencies in our higher education. An additional item taken from a more popular gauge of psychological values offers a fitting opportunity to make the contrasts between the psychology that had been and the psychology that was soon to be. The National Educational Association of the United States, at its Toronto meeting in 1891, gave a pinch of attention to experimental psychology. Two round tables, presided over by President Hall, were permitted, but not recognized as a part of the work of the association. The American policy of indebting itself to the Old World continued during these years in the usual double fashion of sending our students abroad for psychological special

ization and by bringing in translations of foreign literature. This double mode of our enrichment has placed a blanket mortgage, I fear, upon the stability of the confidence of the American academic administrators in the resources of our own institutions. Certain additional features in the situation ten years ago may be reserved for more fitting mention later.

TEN YEARS INSIDE THE ASSOCIATION.

The increasing objectivity of psychology in America was augmented by the organization of our association in 1892. When

the American Journal of Psychology moved to the 'Heart of the Commonwealth' of Massachusetts, its editor found himself near the center of things psychological, at least in New England. In the hope of conserving the great gains which had been made for the science, and with the desire of having an exchange where psychological efforts might be pooled and where a more personal and direct mode of checking off results might be available than through the existing channels of publication, President Hall nursed the idea of a society of psychologists, and took counsel by pen and by mouth with many workers in this field. Everybody consulted was in sympathy with the idea, and wanted to become a member of whatever organization might be effected, pledging his hearty cooperation. Fortified and clarified by these preliminaries, including a conference of some length with Professor Ladd, he issued a letter of invitation to more than a score of psychologists to meet at Clark University, on July 8, 1892. A company of men gathered at the appointed time and place, and the preliminary meeting was held, six papers being presented and discussed, and plans projected for a permanent organization. The first annual meeting was held on the 27th and 28th of the December following, at the University of Pennsylvania. Annual meetings have been held in the meantime.

The following table presents

members and readers not members, research grants, and the treasury balances.* It is interesting to note that most of the organizing psychologists were interested in the project for the sake of fellowship, friendship and the enjoyment of personality. In reviewing the history of the association, and in attempting to ascertain just what it may have done for its object of advancing the science, we can not simply regard it as a social club, meeting for jolly good times. On the contrary, we must look to the work it has actually accomplished or stimulated and recognized. The annual notice of its meetings sent to its members calls for the title of papers to be read. And to this type of activity our attention must primarily be directed.

I therefore adopted the plan of classifying topically the varied material which has been brought in and given a place at the several meetings, in the form of papers, set discussions and research reports, in order to gather up, in a summary fashion, the actual cooperative achievements within the association. The value of such a summary doubtless depends upon the comprehensiveness of the rubrics selected as representing * The data are compiled from the reports of the meetings to be found as follows:

Proceedings of the American Psychological Association.' Macmillan and Co., New York (no