The will provides that girls who are unable or unwilling to pay the cost of their board at the school shall be educated free of charge. "I hold profoundly the conviction that the welfare of any community is divinely and hence inseparably dependent upon the qualities of its motherhood and the spirit and charity of its homes," the will states. The School of Home Economics of Battle Creek, Michigan, is to have a booth illustrating its work at the exhibition to be held in conjunction with the golden jubilee celebration of the Battle Creek Sanitarium, October 3, 4 and 5. Brief Notes. Some additions to the University of Illinois faculty are as follows: Miss DeGarmo of Agnes Scott College, Atlanta, is to be instructor in Dietetics. Miss Larueda Perry, who has her Ph.D. in Economics from Bryn Mawr, has been added to the staff as "Associate", making the University "better prepared than ever to take care of the Economics of the Family." Miss Jean MacKinnon, formerly of Ames, Iowa, has had charge of the food work in the summer session and is to be instructor in Foods the coming year. Miss Olive Percival, assisted by Mr. Floyd Fogel, will be in charge of the University of Illinois Home Economics car that is being overhauled and improved to more fully serve its purpose, and that is to start out in September. Miss Helen Knowlton, formerly teacher of Science in the public schools of Springfield, Mass., and for four years instructor in the Department of Home Economics, Cornell University, has been appointed Dean of Women and in Charge of the Department of Home Economics at the State College, Durham, N. H. in place of Miss Nellie E. Goldthwaite whose resignation took place at the close of the year. Mrs. Joseph C. Gawler of Denver, Colorado, has been chosen chairman of the Home Economics Committee of the General Federation of Women's Clubs, in place of Miss Helen Louise Johnson. Miss Johnson has done a piece of remarkable work in her two years service of the clubs, and has brought Home Economics to the front in Federation affairs in a way that should be appreciated by the American Home Economics Association. MRS. MARY H. ABEL ANNA BARROWS C. F. LANGWORTHY ISABEL ELY LORD Ex-Officio Members-CATHARINE J. MACKAY, President American Home Economics Association EMMA H. GUNTHER, Chairman Institution Economics Section RUTH WHEELER, Chairman Science Section NEALE S. KNOWLES, Chairman Extension Education Section Collaborators-The Officers, Members of the Council, and Advisers Professor of Rural Social Organization, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York Your president has asked me to present a view of the community as the larger family group, and to discuss community life as an expansion of home ideals. You have spent the past four days in a somewhat strenuous consideration of practical problems in much detail. The topic which has been assigned to me invites large play of the imagination and admits of much resort to idealism; and we shall be interested in it from the standpoint of a few principles involved rather than as to practical details. Why may we regard community relations as an expansion of home ideals? Family ideals represent accumulated and refined group ideals. We can rest our case for the community better on group ideals than we can on personal or individual ideals. Not that personal idealism is not a condition devotedly to be sought in all society; but such ideals, being individual, may be at variance with one another and may need to be brought into harmony with those of other members of the group and be tested by their applicability to the whole society. Community life is a "problem" for discussion today partly because our common relations and experiences in society have been left so largely to individual impulse, to the pursuit of personal ideals often untested and unfortified by reliable thought and experience. Every conflict in society is a conflict of ideals and interests. The more reasoned the ideals, and the more fit they are to be the ideals of the whole body of persons affected, the 1 Presented at the Ninth Annual Meeting of the American Home Economics Association, Ithaca, N. Y., 1916. larger the group which can be brought under them and the fewer the persons on the outside who are antagonistic. Ideals which are the fruitage of painstaking investigation and deliberation, which are the outcome of intelligent consideration of all phases of our common welfare, and which have the acceptance of the group, are the forces which help to draw us forward in our community experience. It is the insistence on personal ideals which rest on neither reliable knowledge, reliable thinking, nor reliable experience, which retards human progress. One of the problems of civilization is to decrease the number and vigor of the latter sort of ideals, and progressively to increase the number and the vigor of the former sort. Validity in ideals as in many other things lies on the side of the harmony of many rather than the irresponsible pursuit of that which disregards the many. Not that anyone should drift with the crowd; a drifter has no impelling ideals. But, when one undertakes to set up his ideals against those of the group, he is under the necessity of justifying his independent stand and showing why it should become the position of the group as well as of himself. Our large internal problems in this country, as elsewhere, have their rise in part in the abandonment of our group life and activity to the pursuit of untested and unproved personal ideals, impulses, and ambitions. The condition to be sought is the maximum of individual liberty which at the same time is compatible with the welfare of the whole group. This is the condition that obtains in the well-regulated family. It is in the family par excellence that we find the conformity of individual ideals and motives to the welfare of the group. We know all too well what occurs when the members of a family follow their several wills in disregard of the wills and rights and interests of each other. We have long since pronounced anathema on all such. We have been slow to realize, indeed we have not yet fully realized, the lamentable disruption which results from precisely this condition in the greater family which we may call the community or the nation. As in the normal family the restraint of the individual works for the best good of all while not unduly hampering anyone, so in society is there a pronounced need for the application of a similar code, resting on the principle of each for all and all for each. We have spoken of the normal family. If we are to draw an analogy between the community and the family group and think of the community as the larger family group, we must first project our notion of |