Stanford University School of Medicine and the Predecessor Schools: An Historical Perspective
Part V. The Stanford Era 1909-

Chapter 35. Dean Ophüls' Administration
1916 - 1933

Dean Wilbur was elected President of Stanford University effective 1 January 1916 and on that date Dr. William Ophüls was appointed Acting Dean of the School of Medicine to replace him. Dr. Ophüls was appointed Dean on 1 August 1916.

As Acting Dean of the School of Medicine Dr. Ophüls submitted the Annual Report of the Medical School to the President of the University for the Year Ending 31 July 1916. In that Report Dr. Ophüls included the following two items:[1]

1. The Medical School suffered a severe loss through the transfer of Dean Wilbur to the presidency of the University (on January 1, 1916). The rapid development of the Medical School in the past has been largely due to Dr. Wilbur's untiring efforts. All parts of the Medical School will miss his stimulating interest. They rejoice, however, in the knowledge that in his new position, although not so intimately connected with the work in San Francisco, he will still guide its larger policies as well as those of the rest of the University.

2. Dr. Albion W. Hewlett, of the University of Michigan, was appointed Professor of Medicine (effective August 1,1916) to fill the vacancy left by the appointment of Dr. Wilbur as President.

Dr. Albion Walter Hewlett (1874-1925)

see larger image »

A photo of Dr. Albion Walter Hewlett (1874-1925)

Dr. Wilbur later made the following comment about his successor:[2]

I was much pleased with Hewlett's appointment. I said at the time that "there is no better man of his age in clinical medicine in this country." He was a native Californian, had worked in the Stanford laboratories and on the faculty of Cooper Medical College before he went to Michigan, and was thoroughly familiar with conditions here on the Coast.

Albion Walter Hewlett
(1874-1925)

On 1 August 1916 Dr. Hewlett succeeded Dr. Wilbur as Professor and Executive Head of the Department of Medicine and its Subdivisions. The appointment of Dr. Hewlett, Hopkins and Pioneer Clinical Physiologist, could not have been more timely and appropriate. It served to reinforce the policy already established by Dean Wilbur of making professorial appointments to clinical departments on a geographic full-time basis and only to candidates with strong credentials in research.

Dr. Hewlett was not only a trained physiologist but also a skillful practitioner. Throughout his career he was orderly, thorough, scientific and attentive to the needs of the patient. He was also a brilliant teacher, sound medical statesman and outstanding example of the contributions made by graduates of The Johns Hopkins School of Medicine to the growth and development of the Stanford program, and to the academic programs of numerous other medical schools nationwide. These and many of the subsequent references herein to Dr. Hewlett's career draw extensively on the definitive article on this subject published in the Johns Hopkins Medical Journal in 1979, and written by A. McGehee Harvey, Distinguished Service Professor of Medicine at Hopkins, and foremost authority on clinical research in American Medicine.[3]

B. S. at University of California, Berkeley (1895)

Albion Walter Hewlett, the son of Frederick and Cleora Melissa Whitney Hewlett, was born on 27 November 1874 in the small California town of Petaluma some 40 miles north of San Francisco. His early schooling included enrollment in the "classical" course at the San Francisco Boys High School (despite its name it was coeducational.). After two years in the High School he was admitted to the University of California at Berkeley where he graduated with a B. S. degree in 1895.

First year Student at Cooper Medical College (1895)

Determined then to become a physician, he matriculated in the first year class at Cooper Medical College which met from February 1st to December 5th, 1895.

Student at Johns Hopkins Medical School (1897-1900)

Upon completing the first-year class at Cooper, Hewlett applied for admission to the second-year class at Johns Hopkins. He offered his having had the highest grade average in his class at Cooper as evidence of his scholarship, and as the main justification for his admission to the second year at Hopkins. Hewlett's brash application incited considerable discussion among the Hopkins faculty with the following result:[4]

A note in the Johns Hopkins records dated April 20, 1897 signed by William Henry Welch reads as follows: "Brought Mr. Hewlett's application. . . a second time before faculty at the meeting of April 1, 1897. A more encouraging view was taken, and it was noted that he may be allowed to try to enter second year. Answered his letter April 2 telling him of this decision and suggesting that he would have to pass examinations in normal histology and physiological chemistry and give evidence that his work in anatomy and physiology has been reasonably equivalent to that given here. Knowledge of normal histology especially emphasized. Said that if he takes the summer course at University of Chicago his chance of entering will be improved."

Hewlett followed Dr. Welch's advice and was admitted to the second year class at Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine on October 6, 1897.

Hewlett's first real research was conducted during his second year at Hopkins in collaboration with his California boyhood friend and future Nobel Laureate, Joseph Erlanger. This project resulted in a paper entitled "A Study of the Metabolism in Dogs with Shortened Intestines," published in the American Journal of Physiology in 1901. The dogs on which the study was carried out were those used by the noted Hopkins surgeon William Stewart Halsted and his collaborator Anatomist F. P. Mall in their search for reliable intestinal sutures. Hewlett graduated from Johns Hopkins with M. D. degree in 1900.[5]

Internship in New York and Postdoctoral Study in Germany (1901-1903)

After graduation from Hopkins in 1900, Hewlett interned for a year on the medical service at the New York Hospital. He then studied at Tubingen, Germany in 1902 and 1903 under the auspices of Ludolf Krehl who was one of the first to emphasize abnormal function (pathological physiology) as contrasted to pathological anatomy which was at that time in the ascendancy under the influence of Rudolph Virchow. Krehl's great monograph, Fundamentals of General Clinical Pathology was published in 1893. Five years later the title was changed to Pathological Physiology. This text went through many German editions and was translated into other languages, including the third edition which was translated into English in 1905 by Hewlett under the title of Clinical Physiology. This last volume went through three American editions.

Throughout his career Hewlett's primary research interest was in the emerging field of Clinical Physiology. Indeed his first major scholarly contribution in this area was the translation of Krehl's book into English in 1905. In so doing Hewlett rewrote the section in Krehl's book dealing with cardiac arrhythmia's based on his own observations and graphic records which were responsible for the correct explanation of the nature of auricular fibrillation. Sir William Osler, in his introduction to this work said: "In this book, disease is studied as a perversion of physiological function. The title, Clinical Physiology, expresses well the attempt which is made in it to fill the gap between empirical and scientific medicine. Every few years the laboratories seem to run ahead of the clinics and it takes time before the facts of one are fully appreciated by the other."

Faculty at Cooper Medical College, 1904-1908

Hewlett returned from Europe in 1904 and, at the age of thirty, joined the Cooper faculty where he held the following appointments

Instructor in Clinical Medicine, 1904-1906
Assistant Professor of Principles and Practice of Medicine 1906-1908

Upon joining the Cooper faculty, Hewlett began at once to study pathophysiological problems. In this endeavor he was encouraged and assisted by Walter E. Garrey, Ph. D., Professor of Physiology at Cooper, under whom he conducted much of his early research.

Hewlett's work in Garrey's laboratory resulted in three papers based on Simon Flexner's observation that great quantities of lipase, a fat-splitting enzyme of the pancreas, occur as a result of experimental acute hemorrhagic pancreatitis. Hewlett demonstrated the presence of lipase in the urine and roughly estimated the quantity present in dogs in whom pancreatic disease had been experimentally produced. The lipase was found in the greatest amount as a result of experimental acute hemorrhagic pancreatitis.[6][7]

This paper was followed by two others on gastrointestinal enzymes after which Hewlett's interest shifted to the study of cardiovascular and respiratory physiology ad pathophysiology. In the coming years he pursued these studies with a diligence and success that gained for him national recognition as a scholar, teacher and clinical investigator. This led In 1908 to his election as a charter member of the American Society for Clinical Investigation, and as one of the three members of its original council.[8]

Faculty at University of Michigan Medical School. (1908-1916)

Such was Hewlett's research productivity and academic promise while still an Assistant Professor at Cooper Medical College that he was called to serve as Professor of Medicine at the University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, in 1908. There he replaced Dr. George Dock who had moved to Tulane.

At Michigan Hewlett maintained an incredible schedule. In addition to his voluminous research, writing, and other activities, including a modest private practice, he scrupulously maintained his schedule of class lectures, ward rounds and personal contact with his students and house staff. The latter believed him to possess to an extraordinary degree the gift of the great teacher to make complex subjects appear simple and understandable.

While Hewlett was at Michigan acquiring further national stature as a professor and clinical investigator, Cooper Medical College completed its orderly transition from proprietary medical college to the Stanford University Department of Medicine. Throughout this period Dr. Wilbur followed Hewlett's career with interest and admiration. He remembered him from as early as 1895 when Hewlett was a promising first-year medical student at Cooper and Wilbur, serving then as an Assistant in Physiology, was doubtless one of his instructors.

Since then Wilbur and Hewlett had become friends and professional colleagues as is indicated by the following revealing letter of 19 May 1911 on the subject of faculty affairs:[9]

San Francisco
May 10, 1911
Dr. A. W. Hewlett
Ann Arbor, Mich.

My dear Dr. Hewlett:
Your letter of May 6th just reached me. I am sorry to hear that Dr. Warren is not likely to consider the opening here but glad for your sake that he prefers to stay with you. I appreciate very much your calling him to our attention.

Is there any possibility that you yourself would consider a professorship in Medicine here with charge of the work at the City and County Hospital? It does not fall into our hands until a year from next July. I merely ask you this for my own personal information in making plans and would prefer that you do not mention it.

With very best wishes,
Sincerely yours,
Ray Lyman Wilbur
Executive Head
(Department of Medicine Stanford University)

Appointment to the Stanford Medical Faculty (1916)

After months of uncertainty, the Stanford Trustees voted in the fall of 1915 for Dr. Wilbur to become President of the University and for him to take office on 1 January 1916. At the meeting of the Medical Faculty on 15 December 1915, it was announced that Dr. Hewlett would succeed Dr. Wilbur as Professor and Executive Head of the Department of Medicine, effective 1 August 1916. The dispatch with which Hewlett was appointed to the Stanford Faculty suggests that he was an ideal and willing candidate for the position, as he proved to be.

Before leaving his post at Michigan to assume the Stanford position, Hewlett summarized in simple terms his conception of a clinical department in a medical school. He said, in essence, that the clinical department which is not adding to the sum total of medical knowledge is already falling behind; members of the department must devote a portion of their time to research; facilities for such research must be furnished by the hospital or by the university; and, finally, the problems confronting clinical medicine at the present day involve not only the usual clinical observations of patients, but also the study of these patients by the various methods that are increasingly available in biochemistry, physiology, bacteriology, immunology and other emerging scientific disciplines.[10]

By this time Hewlett was at the forefront of those who had assumed leadership in enlarging medicine's scientific base through clinical investigation. And it was just as he was leaving Michigan in 1916 that the first edition of his book, The Pathological Physiology of Internal Diseases, a volume of 700 pages, appeared. This monograph was based in large part on his own clinical observations and experimental work and was the definitive medical treatise of the day dealing with the pathophysiology of disease. As such, It went through several editions.[11]

Stanford Medical School during World War I

American involvement in World War I (April 6, 1917 - November 11, 1918) began only eight months after Hewlett's arrival at Stanford. As soon as the United States entered the war, the University placed the medical staff and clinical and hospital facilities in San Francisco at the disposal of the army and naval authorities for such use as may be required.

U. S. Navy Training Schools

During the summer of 1917 there was maintained at the Medical School in San Francisco under the direction of the medical staff a training school for medical officers of the United States Navy, the course covering six weeks beginning July 25th. A second course was scheduled to begin on September 10th.

The Medical School also conducted a training school under the direction of Dr. Stanley Stillman for the instruction of fifty naval hospital apprentices, the work consisting of lectures, recitation and laboratory work in anatomy and physiology, first aid, and minor surgery, materia medica, pharmacy and toxicology, elementary hygiene, and sanitation and bacteriology, with experience in practical nursing in the medical and surgical wards of Lane Hospital.[12][13]

During the academic year ending 31 July 1917 a course in emergency medicine and surgery was arranged for senior medical students, during the second semester, under the direction of the Chief Surgeon of the Emergency Hospital Service, the students spending about four hours a day for a month working in the various emergency hospitals of the city. Four of the graduates of the class of 1917 enrolled as assistant surgeons in the Navy.[14]

By the closing of the academic year ending 31 August 1918, a majority of the medical students had become members of the Medical Enlisted Reserve Corps, and were assigned by the War Department to the inactive list in order for them to continue their medical studies.[15]

In 1917 Red Cross Naval Base Hospital Unit No. 2 was organized in connection with the Medical School and included the following seven members of the faculty; Drs. G. D. Barnett, P. K. Gilman, A. W. Hewlett, T. G. Inman, Stanley Stillman, R. B. Tupper, and F. Wolfsohn; and about forty nurses. The Hospital was mobilized on 5 December 1917 and in February 1918 was safely transported across the U-boat infested North Atlantic to Strathpeffer in Scotland.[16]

Hewlett was a Lieutenant Commander during this period and came to know the University of Edinburgh well. There he learned of the legendary medical reasoning powers of Dr. Joseph Bell of that institution. It was Dr. Bell who gave rise in the mind of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle (physician and novelist) to that incomparable detective of fiction, Sherlock Holmes. This undoubtedly interested Hewlett greatly for he, himself, possessed extraordinary reasoning power. and applied it effectively in his medical teaching at Stanford.[17][18]

Hewlett continued to serve with Naval Base Hospital No. 2 after it moved to France. There, in the summer of 1918, an influenza epidemic occurred of which he and W. M. Alberty wrote an excellent description.[19][20]

Additional Faculty that Joined the Armed Forces

In addition to those who went with the Base Hospital No. 2, the following seventeen members of the staff of the Medical School also left for active service: Drs. Thomas Addis, Shadworth O. Beasley, Emmet J. Brady, Joseph K. Brown, Edmund Butler, William. R. P. Clark, Ernest C. Dickson, Harold K. Faber, Frank R. Girard, Harry L. Langnecker, Charles N. Leach, Harold S. Moore, Harry K. Oliver, Alfred C. Reed, Jay M. Read, George Rothganger, and Henry A. Stephenson.

The ranks of the teaching staff were at this point so depleted that any further losses through entrance of members into active service would have led to the disorganization of medical teaching and it was only the fortunate early end of the war that enabled the Medical School to return soon to full operation.[21][22]

The only member of the Medical Faculty to be killed during the war was Shadworth O. Beasley, M. D., '97, Assistant Clinical Professor of Obstetrics and Gynecology, who was among the first to be called into service when the United States entered the war in April of 1917. He died on October 14, 1918, while, as a major in the Medical Corps of the U. S. Army, he was rescuing the wounded under heavy fire on the Western Front. The Faculty memorialized his heroism and supreme sacrifice by mounting a bronze plaque, suitably inscribed, in the entrance to the Lane Library.[23]

Shadworth Oldham Beasley (1876-1918) with JL Cammell, RL Coe, AG Montgomery, DR Peacock and unidentified persons

see larger image »

A group photo of Shadworth Oldham Beasley (1876-1918) with JL Cammell, RL Coe, AG Montgomery, DR Peacock and unidentified persons in army fatigues in front of an army cantine

Following the war, Hewlett continued his studies on the cardiovascular and respiratory systems, completing an extensive and noteworthy series of experiments and observations. These are discussed in detail by Professor McGehee Harvey and are beyond the scope of this commentary.[24]

During the summer of 1925 Dr. Hewlett was granted a leave of absence from April 29th to May 11th in order attend medical meetings in Washington, D. C. This leave being presumptive evidence of Dr. Hewlett's good health, it was a profound shock to the faculty to learn on 8 October 1925 that the Board of Trustees, because of Hewlett's rapidly failing health, had appointed a Committee to manage the Department of Medicine.[25][26]

The Illness of Dr. Hewlett[27]

As soon as it was recognized that Dr. Hewlett was suffering from a serious disease of the brain, it was decided to take him to some expert in brain surgery in order to give him the best possible chance for recovery. Dr. Harvey Cushing, Harvard's Mosely Professor of Surgery at the Peter Bent Brigham Hospital in Boston, and founder of neurosurgery in America, was first approached. Since Dr. Cushing was leaving for Europe, Dr. Charles H. Frazier of the University of Pennsylvania Hospital in Philadelphia was asked to take charge of his case which he gladly consented to do. Dr. Hewlett's colleague and friend, Dr. Henry George Mehrtens, Associate Professor of Medicine (Neurology) on the Stanford faculty, accompanied him on the long trip east to Philadelphia. The transcontinental journey by train was thus accomplished relatively easily.

Upon arrival in Philadelphia, Dr. Hewlett was promptly admitted to the University of Pennsylvania Hospital where Drs. Frazier and Weisenburg immediately took up the study of the case with the greatest interest They and their staffs vied with each other in attempting to establish the diagnosis and to give the patient what comfort they could.

Shortly after his hospitalization, rapid rise in Dr. Hewlett's intracranial pressure made it necessary to perform an operation to decompress the brain. At the same time a limited exploration was carried out that revealed no sign of either tumor or abscess. In spite of these efforts and the indefinite findings, Dr. Hewlett's condition steadily worsened and he died on 10 November 1925.

At the post mortem examination multiple subcortical gliomata, all of a very malignant type, were found in the brain. During the terminal stage of his illness, Dr. Hewlett was more or less unconscious and did not realize the gravity of his condition..

At the time of Dr. Hewlett's death a revision of his textbook on Pathological Physiology of Internal Diseases was in preparation. As an expression of their affection and respect, Hewlett's Stanford colleagues assumed the responsibility of finishing the final (1928) revision. Among those participating in the project were Drs. Thomas Addis, George DeForest Barnett, Walter Whitney Boardman, Ernest Charles Dickson, Henry George Mehrtens, William Ophüls, Jay Marion Read, Howard Frank West, and Harry Alphonso Wyckoff. The editorial supervision was under the direction of George DeForest Barnett and an appreciation was written by Ray Lyman Wilbur.[28]

Memorials to Dr. Hewlett

In the annals of Stanford and its predecessor medical schools, no member of the faculty has been in his own day at once more highly respected by his colleagues and students as an investigator and teacher, and more warmly remembered as an exemplary physician and man.

Eulogy by Dean Ophüls

The following eulogy by Dean Ophüls is recorded in the Minutes of the Medical Faculty for 14 December 1925:[29]

Dr Hewlett was a great scholar in his chosen field and a successful and indefatigable investigator. He was thoroughly versed in both physiology and pathology and was the author of a most admirable book on Pathological Physiology of Internal Diseases. He was great as a clinician and an inspiring teacher to his students. With all this he combined a marvelous capacity for administration. He managed the affairs of the medical department very skillfully and successfully being ready at all times to do anything in his power to further the work of the younger men in his department. He held a very important position as a member of the Clinical Committee of our hospitals and of the training school of nurses. His associates in the Committee could always rely on his good judgment and on his willingness to devote time and energy to any serious questions that might arise. He was secretary of the medical faculty, and in this capacity facilitated the work of the Dean's Office to a great extent. He was particularly interested in the medical curriculum and was a leading spirit in repeated revisions of the same, each of which brought new progress. At the time of his death, he was contemplating a reorganization in the teaching of internal medicine by which it would be possible to have the third-year students in the wards of the hospital and the fourth-year students in the out-patient department.

Dr. Hewlett also had created for himself a most enviable position in the medical profession of San Francisco and California. He was much sought after as a medical consultant and he was always ready and willing to give his advice freely and liberally, but at the same time he managed in some way to prevent that this work should interfere to any considerable extent with what he regarded as his higher duties, namely, the investigation of problems in his chosen specialty and the instruction of medical students.

With all these multifarious duties, Dr. Hewlett never seemed rushed and in his systematic manner accomplished a tremendous amount of work apparently very easily. In spite of the eminence which he had attained, he was the most modest person. He was dearly beloved by all those who came in close personal contact with him

In Dr. Hewlett's death, the Medical School has suffered a great loss and it seems improbable that we shall ever find again a man who is so thoroughly well qualified to serve as the head of the most important department in our Medical School.

Resolution by the American Society for Clinical Investigation

In 1925 Dr. Hewlett was president of the American Society for Clinical Investigation of which he had become a charter member in 1908. The following are excerpts from the formal resolution in memory of Dr. Hewlett adopted by the Society at its eighteenth annual meeting in New Jersey in 1926, a year after his death:[30]

During the past year we have lost by death one of the small group of men to whom the foundation of this society was due and one who later became its president, Dr. Albion Walter Hewlett.

Dr. Hewlett possessed not only unusual intellectual equipment and ability as an investigator, as teacher and physician, he was possessed of a most attractive personality. Quiet and thoughtful and giving the impression of much reserve power and force, yet he was a most interesting and agreeable companion. All the members of the early group comprising this society were his personal friends. He was always interested in the younger members of this society and many of them became greatly influenced in their later careers by his writings and by his personal influence.

The profession of medicine has lost in Dr. Hewlett one of its ablest and most valuable colleagues, this society has lost one of its wisest and most capable members.

But we have lost much more, we have all lost a sincere and true friend.

The Hewlett Club

After Hewlett's death a "Hewlett Club" was organized by former students to honor and perpetuate his memory.

One of Dr. Hewlett's students, Dr. Gunther Nagel (Stanford M. D. 1921), reported that chapters of the Hewlett Club continued active for a number of years in San Francisco, Oakland, and Los Angeles. The last meeting of which we have a good account was in Pasadena, California, on an evening in 1965 when, according to Dean Robert Glaser, he met with a group of local alumni members of the Club for a congenial and mutually informative discussion of Medical School affairs.

We were recently informed by alumnus Dr. Robert I Boyd (A. B. 1938, M. D. 1942) that he was himself President of the Hewlett Club in Southern California when its last meeting was held at Pasadena in April 1980. Prior to that meeting the attendance at periodic sessions of the Club had been decreasing so that no further meetings were called thereafter.[31][32]

The Hewlett Room

On May 31, 1968 a gift of $25,000 was made to the Department of Medicine by the W. R. Hewlett Foundation to establish an endowment fund "the income from this grant to be used for the continuing support of the Hewlett Room."[33]

In 1979 the Medical Department dedicated their spacious and intensively-used Conference Room and Library, located in the heart of the Department, to the memory of Dr. Hewlett. On the door to the room is mounted a bronze plaque bearing the inscription:

The Hewlett Room. Gift of Louise R. Hewlett in memory of her husband Albion Walter Hewlett, M. D. Professor and Executive Head. Department of Medicine. 1916-1925.

Through their use of the room, generations of medical students and faculty continue to be reminded of the distinguished life and legacy of Professor Hewlett, Pioneer Clinical Physiologist.

The Hewlett Award

In 1983, the Stanford Department of Medicine established and funded the Albion Walter Hewlett Award to recognize and honor living physicians who had some Stanford background and were well-known at Stanford as dynamic role-models for future academicians and practitioners of scientific medicine, as was the case with Dr. Hewlett.

Most importantly those nominated for the award should symbolize the physician of care and skill who, in the tradition of Dr. Albion Walter Hewlett, is committed to using wisdom, compassion and biological knowledge to return patients to productive lives.

Recipients of the award are chosen by an award committee charged to recommend an award not more than once a year.

The award, which includes no financial component, is presented in concert with a major event in the Department of Medicine such as a special session of Medical Grand Rounds, attended also by the Hewlett family, at which the recipient of the award delivers a lecture. To commemorate the occasion, the awardee receives a parchment seal and silver medallion depicting figures from the distinguished metal sculpture created by Artist Agnese Udinotti symbolizing the physician in the service of mankind. The recipient will also have the opportunity to select books or journals for the Hewlett Room Library in an amount to be determined each year. Each book will bear a bookplate with a picture of the sculpture, the recipient's name and the date of the award. Other observances may include a dinner in the evening at which the recipient is joined by the Hewlett Family and invited guests.

On March 3, 1992 a fund was established by a gift of $50,000 from William R. Hewlitt to provide future support for the Albion Walter Hewlett Award program.[34]

The first Hewlett award was in 1983, the recipient being Saul Rosenberg, M. D., Maureen Lyles D'Ambrogio Professor of Medicine (Oncology) and Radiology. The most recent award, the tenth, was presented on November 14 1996 to Stanley L. Schrier, M. D., Professor of Medicine (Hematology). These periodic observances refresh institutional awareness, and reward individual emulation, of Dr. Hewlett's memorable contributions to science and humanity.

Based on our considerable knowledge, not only of Dr. Hewlett's academic stature but also of his admirable personal qualities, we can fairly conclude that his presence on the faculty from 1916 to 1925 contributed significantly to development of the extraordinary esprit de corp which characterized the Stanford medical faculty during that fondly-recalled interlude between 1916 and 1959 when the clinical departments joined the basic sciences in successfully fostering the scientific aspects of their disciplines while, happily, preserving a steadfast devotion to the practice and teaching of exemplary patient care.

Other Critical Appointments

Arthur Bloomfield replaces Dr. Hewlett

Dr. Arthur L. Bloomfield, of Johns Hopkins Medical School, was selected to fill Dr. Hewlett's place as Professor and Executive Head of the Department of Medicine and its subdivisions on 1 September 1926.

Dr. Bloomfield received the degree of Doctor 0f Medicine from Johns Hopkins University in 1911. He was Assistant Resident Physician at the Johns Hopkins Hospital from 1911 to 1916 and Resident Physician from 1917 to 1920. He was Instructor in Medicine and Associate in Clinical Medicine from 1912 to 1922 and since then has been Associate Professor of Medicine at the Hopkins Medical School.[35]

Emile Holman replaces Dr. Stanley Stillman

On 1 September 1926 Dr. Stanley Stillman, Professor of Surgery, retired from active service on account of the age limit. Dr. Stillman was given the title of Professor of Surgery Emeritus, and Consultant at the Lane Hospital. In place of Dr. Stillman, Dr. Emile F. Holman was appointed Professor of Surgery and Executive Head of the Department of Surgery and its subdivisions effective 1 September 1926.

Dr. Holman received his A. B. degree at Stanford in 1911. He was a Rhodes Scholar at Oxford in 1916 and took his degree of Doctor of Medicine at Johns Hopkins University 1918. He was a research fellow at the Hunterian Laboratory of Experimental Surgery at Hopkins in 1918-19 and Resident Surgeon at Johns Hopkins Hospital from 1921 to 1923, and at the Peter Bent Brigham Hospital in 1923-24. In 1924 he went to Western Reserve University Medical School at Cleveland, Ohio, as Assistant Professor of Surgery. In December, 1925 he was called to Stanford as Associate Professor of Surgery. Dr. Holman was particularly interested in experimental surgery.[36]

By these two critical appointments the major Departments of Medicine and Surgery were placed in the capable hands of seasoned veterans of the rigorous Hopkins program. As we pointed out in Chapter 3, numerous other Hopkins graduates and trainees would ultimately join the Faculty to assure that Stanford would reflect the excellence of the Hopkins School.

Curriculum Changes

During 1921-22 the medical curriculum was revised so as to consolidate some of the classes and make the course more uniform. Prior to this time there had been two transfers a year of students from Palo Alto to San Francisco. . Now, this was limited to one transfer in April. The work taken in San Francisco was prescribed along the lines specified by the Association of American Medical Colleges, with a total of 4, 000 hours in the curriculum. As a result of this revision, comparatively little regular undergraduate work was offered during the summer quarter, and opportunity was given, at that time, to offer special and advanced courses, particularly for research students and for graduates in Medicine.[37]

Two years later, in 1923-24, the Medical Faculty appointed a committee to revise the medical curriculum. On the recommendation of this committee it was decided that all required work in the Medical School be reduced by eight per cent. This reduced the total number of hours of required work to something less than the 4, 000 hours which were required by state law. The students were, therefore, required to make up the difference by doing elective work. In this work they had the choice of any department in the Medical School, and the time could be used in research in preparation of their required thesis. The new schedule was a great improvement over the old one in that it did away with a good part of the overcrowding, and made it possible for the students to have an additional free afternoon a week.[38]

Class size was increased from 25 to 50 in the autumn of 1920. In order to accommodate the larger classes and to make the teaching at the Medical School in San Francisco more effective, the schedule of work for the medical students during the third and fourth medical years was completely revised in 1925-26. One of the objects of this revision was to give the students as much practical experience as possible. To accomplish this, the third-year medical students were assigned to practical ward work at the Lane and San Francisco Hospitals during the forenoons of the third year. During the fourth year the students would work in the mornings in the outpatient department where they would, in so far as possible, have full charge of the patients under the supervision of the attending physicians. During the fifth year they would return to the hospital as student interns. Under this arrangement, it was expected that the students, through their practical experience, would develop sufficient initiative to cover the theoretical work to a great extent by personal effort and intensive selective reading.[39][40]

In 1926-27 it was decided to create a permanent Committee on Curriculum at San Francisco on which all departments located there were to be represented. An important step forward was then taken by the introduction of departmental examinations instead of course examinations.[41]

In summary, the number of graduates from the Medical School in 1916 was twenty-four, and the number of students per class was limited to twenty-five. By 1933, the annual graduates numbered forty-seven, and the student limit per class had been increased to fifty. In 1933-34 the size of the first year entering class was increased to 60 according to the Annual Announcement. As an indication of the growing reputation of the School, there were often as many as two to three-hundred applicants for the beginning class.[42]

Research in the Ophüls' Years

We have amply documented the commitment to research that characterized the Medical School from its inception. The momentum generated during Dr. Wilbur's tenure as Dean led to ever-increasing productivity by the faculty under the administration of his successors who modified the curriculum to encourage research efforts by the students.

In 1929, at the request of a government agency, a Survey of Research at Stanford University was conducted by a Research Survey Committee of the University. The Survey, published in the Annual Report of the President to the Trustees for the year ending August 31, 1929, included an impressive summary of the facilities available to and the research in progress by 24 members of the Medical Faculty.[43]

Also In 1929, the number of research publications of the Medical Faculty over the previous ten years was determined and proved to be 1300; that is an average of 130 per year. These data are indicative of the extent of research in the Medical School. The quality of the research is attested to by the sources of funding which included such sources as the Rockefeller Institute, the Carnegie Corporation of New York, the United States interdepartmental Social Hygiene Board, and others.

A large share of this research work was concerned with basic problems in anatomy, physiology, and allied sciences with the aim of laying the foundations on which practical advances in the prevention and alleviation of suffering might rest. For example, an extensive study of the anatomy and physiology of the kidney was undertaken for information of value in treating Bright's Disease. Stanford's Department of Bacteriology succeeded in measuring the infantile paralysis virus and sought more information about it. More knowledge was also being sought about the endocrine glands, particularly the pituitary.

The Department of Pharmacology rendered a wide service in developing methods of standardization. The United States Department of Agriculture stationed investigators in Pharmacology to make extended studies on the toxicity of metals, insecticides, preservatives, and other adulterants found in foods. The research experts of the Stanford School of Medicine working with those from the University of California helped the canning industry to control botulism, a virulent form of food poisoning.[44]

Library of the History of Medicine Established

In 1913 Miss Louise Ophüls, sister of Dr. William Ophüls, was appointed Librarian of the Lane Medical Library, a position which she held for the next thirty years. It was during these three decades, and through the generosity and foresight of Dr. Adolph Barkan, Emeritus Professor of Structure and Diseases of Eye, Ear, and Larynx, that a Library of the History of Medicine in Lane Medical Library was conceived and established.

During the year 1919-20 Dr. Barkan, advised by Dr. Karl Sudhoff, Director of the Institute for the History of Medicine at the University of Leipzig, decided to create a Library of the History of Medicine for Lane Library (instead of one limited to the history of ophthalmology and otolaryngology as he previously envisioned). Dr. Sudhoff recommended purchase of the valuable private library of Dr. Ernst Seidel, a collection strong in ancient medical authors. Dr. Barkan requested assistance from the Board of Trustees and the University Librarian in purchasing the Seidel collection with the following result as recorded by Miss Ophüls in the Annual Report of the President for the year ending August 31 1921.[45]

Of noteworthy importance is the start which has been made on a collection of material on the history of medicine through the generous interest and efforts of Dr. Adolph Barkan. The sum of $4,500 has been set aside by the Trustees from the L. C. Lane funds and to this Dr. Barkan has added $3, 000 to establish a fund for the purchase of books in this field. During his recent travels in Italy and Germany Dr. Barkan made a number of small purchases and then finally secured the personal library of Dr. Ernst Seidel comprising about 4,500 volumes and representing the work of a lifetime in bringing together the fundamental material necessary to the study of the history of medicine.

The Seidel collection is rich in material on Oriental medicine (in the Arabic, Turkish and Persian languages). Equal in value is that portion of the collection containing the ancient medical authors of the Occident. The works of the famous physicians of the 15th and 16th centuries are represented, partly in very rare original editions; the Greek and Roman classics of medicine are to be found without exception; and the whole library is rounded out by those publications of earlier and more recent date which are necessary for the study of the history of medicine. (The historical collection in Lane Library also now includes, among many others, such valuable acquisitions as the first edition of Vesalius' works on anatomy and a lengthy treatise of Ambroise Paré.)

During 1923-24 the third floor of the Lane Medical Library building was remodeled to accommodate the Barkan Library on the History of Medicine. New stacks were installed on the various floors, and exhibit cases and a beautiful reading room were provided on the second floor. The history collection increased rapidly in extent and significance as a result of purchases made possible by Dr. Barkan's annual contribution of $ 500, so that the Lane collection soon attained a respected position among history of medicine libraries nationally.[46]

The new reading room for the medical history collection on the second floor provided admirable quarters for this special library and also afforded working space amidst quiet and comfortable surroundings for those engaged in research. Soon after its completion Dr. Barkan held a meeting in the new room to which he invited all the physicians in the vicinity interested in the history of medicine. Tentative plans for the organization of a society of medical history were made but never carried out.[47]

During the next ten years, Dr. Sudhoff at the Institute for the History of Medicine in Leipzig continued to advise Dr. Barkan on the systematic purchase of books to augment Lane Library's History of Medicine collection. For example, in 1925-26 Dr. Barkan made a further contribution of $2032 to be expended by Dr. Sudhoff in the acquisition of books for the medical history collection, which was enriched on this occasion by some very rare items. It was to facilitate such transactions that a complete file of Lane's History of Medicine Collection was maintained at the Institute in Leipzig.[48][49]

Dr. Barkan Endows History of Medicine Library

Beginning January 1 1928, Dr. Adolph Barkan, made the University a gift of $1,000 a month for ten months, this sum of $10,000 to serve as a permanent endowment for the History of Medicine and Natural Sciences in the Lane Medical Library.[50]

Dr. Barkan requested that the first special library which he previously endowed in the Lane Medical Library be named "The Helmholtz Library of Ophthalmology and Oto-rhino-laryngology," founded by Dr. and Mrs. A. Barkan;" and that the second special library, which he was endowing with a gift of $10,000, be named "The Harvey Library of the History of Medicine and Natural Sciences, founded by Dr. and Mrs. A. Barkan."[51]

In her annual report to the Director of University Libraries for the academic year ending August 31, 1928 Miss Ophüls reported that Dr. Barkan, at Christmas, surprised her with a splendid gift of $500 for the purchase of old, rare books.[52]

Dr. Barkan also clarified the manner in which the interest from the $10,000 endowment was to be used. He specified that it was to be expended only for the purchase of old and rare books and that all modern publications on historical subjects were to be bought from other funds.[53]

To further his plan to stimulate the interest of the medical profession in the study of the history of medicine, Dr. Barkan conceived the idea of publishing in each month's issue of California and Western Medicine a short article on some historical topic. The editor of the journal kindly consented to do this. Under the title "The Lure of Medical History" several very interesting articles were written by members of the medical staff and many of the younger physicians began to be quite interested in the subject.

The greatest step forward in arousing the interest of students in historical subjects was taken by Dr. R. L. Reichert, Associate Professor of Surgery. During the academic year 1927-28 he gave an informal seminar once a weak in which he spoke about the famous men of medicine, and each week the books pertaining to their historical period were placed on exhibition. The seminar, which was elective and separate from the regular course in the history of medicine, was well attended.[54]

Dedication

The Medical History Collection was formally dedicated at a meeting held in the Medical History Room on the evening of January 11, 1932. The principal speaker upon this occasion was Professor Henry E. Sigerist, of the Institute of Medical History at Leipzig (now at the Johns Hopkins University). Dean Ophüls outlined the development of the collection, and Dr. Rixford spoke feelingly of the life and work of Dr. Barkan its founder.[55]

The Herzstein Bequests

Dr. Morris Herzstein was a humanitarian and philanthropist who died in San Francisco on October 25, 1927. In his will he left two generous bequests to Stanford University. One was the sum of $100,000 for the establishment of a Chair of Biology in the University to be named in his honor.

The second was the sum of $20,000, the income of which was to be used jointly by the University of California and Stanford University for medical lectures, these lectures to be known as

The Morris Herzstein Course of Medical Lectures

The respective Presidents of the two Universities jointly make all arrangements as to time, place and subject of the lectures which shall be open to the public, and no fee shall be charged for the privilege of attending the same.[56]

Buildings Completed during Dr. Ophüls' Administration

We have already reported on the following two construction projects conceived during Dr. Wilbur's tenure as Dean , but not completed until Dr. Ophüls' deanship:

  • 1.) Stanford University Hospital (work begun on excavation of the foundation on 24 June 1916 and opened for patients on 26 December 1917);
  • 2.) Stanford School of Nursing (work begun in 1920 and formally opened on 31 March 1922).

Endowment Campaign

Trustee Herbert Hoover predicted that President Wilbur would take vigorous action on behalf of the University and this he proceeded to do. He recognized that a vital area requiring urgent attention by the President was the raising of money with which to strengthen and expand the academic programs of the institution.

As a first step, President Wilbur requested the General Education Board of the Rockefeller Foundation to evaluate the University and to join in its support if they found it worthy. The GEB was so favorably impressed by the University's program that it offered Stanford the sum of $300,000 towards a goal of $1,000,000 to provide adequate professors' salaries in the College of Arts and Sciences. The GEB grant was conditional on Stanford raising the remaining $700,000 from other sources. The GEB also agreed that, if their offer was accepted by the University, the Board would advance $25,000 a year for two years, so that the salary increases could be made at once.

Significantly, President Wilbur took this recognition of the University by the GEB as the occasion to establish an Endowment Committee and launch an Endowment Campaign in 1922 based on the following bold assertion:[57]

Stanford University is making a new decision which will determine its future for all time. The University has reached the limit made possible by the Stanford Fortune. If it is to go forward and upward it can only do so through the support of every member of the Stanford Family and of the public in general. Stanford now takes its place among the great national universities of this country. . .

Independent, self-contained, apparently rich, the University has gone its way to the best of its ability, making limitations in various ways, including the number of students accepted, so that the work done could be on a satisfactory plane. Not to grow is in part to die. The University must have increased facilities, more buildings, more advantages; must keep step with educational progress, just as a growing boy must have new clothes and new facilities as his capacity to do more increases with age. . .

There is every reason to anticipate that we can obtain the same help that has come to similar institutions elsewhere. Stanford is the one great privately endowed university west of St. Louis. Certainly from this vast territory there will come the interest and help that is needed. . .

If we can work together for Stanford and Stanford's progress we can rest assured that within another generation no institution in the country will have better facilities, a better reputation, or achieve better results in education.

In issuing this brave manifesto on behalf of the University, President Wilbur did not forget the Medical School. He cited the following "wish-list" of seven facilities in San Francisco as in need of endowment for construction or modernization. He implied that that the Endowment Campaign would raise the necessary funds.[58]

FacilitySuitable Endowment
Women's Hospital$250,000 to $1,000,000
Children's Hospital$250,000 to $1,000 000
Orthopedic Hospital$250,000 to $1,000,000
Psychopathic Hospital$100,000 to $750,000
Lane HospitalA Liberal Endowment
Stanford University HospitalA Liberal Endowment
Outpatient or Clinical Building$150,000

Five years later, in 1927, the Endowment Campaign had made little progress on raising the funds needed for the above-listed facilities in San Francisco. President Wilbur referred to the stalled building program in the following manner:[59]

The present buildings of the Medical School in San Francisco are entirely inadequate. Two of them, the old Cooper Medical College building and the Lane Hospital, are, in spite of much alteration, unfitted to serve as permanent housing. A new outpatient building, a new laboratory building, and new wards for clinical patients are urgently needed.

In the Stanford Hospital, Nurses' Home, and Lane Medical Library we have three excellent and modern buildings. The Stanford Hospital is too small to serve effectively as an economic administrative unit. There is constant demand for more beds. Plans are now being formulated for a one-hundred-bed addition, and efforts are being made to interest friends of medical education so that funds may be obtained for the new construction which is urgently needed..

As to the prospects for funding the medical School building program from voluntary contributions, we can only report that the University Endowment Campaign included a special drive for medical school projects (referred to as the "First Million for the Medical School") with a target of $1 million. Up to September 1, 1927 the amount pledged was $405,102; and the amount received was $390,650 - far from enough to renovate much less to replace Medical School facilities.

Nevertheless, according to the following statement by Dean Ophüls, published in the President's Annual Report for the year ending August 31, 1928, the Dean was very optimistic about the prospects for raising the funds needed for the medical school building program outlined below with its price tag of 4 million dollars:[60]

Sketch plans of the proposed new School of Medicine Building on the west side of Webster Street have been completed; also the plans of the combined out-patient department and clinical hospital, which is to take the place of the present School of Medicine Building and the Lane Hospital. It is estimated that each one of these buildings will cost approximately a million and a half dollars, making a total of three million dollars, and that an additional million should be raised as a further endowment of the activities of the School of Medicine. It is hoped that, with the cooperation of the University authorities and the Board of Trustees it will be possible to raise in the near future two million dollars, which would allow us to go ahead with the new School of Medicine Building. The erection of the new out-patient building and the clinical hospital would have a strong appeal to all persons who are taking an interest in charitable work, and for that reason it is anticipated that the raising of an additional two million dollars for the purpose will be a relative easy matter, especially if we can secure the endorsement of the Community Chest.

The plans for the new wing of the Stanford Hospital are going ahead very well, and it is hoped that after a renewed investigation of the financial aspects it will be possible to start building in the near future.

In the following year the outlook for new facilities continued to be promising and on February 24, 1929 the Board of Trustees voted that the University proceed with the construction of an additional wing to Stanford Hospital in accordance with the plans and estimates presented, and it was hoped that bids could be called for within a few months.[61]

General Plan for the Development of the School of Medicine

In spite of the Trustees' commitment, yet another year went by without new construction and the Report of the President to the Board of Trustees for the year ending on August 31 1930 carried only the brief but reassuring announcement that "in the course of the year a General Plan for the Development of the School of Medicine was worked out and authorization given by the Board of Trustees of the University for the presentation of this plan to prospective donors who might be interested in helping to make it a reality."[62]

In the eight years that transpired between launching of the Endowment Campaign in 1922 and completion of the General Plan for the Development of the School of Medicine in 1930 there was an abundance of encouraging rhetoric such as the above but no major construction or renovation project was actually carried out. Although financial support for the projects was committed by the Trustees, it was not provided - the reason being that raising a significant amount of the money through voluntary contributions was an essential prerequisite that proved impossible to fulfill due to the continuing financial depression that began in the fall of 1929, and to which we shall later refer.

Unexpectedly, during the academic year ending August 31 1931 an anonymous donor from the East came forward and offered to provide the sum of $2,503,417 for the erection and equipment of a new building for the Medical School in San Francisco. However, the gift was contingent upon the University raising an additional sum of $1,250,000 for endowment of the School by February 1, 1932. If these conditions could be met this donation would represent the largest single gift ever made to the University except for the great foundation set up by Governor and Mrs. Stanford. It would provide for the most important structure in the comprehensive General Plan for the Development of the School of Medicine drawn up the previous year, i. e., an eight-story building fully equipped to take care of the work of teaching and research in the School.[63]

Architects Drawing of Medical School Building

An elaborate campaign was undertaken to raise by February 1, 1932 the contingent sum of $1,250,000 as endowment for the Medical School. An impressive booklet of twenty-four pages entitled A Challenge to California and the West was published by the Medical School as a means of appealing to prospective donors.[64]

It was to no avail. February 1 1932 passed without the endowment of one and a quarter million dollars being raised and the offer of two and a half million dollars was withdrawn.[65]

By 1932 it was clear that, in spite of approval in principle of the General Plan by the Board of Trustees, national events had overtaken the planning process and the depression had made such expenditure no longer feasible. Although somewhat alleviated by the financial and social expedients of the New Deal, the depression was never really ended until 1939-40. It was then that America began to arm in anticipation of involvement in World War II.[66]

While disappointment at failing to qualify for the bountiful gift from the eastern foundation was keenly felt at the time, acquisition of it would probably have resulted in such a large investment in San Francisco facilities as to preclude the later move of the clinical program to the Stanford Campus - with disastrous implications for the future of the School as we now, in retrospect, can see.

For the same reason, we may regard as providential the role of the national depression in preventing the Endowment Campaign from raising sufficient funds to implement The General Plan for the Development of the School of Medicine.

To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven.[67]

On March 4, 1929 there was a further development that adversely affected the prospects for implementation of the General Plan. President Wilbur, the Plan's most influential advocate on the Board of Trustees, took office as Secretary of the Interior in the Cabinet of his close friend, the Honorable Herbert Hoover, who became the thirty-first President of the United States on that date. Dr. Wilbur's secretarial duties included administrative control over many of the important activities of the Government. In spite of urgent calls from students and faculty for him to resign his cabinet position and return to his post as President of the University, the Board of Trustees extended his leave until the end of the Hoover presidency on March 4, 1933, at which time President Wilbur returned to the campus. Hoover also returned to his alma mater to live in his campus residence, the Lou Henry Hoover House on San Juan Hill.[68][69]

Death of Dean Ophüls

Dr. William Ophüls, Professor of Pathology and Dean, died in San Francisco on April 27, 1933.[70]

Born in Brooklyn, New York, 23 October 1871, Dr. Ophüls was educated in Germany, where he acquired a slight accent and distinguished duelist scar on his left cheek. He was slight, elegantly slim, reserved, and sparing of words, which were spoken in a soft, unpretentious manner. He studied in Göttingen under Professor Johannes Orth, student of the famous Virchow, one of the intellectual giants of the 19th century. Dr. Ophüls possessed a quiet forcefulness which gave his students an understanding and lasting appreciation in the basic science of pathology.

The following resolution was adopted by the Academic Council of the University on June 16, 1933:[71]

Our Medical School and University suffered a grievous loss through the death of our Colleague and friend, William Ophüls, Dean for seventeen years and Professor of Pathology for twenty-four. His quiet and modest demeanor, cooperative spirit and self-sacrificing devotion will always remain a treasured possession.

After receiving his undergraduate and graduate training abroad, William Ophüls acted as Assistant at the Pathological Institute of the University of Göttingen for two years. Upon returning to his native land, he became Professor of Pathology and Bacteriology at the University of Missouri, joining the faculty of Cooper Medical College in that capacity the following year. His scientific interests were not limited to pathology, however, but extended to medical education and public health. He had the latter particularly at heart, was President of the Board of Health of the City of San Francisco for three years, and maintained his interest and influence in this work throughout his lifetime.

As Teacher, William Ophüls enjoyed to an unusual degree the respect, confidence and affection of his students. He had their best interests at heart and they sought his presence and rejoiced in it. As pathologist he shared fully in the arduous duties of his Department, even after relentless illness had overtaken him. He asked little in support of his own activities, accepting restrictions without complaint and placing the welfare and desires of others above his own. As Dean, he always had the best interests of the School at heart and cooperated fully for its improvement.

In testimony of our loss and in appreciation of his services, your Committee recommend that these words be entered in the Minutes of the Academic Council, that a copy be sent to the Family of the deceased , to those nearest of kin, and to the Chairman of the Board of Trustees of our University.

The Hoover Presidency
1929 - 1933

We recall Trustee Herbert Hoover as a staunch supporter of the Medical School during the School's precarious early years. We therefore have a special interest in his remarkable career on the national stage, and envision his possible willingness to be again supportive of the School should the occasion arise.

When the election for the presidency of the United States approached in 1928 President Calvin Coolidge, who secretly aspired to a third term, announced that "I do not choose to run." Much to the President's discomfiture, this cryptic statement was taken to mean that he would not accept the nomination of the Republican Party even if offered to him. This misunderstanding opened the door for Herbert Hoover, who was serving as Coolidge's Secretary of Commerce at the time, to make a bid for the nomination himself.

By dint of his well-deserved reputation as humanitarian, administrator and trusted public servant, Hoover had since World War I advanced to the upper echelon of the Republican Party. Although never elected to public office, he seemed to be a new type of political leader, a socially-minded efficiency expert. Since becoming Secretary of Commerce, he had won the confidence of the business community and people did not resent his being a millionaire for he had been born on an Iowa farm and worked his way up to success. As a result he had wide support both nationally and within the Republican Party and when he ran for the Republican nomination for President of the United States, he won it handily.[72]

In 1928 President Wilbur at Stanford and various party leaders hit upon the idea of holding a ceremonial acceptance of the Republican nomination in Stanford's football stadium and of inviting the public to attend. This, Wilbur telegraphed Hoover, would allow "popular participation in greatest event in California" and "start campaign on new basis." It would offer a "vent for California enthusiasm" and be a symbolic break with "old style politics."[73]

And so, on August 11, 1928, one day after his 54th birthday, Herbert Hoover delivered his acceptance speech before 70, 000 admirers in the Stanford Stadium - and an audience of uncounted millions by national radio hookup. David Starr Jordan was there, as were some of the university's first professors and many members of the Pioneer Class of '95. Shortly afterward the nominee journeyed east on his arduous path to the White House.

On November 5, 1928, the day before the election, a confident Herbert Hoover returned home. The portents were promising as the campaign train streamed down the peninsula.

Ten thousand people, including virtually the entire Stanford student body, cheered the Chief at the Palo Alto railroad station that day. Overhead an airplane pilot dropped "bombs" that broke into parachutes flying the flags of the world's nations. Up Palm Drive Hoover and his family rode as students and adults lined their path. That night the nominee addressed the nation by radio from his campus home, the Lou Henry Hoover House on San Juan Hill . . .

The next day, Tuesday, November 6, the Hoovers, their two sons, and their daughter-in-law cast their ballots in mid-morning at their campus precinct. . . .Then, its civic duty done, the family retired to its home, where special Associated Press and Western Union wires were in place to convey the returns.

Early that evening old friends from Stanford, Palo Alto, and the Bay Area gathered at the house of the nominee. As it happened, many months before - before, in fact, it was known that Hoover would be a presidential aspirant - the university had booked an election night concert by John Phillip Sousa and his 70- piece band. The venerable "March King" (who turned 74 that very day) agreed that if the returns showed Hoover victorious by the close of the performance, he would lead a parade to the candidate's home.

And thus, in late evening, an exultant crowd of 2,000 Stanford students ascended San Juan Hill, a tired and puffing Sousa at their head. Cameras whirred, reporters scrambled, a special Radio Hookup broadcast the scene. Out onto the roof and terraces came Hoover's family and friends. The candidate himself and his wife thanked Sousa at the front door and then mounted to the second floor to survey the scene.

Across the breadth of America - even as far away as Tahiti - owners of radio sets heard the jubilant sounds. Sousa struck up the band, it was the "El Capitan" march. Then came the "Stars and Stripes Forever." Then two thunderous yells for the President-elect.

Next the throng sang the "Star Spangled Banner." - not yet the national anthem (it would become so designated during Hoover's administration). As the crowd lifted its collective voice, a pilot from the Palo Alto School of Aviation fired a 21-gun salute of fireworks from an airplane circling overhead. And then the Stanford hymn:

Where the rolling foothills rise,
Up t'wards mountains higher,
Where at eve the Coast Range lies'
in the sunset fire,
Flushing deep and paling;
Here we raise our voices hailing
Thee, our Alma Mater.

From the foothills to the bay,
It shall ring,
As we sing,
It shall ring and float away;
Hail, Stanford hail!
Hail, Stanford hail!

As he heard the words of the anthem, Hoover was transfixed. He did not sing. He seemed "wrapt in thought." Tears filled his eyes. Never was his identification with Stanford as complete as it was at this, the most triumphant moment of his life.

And never was Stanford's identification with Hoover more joyful and unrestrained than it was that starlit November evening. His glory was also its own. A few days later an old British friend expressed the sentiment well: "I do hope and believe that a hundred years hence Stanford men will point back to Hoover with the same sort of pride that the University of Virginia now points back to Jefferson."[74]

The nominee of the Democratic Party was Al Smith of New York. On November 6, 1928, after an exciting campaign, Hoover, with Charles Curtis - an Osage Indian - as Vice President, was elected President of the United states by a wide margin. He received 58 percent of the popular vote and an overwhelming electoral college majority of 357, carrying every state but eight and smashing the solid South.[75]

Stock Market Crash of 1929 and Great Depression

President Hoover took the oath of office on March 4, 1929. In spite of reassuring economic forecasts from pundits and politicians the stock market had begun to act queerly early in 1929. On 23 October, barely six months after Hoover's inauguration, there was a spectacular drop in the market during the last hour of trading, and the 24th, when almost 13 million shares changed hands, became known as "Black Thursday.." Bankers and brokers insisted that the worst was over, but 28 and 29 October were even more terrible days from which there was no recovery. Stocks reached new lows on 13 November, rose slightly during the early months of 1930, but in April began a downward slide that continued with only brief interruptions to rock-bottom in mid 1932. By this time around 12 million people, about 25 % of the normal labor force, were unemployed. In the cities there were soup kitchens and breadlines. Shanty towns sprang up and small towns in the farm belt were almost deserted.

President Hoover did the best he could to restore confidence in the economy. He assured the public that business and industry were beginning to recover and that prosperity was just around the corner. But more was needed than assurances. Hoover's conservative economic philosophy (that is, his belief that normal market forces would in due course correct the recession) prevented his timely and aggressive use of the financial and other resources of government to create jobs and foster institutional stability and recovery.

Such measures along these lines as were adopted were too little and too late. By the end of President Hoover's term in office, public confidence in the Republican administration was at a low ebb.

On the promise of a "New Deal" for the "forgotten man" Franklin Delano Roosevelt gained the presidency in a landslide. victory and was sworn in on March 4, 1933.

Roosevelt occupied the presidency for the following twelve years and thirty-nine days. He held that office during two major crises, the Great Depression and World War II, and is ranked by many with Washington, Jefferson and Lincoln as among America's greatest presidents.[76]

In 1940 when President Wilbur reached retirement age the trustees extended his tenure through December 31, 1941 so that he could preside over Stanford's 50th anniversary observances. His days in the presidency were now waning and, in fact, Hoover had been chairman of the trustee's committee in search of a successor. Now, at this fateful juncture in their lives, Wilbur saw the opportunity in the 50th anniversary proceedings to pay tribute to Hoover and his peerless archive, the Hoover War Library.

The Hoover War Library[77]

The Hoover War Library had its inception from a paragraph in the autobiography of President Andrew D. White of Cornell. This paragraph was a discussion of President White's difficulties in collecting material upon the French Revolution and the Napoleonic era, due to the fact that there had been but little preservation of fugitive records of the period. That paragraph came under Mr. Hoover's eye soon after World War I broke out. He at once started the collection of such material pertaining to the war.

Collection and transportation during the period of the war was extremely difficult. While he traveled constantly between the enemy countries, because of his mission nothing could be done that would incur the slightest suspicion. However, he collected a very considerable amount of material in the course of the war during both his two and one-half years in Europe and his one and one-half in the United States as Food Administrator.

In 1918 Mr. Hoover was sent to Europe by President Wilson to represent the American government in what became subsequently the Supreme Economic Council, and to conduct various American activities during the period of the Armistice. Upon his arrival in Europe in late November he cabled to Dr. Wilbur through Mrs. Hoover a request to send someone to Europe who could take charge of the systematic collection of the vast materials which had been released at the end of the war. Stanford History Professor Ephraim Douglass Adams was sent over, and Mr. Hoover secured from the ranks of the American army the release of a number of young professors of history who were awaiting transportation home from Europe, and dispatched them into every part of Europe.

Thus the Hoover War Library was initially comprised of material from over fifty nations. Its temporary home was in the Library Building at Stanford University where the Hoover Library Wing became a Mecca for history scholars from many lands.

By early 1925 the Hoover War Library had outgrown its allotted quarters. Less than six years after its founding, it occupied one fifth of the available stack space in the entire Stanford Main Library. . . .Never one to beat around the bush, Professor Adams had informed Hoover in mid-1923 that the collection would soon require a separate building. "The Chief" was astonished, but soon he, too, realized that the international archive carrying his name deserved - nay, demanded - a more dignified and commodious home.[78]

There ensued an arduous but eventually successful fund-raising drive followed by construction of the Hoover Library Building with its soaring Hoover Library Tower. In 1938 Hoover proposed and the University Trustees approved the title of the building to be:

"Hoover Library on War, Revolution and Peace,"[79]

The year 1941 marked Stanford's 50th anniversary. As the Stanford Community prepared to celebrate this milestone in its history, Hoover requested that the formal dedication of his library building be included in the ceremonies. The university accepted and went further - it made its most honored alumnus a focus of the observances (a tribute surely designed by President Wilbur).

From June 16 to 21, 1941 the university staged an elaborate Academic Week of Commemoration. The event opened with a four-day symposium on "The University and the Future of America," at which fifteen distinguished scholars and men of affairs from across the land delivered lectures to a total of approximately 5, 000 guests. To Hoover was given the privilege of offering the concluding address.

But before the final dedication exercises, a concert of carillon music rang forth from atop the stately tower. The magnificent, none-ton carillon had been built in Belgium and exhibited at that nation's pavilion at the anew York World's Fair. The Belgian American Educational Foundation had then purchased the instrument from its owners and presented it to the Hoover Library - a musical memorial to the humanitarian achievement that had created a hero a quarter of a century before.

Rising at last before the outdoor assembly seated in front of the tower, Hoover noted the treasures to be stored inside. His mind that afternoon, however, was on the present and the future. . . His plea was for American universities to raise "the lamp of freedom" in a world ravaged by the tyranny and World War II already afoot in Europe and Asia. . .A university, he told his audience, "is more than just to help you. It is a great living thing radiating truth, justice, service and freedom. And if you work for it and care for it and serve it in these next fifty years, it will give even greater service to mankind."

The next day, June 20, Stanfordians, dignitaries and visitors, gathered for what Ray Lyman Wilbur considered the climax of the entire symposium, the dedication of the new Hoover Library building. Speaker after speaker acclaimed the world's hugest collection of social and political documents, and the man who made this resource possible and second to none.[80]

Succession in the Presidency of Stanford University

The devastating air attack by the Japanese on Pearl Harbor on December 7 1941, the "day that shall live in infamy," catapulted the United States into World War II, a conflict it had sought to avoid. War was declared on Japan on December 8th Germany and Italy, faithful to their tripartite treaty with Japan, declared war on the United States on December 11. By the manner of its beginning for the United States, World War II united the nation against its adversaries as nothing else could have done. We shall later return to its effect on the medical school.

Meanwhile the most important responsibility confronting the Stanford Trustees relative to the school was the selection of a successor to President Ray Lyman Wilbur. On December 5, 1941 the board formally offered the Stanford presidency to the head of the Carnegie Institution of Washington, Vanevar Bush. Two days later, the Japanese bombing of Pearl Harbor thwarted that plan as 'Bush, a noted scientist, had to decline in order to accept war-related responsibilities.

On January 1, 1942 Wilbur became Chancellor as scheduled but agreed to act also as president until his replacement could be found. Later that year the newest member of the Board of Trustees, Donald B. Tresidder (Stanford Class of '19), personable physician- turned- businessman, attracted the favorable attention of Hoover who discussed the matter with several other trustees with the result that the 48-year-old alumnus was appointed the fourth President of the University on January 21, 1943.[81]

Then, on January 7, 1944, Lou Henry, Hoover's wife of nearly 45 years died suddenly, two months short of her 76th birthday. A few days later Ray Lyman Wilbur eulogized her at a memorial service attended by a few of her California Friends and neighbors. He spoke of her as the unaffected woman who had brought luster to her alma mater. There is no finer example of how to live," he said, "than was given to us by Lou Henry Hoover.

Hoover's spacious, storied and vine-clad campus residence on San Juan Hill had now lost its appeal for him. And so, later in 1944, he offered to donate it to the university to serve as the official residence of the university president - provided that it be named the Lou Henry Hoover House and that Stanford contribute $6,250 per year for ten years to document-collecting efforts of the Hoover Library in her memory. A grateful board accepted his bequest.[82]

In the summer of 1946 President Tresidder proposed a reorganization of the mode of governance that had been in effect since the 1920's. Both Hoover and the Board of Trustees approved the suggested plan which included changing the name of the institution to the "Hoover Institute and Library on War, Revolution and Peace.," and declared it to be "a separate division of Stanford University."[83]

Sadly, in early 1948, President Tresidder died suddenly at the age of 53. The Board soon appointed a committee to recommend a successor; not surprisingly, Hoover was a member of the panel. One of the prospective candidates under consideration was the new director of the Huntington Library, J. E. Wallace Sterling, a Canadian-born historian who had received his Ph. D. from Stanford in the 1930's. On August 25, 1948 Hoover's friend and fellow trustee, Seelye G. Mudd, called on Sterling to determine his political convictions. Sterling declared that he had never voted for Franklin Roosevelt and favored Thomas Dewey for President. As for the New Deal, Sterling said that he admired some of its social objectives but considered that the programs were poorly implemented and there was need for a thorough housecleaning. Mudd and Hoover concluded that Sterling's political views were compatible with theirs. Some years later Hoover declared that his was the deciding vote that put Sterling's nomination through. If so, he could claim a crucial, perhaps decisive, role in the selection of four consecutive presidents of his alma mater. On April 1, 1949, J. E. Wallace Sterling became the fifth President of Stanford.[84]

Ray Lyman Wilbur
(1875-1949)

But not all the news from the campus was so encouraging. On June 26, 1949 Ray Lyman Wilbur died at 74 - victim of recurrence of a heart condition from which he had suffered five years earlier. He appeared to be improving but a new occlusion proved fatal.[85]

To the end he and Hoover had remained very close, with offices on the same floor of the Hoover Tower. With his passing Hoover lost not only an intimate friend of nearly 57 years but an irreplaceable personal link to the University. As Herbert Hoover stated it, "His loss leaves a gap in all our lives. America is a better place for his having lived in it."[86]

Dr. Wilbur served as Dean (or Executive Head) of the Medical School for five years from 1911 to 1915 and as the third President of Stanford University for over a quarter of a century - from 1916 to 1943 - the longest tenure of any of the University's Presidents.

We have previously referred to certain of Dr. Wilbur's accomplishments, but we should now call attention to other important contributions made during his long and varied career.

We are already familiar with Dr. Wilbur's early work in the physiology laboratory, and with his later crucial role as Dean in the original organization of the new medical school. His success in establishing high standards as the hallmark of the school was especially noteworthy. His close cooperation with the Board of Trustees in fending off strong forces seeking to close the medical school, or merge it into oblivion with the University of California, assured the survival of the School. Thereafter, as President of the University, Dr. Wilbur continued to be ever mindful of the needs of the Medical School throughout a presidency which spanned two World Wars and a Great Depression.

Dr. Wilbur discontinued regular medical practice when he became President of the University. In the ensuing decades, however, his professional interest in medicine and health was maintained at a high level and he rose to eminence in these and other fields of human endeavor.

This is reflected in his work on a number of important commissions, and by his election to the Presidency of several national organizations. Among these was the American Medical Association (1923-24) seven years after he had given up his medical school deanship to become a university president. This is one of the greatest honors in medicine and a post of great responsibility. After the completion of his term of office he continued to exert wide influence on matters of policy in the AMA and attended its annual meetings as chairman of the Council on Medical Education and Hospitals.

His other important undertakings included chairmanship of the Barite Committee on Physical Medicine (beginning in 1943); and his service on the Medical Services Committee of the Hoover Commission (beginning in 1948).

Particular reference should be made to his work as chairman of the Committee on the Cost of Medical Care (1927-32) which was financed by several foundations. This was in the pioneering days of a movement which was then, as now, highly controversial. The Committee's final report, published under the title "Medical Care for the American People," is a classic example of the way in which a broad question should be studied and reported upon. Dr. Wilbur took the lead in putting into effect some features of the report by organizing the California Physicians' Service in 1939 and becoming its first president. The CPS had a spectacular growth and was becoming a model for nationwide voluntary health insurance programs.

From the outset of the junior college movement in California, Wilbur was one of its staunchest advocates, foreseeing clearly the day, now long past, when the universities in this rapidly growing western commonwealth could no longer carry the load without weakening seriously the work which they alone are able to do in the graduate and professional years.

A comprehensive, farsighted grasp of big questions is reflected in every segment of Dr. Wilbur's career. As Secretary of the Interior under President Hoover, he and "the Chief" made an incomparable team. Both had wide experience in frontier life, were scientifically trained, were well acquainted with the vast undeveloped resources of the nation, and knew well how quickly reckless depletion would exhaust them. Almost overnight the Department of the Interior became, in effect, a department of conservation - conservation of forests; of oil and gas; of water for irrigation and falling water for power; of animal life; particularly of the migratory waterfowl; of the vast grazing lands of the public domain of the West; and of public health; To this task Wilbur brought the same wisdom, courage, integrity, and incredible capacity for dispatching business which he had shown in university administration.

Many honors came to him, among them more than a score of honorary degrees; the William Freeman Snow Medal, awarded by the American Social Hygiene Association "for distinguished service to humanity"; the title of Commander, Order of Leopold II; the Honor Corss of the German Red Cross; and the title of Chevalier, Legion d'Honneur of France.

In the last few years of his life he used what spare time he had in working on his autobiography. He had the manuscript for it practically completed at the time of his death. Fortunately it was later edited and published as The Memoirs of Ray Lyman Wilbur.

Regarding this work Hoover said, "I can only add, as to this volume, that here is an autobiography which ranks with the best of those in American literature. And within it are profound lessons to the American people."[87]

Hoover Campaigns for the Medical Center

Hoover was an accomplished and persuasive campaigner for funds and the medical school was among the countless beneficiaries of his efforts. In 1956, the University asked him to serve as honorary chairman of a committee to raise more than $ 42, 000, 000 for a medical center to be located on the campus. The aging alumnus agreed, and the drive was successfully launched. Despite his "honorary" status, Hoover actively solicited contributions.

Even as Stanford benefited from the aura of Hoover's reputation, tension at times surfaced behind the scenes. In September 1956 he formally protested to his fellow trustees against the proposed architecture of the planned medical center. It was "a complete departure from the Romanesque which has been the architectural motif of the University since the beginning," he wrote. Once upon a time his directions would have carried the day. But Hoover was no longer as dominant as he once had been, and the board decided not to alter the design of the medical center as submitted by the renowned architect, Edward Durell Stone.[88]

The Chief did not give up easily. A year later he strenuously reiterated his disapproval of the university's growing break with its architectural past. The medical school and post office were a "sorry departure from the Romanesque," he charged; so, too, was the proposed new addition to the physics complex, which would be an "eyesore" until the university tore it down. He urged the trustees to revise their plans for the physics buildings now, when only a few thousand dollars had been expended. Stanford, he declared, was "one of only two or three American universities having a distinctive and consistent architecture. Its architectural motif is singularly appropriate for California as it memorializes the spirit of learning and religious faith which the Spanish Fathers brought to this state." It was also "an essential part" of the Stanford family's gift to the university.

This time Hoover's protest, in which at least one other trustee joined, had a noticeable impact on his brethren. Although the board did not modify its current projects, in November 1957 it did decide that all future structures erected adjacent to or facing the original Quad should "conform, as nearly as possible" to the modified Romanesque form of architecture of "the original Inner and Outer Quadrangles, due, allowance being made for modern costs and materials." Thanks in considerable measure to Hoover (and irrespective of the merit of his argument), the erosion of Stanford's architectural integrity - at least on the inner campus - was stopped.[89]

Herbert Clark Hoover
(1874 - 1864)

On October 20, 1964 , at the age of 90, Hoover died in New York City, more than 73 years after he had entered Stanford University.

In all that period hardly a week had passed in which it had been absent from his thoughts. A few months before his death the Stanford University News Service issued a press release in which it recounted some of his principal benefactions for his alma mater. "No other American President," it noted, "has been more deeply involved or contributed more to the development of a single academic institution for so long a time as Hoover has done for Stanford." Indeed no other person except the Stanfords themselves had done so much for the University. He was the Stanford spirit personified, the epitome of Leland Stanford's ideal of "direct usefulness in life."

As for Hoover's contributions to the Medical School, we have already told how his influence within the Board of Trustees saved the Medical School from extinction, and was responsible for the election of Dr. Wilbur to the university presidency , thus assuring due consideration for the Medical School's interests in the University's highest councils.

In an autobiographical fragment written sometime after World War I, Hoover declared: "There is little importance to men's lives except the accomplishments they leave to posterity." It is "in the origination or administration of tangible institutions or constructive works," he wrote, that men's contributions can best be measured. "When all is said and done," he asserted, "accomplishment is all that counts."[90]

Endnotes

  1. Annual Report of the President for the Year ending July 31, 1916 (Stanford University, CA: Published by the University, 1916), p. 91.Lane Library catalog record
  2. Ray Lyman Wilbur , The Memoirs of Ray Lyman Wilbur, 1875-1949, ed. Edgar E. Robinson and Paul C. Edwards (Stanford, California: Stanford University Press: 1960), p. 208.Lane Library catalog record
  3. A. McGehee Harvey , "Albion Walter Hewlett: Pioneer Clinical Physiologist," Johns Hopkins Medical Journal 144, no. 6 (Jun 1979): 202-214.Lane Library catalog record
  4. A. McGehee Harvey , "Albion Walter Hewlett: Pioneer Clinical Physiologist," Johns Hopkins Medical Journal 144, no. 6 (Jun 1979): 203.Lane Library catalog record
  5. Joseph Erlanger and Albion Walter Hewlett , "A Study of the Metabolism in Dogs with Shortened Small Intestines," American Journal of Physiology 6, no. 1 (Sep 1901): 1-30.Lane Library catalog record
  6. Simon Flexner , "On the Occurrence of the Fat-Splitting Ferment in Peritoneal Fat necrosis and the Histology of these Lesions," Journal of Experimental Medicine 2 (1897): 413.Lane Library catalog record
  7. Albion W. Hewlett , "On the occurrence of lipase in the urine as a result of experimental pancreatic disease," Journal of Medical Research 11 (1904): 377.Lane Library catalog record
  8. A. McGehee Harvey , "Albion Walter Hewlett: Pioneer Clinical Physiologist," Johns Hopkins Medical Journal 144, no. 6 (Jun 1979): 203-205; and 212.Lane Library catalog record
  9. Letter R. L. Wilbur to A. S. Hewlett, 19 May 1911, Hewlett Folder - Box 1C, Ray Lyman Wilbur Collection - MSS 3, Lane Medical Archives, Stanford.Lane Library catalog record
  10. A. McGehee Harvey , "Albion Walter Hewlett: Pioneer Clinical Physiologist," Johns Hopkins Medical Journal 144, no. 6 (Jun 1979): 209-210.Lane Library catalog record
  11. A. McGehee Harvey , "Albion Walter Hewlett: Pioneer Clinical Physiologist," Johns Hopkins Medical Journal 144, no. 6 (Jun 1979): 209-210.Lane Library catalog record
  12. Annual Report of the President of Stanford University For the Academic Year Ending July 31 1917 (Stanford University, CA: Stanford University Press, 1917), pp. 10 - 13 and 77.Lane Library catalog record
  13. Minutes of the Medical Faculty of Stanford University, for 29 September 1917, Minutes of Stanford Medical Faculty, Vol. 3, Lane Medical Archives, Stanford.
  14. Annual Report of the President of Stanford University For the Academic Year Ending July 31 1917 (Stanford University, CA: Stanford University Press, 1917), p. 77.Lane Library catalog record
  15. Annual Report of the President of Stanford University For the Academic Year Ending August 31 1918 (Stanford University, CA: Stanford University Press, 1918), p. 77.Lane Library catalog record
  16. Minutes of the Medical Faculty of Stanford University, for 29 September 1917, Minutes of Stanford Medical Faculty, Vol. 3, Lane Medical Archives, Stanford.
  17. A. McGehee Harvey , "Albion Walter Hewlett: Pioneer Clinical Physiologist," Johns Hopkins Medical Journal 144, no. 6 (Jun 1979): 210.Lane Library catalog record
  18. Gunther W. Nagel , A Stanford Heritage (Stanford, California: Stanford Medical Alumni Association, 1970), pp. 41-47.Lane Library catalog record
  19. A. McGehee Harvey , "Albion Walter Hewlett: Pioneer Clinical Physiologist," Johns Hopkins Medical Journal 144, no. 6 (Jun 1979): 210.Lane Library catalog record
  20. A. W. Hewlett and W. M. Alberty , "Influenza at the Navy Base Hospital in France," JAMA 71, no. 13 (Sep 28, 1918): 1056-1058.Lane Library catalog record
  21. Annual Report of the President of Stanford University For the Academic Year Ending July 31 1917 (Stanford University, CA: Stanford University Press, 1917), pp. 10 - 13 and 77.Lane Library catalog record
  22. Annual Report of the President of Stanford University For the Academic Year Ending August 31 1918 (Stanford University, CA: Stanford University Press, 1918), pp. 13 and 76.Lane Library catalog record
  23. Minutes of the Medical Faculty of Stanford University for 1 March 1919, Minutes of Stanford Medical Faculty, Vol. 4, pp. 186-188, Lane Medical Archives, Stanford.
  24. A. McGehee Harvey , "Albion Walter Hewlett: Pioneer Clinical Physiologist," Johns Hopkins Medical Journal 144, no. 6 (Jun 1979): 210-214.Lane Library catalog record
  25. Minutes of the Medical Faculty of Stanford University for 13 June 1925, Minutes of Stanford Medical Faculty, Vol. 5, Lane Medical Archives, Stanford.
  26. Minutes of the Medical Faculty of Stanford University for 14 December 1925, Minutes of Stanford Medical Faculty, Vol. 5, pp. 152-153, Lane Medical Archives, Stanford.
  27. Minutes of the Medical Faculty of Stanford University for 14 December 1925, Minutes of Stanford Medical Faculty, Vol. 5, pp. 165-166, Lane Medical Archives, Stanford.
  28. A. McGehee Harvey , "Albion Walter Hewlett: Pioneer Clinical Physiologist," Johns Hopkins Medical Journal 144, no. 6 (Jun 1979): 210.Lane Library catalog record
  29. Minutes of the Medical Faculty of Stanford University for 14 December 1925, Minutes of Stanford Medical Faculty, Vol. 5, pp. 161-166, Lane Medical Archives.
  30. A. McGehee Harvey , "Albion Walter Hewlett: Pioneer Clinical Physiologist," Johns Hopkins Medical Journal 144, no. 6 (Jun 1979): 212.Lane Library catalog record
  31. Gunther W. Nagel , A Stanford Heritage (Stanford, California: Stanford Medical Alumni Association, 1970) p. 47.Lane Library catalog record
  32. Personal Communications from former Dean Robert J. Glaser and Alumnus Dr. Robert I. Boyd.
  33. Fund 352H350, Department of Medicine, per Perry 'Everett Controller, School of Medicine.
  34. Fund 352H374, Department of Medicine, per Perry 'Everett Controller, School of Medicine.
  35. Annual Report of the President of Stanford University For the Academic Year Ending August 31 1926 (Stanford University, CA: Stanford University Press, 1918), p. 184.Lane Library catalog record
  36. Annual Report of the President of Stanford University For the Academic Year Ending August 31 1926 (Stanford University, CA: Stanford University Press, 1927), pp. 184-185.Lane Library catalog record
  37. Annual Report of the President of Stanford University For the Academic Year Ending August 31 1922 (Stanford University, CA: Stanford University Press, 1922), pp. 161-162.Lane Library catalog record
  38. Annual Report of the President of Stanford University For the Academic Year Ending August 31 1924 (Stanford University, CA: Stanford University Press, 1925), p. 158.Lane Library catalog record
  39. Windsor Cutting , Loren R. Chandler , et al. The First Hundred Years: A compendium of Decanal and Departmental Reports (Glendale, California; Mirro-Graphic Yearbooks: c. 1959): p. 91.
  40. Annual Report of the President of Stanford University For the Academic Year Ending August 31 1926 (Stanford University, CA: Stanford University Press, 1927), pp. 185-186.Lane Library catalog record
  41. Annual Report of the President of Stanford University For the Academic Year Ending August 31 1927 (Stanford University, CA: Stanford University Press, 1927), pp. 185-186.Lane Library catalog record
  42. Robert G. Whitfield , "Historical Development of the Stanford School of Medicine" (A Thesis submitted to the School of Education and Committee of Graduate Study of Stanford University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts, April, 1949), p. 167.Lane Library catalog record
  43. Annual Report of the President of Stanford University For the Academic Year Ending August 31 1929 (Stanford University, CA: Stanford University Press, 1929), pp. 40-49.Lane Library catalog record
  44. Robert G. Whitfield , "Historical Development of the Stanford School of Medicine" (A Thesis submitted to the School of Education and Committee of Graduate Study of Stanford University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts, April, 1949), pp. 163-64.Lane Library catalog record
  45. Annual Report of the President of Stanford University For the Academic Year Ending August 31 1921 (Stanford University, CA: Stanford University Press, 1921), p. 234.Lane Library catalog record
  46. Annual Report of the President of Stanford University For the Academic Year Ending August 31 1924 (Stanford University, CA: Stanford University Press, 1925), p. 6.Lane Library catalog record
  47. Annual Report of the President of Stanford University For the Academic Year Ending August 31 1924 (Stanford University, CA: Stanford University Press, 1925), p. 230.Lane Library catalog record
  48. Elizabeth Vadeboncoeur, Senior Lane Librarian Emeritus, "Lane Medical Library Chronology" (personal communication).
  49. Annual Report of the President of Stanford University For the Academic Year Ending August 31 1926 (Stanford University, CA: Stanford University Press, 1927), pp. 249-50.Lane Library catalog record
  50. Annual Report of the President of Stanford University For the Academic Year Ending August 31 1928 (Stanford University, CA: Stanford University Press, 1928), p. 8.Lane Library catalog record
  51. Annual Report of the President of Stanford University For the Academic Year Ending August 31 1928 (Stanford University, CA: Stanford University Press, 1928), p. 193.Lane Library catalog record
  52. Annual Report of the President of Stanford University For the Academic Year Ending August 31 1928 (Stanford University, CA: Stanford University Press, 1928), p. 285.Lane Library catalog record
  53. Annual Report of the President of Stanford University For the Academic Year Ending August 31 1928 (Stanford University, CA: Stanford University Press, 1928), p. 286.Lane Library catalog record
  54. Annual Report of the President of Stanford University For the Academic Year Ending August 31 1928 (Stanford University, CA: Stanford University Press, 1928), p. 286.Lane Library catalog record
  55. Annual Report of the President of Stanford University For the Academic Year Ending August 31 1932 (Stanford University, CA: Stanford University Press, 1932), p. 360.Lane Library catalog record
  56. Annual Report of the President of Stanford University For the Academic Year Ending August 31 1928 (Stanford University, CA: Stanford University Press, 1928), pp. 8 and 192.Lane Library catalog record
  57. Annual Report of the President of Stanford University For the Academic Year Ending August 31 1922 (Stanford University, CA: Stanford University Press, 1922), pp. 19-22.Lane Library catalog record
  58. Annual Report of the President of Stanford University For the Academic Year Ending August 31 1922 (Stanford University, CA: Stanford University Press, 1922), p. 37.Lane Library catalog record
  59. Annual Report of the President of Stanford University For the Academic Year Ending August 31 1927 (Stanford University, CA: Stanford University Press, 1927), pp. 12 and 25.Lane Library catalog record
  60. Annual Report of the President of Stanford University For the Academic Year Ending August 31 1928 (Stanford University, CA: Stanford University Press, 1928), pp. 192-193.Lane Library catalog record
  61. Annual Report of the President of Stanford University For the Academic Year Ending August 31 1929 (Stanford University, CA: Stanford University Press, 1929), pp. 10 and 318.Lane Library catalog record
  62. Annual Report of the President of Stanford University For the Academic Year Ending August 31 1930 (Stanford University, CA: Stanford University Press, 1930), p. 7.Lane Library catalog record
  63. Annual Report of the President of Stanford University For the Academic Year Ending August 31 1931 (Stanford University, CA: Stanford University Press, 1931), p. 17.Lane Library catalog record
  64. Stanford University School of Medicine , A Challenge to California and the West (A Booklet of 24 pages Published by Stanford University, 1932), Drawing of Medical School Building, p. 2.Lane Library catalog record
  65. Annual Report of the President of Stanford University For the Academic Year Ending August 31 1933 (Stanford University, CA: Stanford University Press, 1933), p. 4.Lane Library catalog record
  66. Samuel Eliot Morison , The Oxford History of the American People (New York: Oxford University Press, 1965), 940-941.
  67. Ecclesiastes, The Holy Bible.
  68. Annual Report of the President of Stanford University For the Academic Year Ending August 31 1930 (Stanford University, CA: Stanford University Press, 1930), pp. 7-8.Lane Library catalog record
  69. George H. Nash , Herbert Hoover and Stanford University (Stanford, California: Hoover institution Press, 1988) p. 102.
  70. Gunther W. Nagel (Stanford A. B. 1917, M. D. 1921), A Stanford Heritage: Sketches of ten teacher-physicians (Stanford, California: Stanford Medical Alumni Association, 1970), p. 15.Lane Library catalog record
  71. Annual Report of the President of Stanford University For the Academic Year Ending August 31 1933 (Stanford University, CA: Stanford University Press, 1933), p. 24.Lane Library catalog record
  72. Samuel Eliot Morison , The Oxford History of the American People (New York: Oxford University Press, 1965), pp. 935-936.
  73. George H. Nash , Herbert Hoover and Stanford University (Stanford, California: Hoover institution Press, 1988), pp. 90-93.
  74. George H. Nash , Herbert Hoover and Stanford University (Stanford, California: Hoover institution Press, 1988), pp. 90-93.
  75. Samuel Eliot Morison , The Oxford History of the American People (New York: Oxford University Press, 1965), pp. 935-936.
  76. Samuel Eliot Morison , The Oxford History of the American People (New York: Oxford University Press, 1965), pp. 936-949 and 951.
  77. "The Hoover War Library, Stanford University." Stanford University. Misc. Historical Items. H747H S7S95.
  78. George H. Nash , Herbert Hoover and Stanford University (Stanford, California: Hoover institution Press, 1988) p. 87.
  79. George H. Nash , Herbert Hoover and Stanford University (Stanford, California: Hoover institution Press, 1988), p. 104.
  80. George H. Nash , Herbert Hoover and Stanford University (Stanford, California: Hoover institution Press, 1988), pp. 108-110.
  81. George H. Nash , Herbert Hoover and Stanford University (Stanford, California: Hoover institution Press, 1988), pp. 117-118.
  82. George H. Nash , Herbert Hoover and Stanford University (Stanford, California: Hoover institution Press, 1988), pp. 117-118.
  83. George H. Nash , Herbert Hoover and Stanford University (Stanford, California: Hoover institution Press, 1988), p. 121.
  84. George H. Nash , Herbert Hoover and Stanford University (Stanford, California: Hoover institution Press, 1988), pp. 123-124.
  85. George H. Nash , Herbert Hoover and Stanford University (Stanford, California: Hoover institution Press, 1988), p.124.
  86. Robert E. Swain , "Ray Lyman Wilbur: 1975-1949," Science 111 (1950 Mar 31): 324-327.
  87. Ray Lyman Wilbur , The Memoirs of Ray Lyman Wilbur, 1875-1949, ed. Edgar Eugene Robinson and Paul Carroll Edwards (Stanford , California; Stanford University Press, 1960), p. vi.Lane Library catalog record
  88. George H. Nash , Herbert Hoover and Stanford University (Stanford, California: Hoover institution Press, 1988), p.127.
  89. George H. Nash , Herbert Hoover and Stanford University (Stanford, California: Hoover institution Press, 1988) p.127.
  90. George H. Nash , Herbert Hoover and Stanford University (Stanford, California: Hoover institution Press, 1988) pp.167-168.
Stanford Medicine
©2017 Stanford Medicine