CLASS OF 1922
We are glad to print the following correspondence concerning our collective failure to raise our part of the Alumni Fund. Some of our readers may be struck with the thought that the collective failure is the sum of the individual failures.
Mr. C. S. Hopkins, Westport, Conn. Dear Chick:
January 1, 1930
After long consideration I am writing you about a subject which, for several years, has been of constant irritation to me—the annual disgraceful showing of the class of 1922 in the Alumni Fund drive. I have recently gone over last year's figures, and I see that again we missed making our quota.
I have checked back over previous Fund statements, and find that we have fallen behind each year for the past four years.
As I say, this is a disgraceful record for an otherwise self-respecting class to have. Personally, I feel very much mortified every time a new year's figures come out, and I am sure that practically every other man in the class feels the same.
What is wrong? Something, certainly is, badly. It doesn't just happen in the course of events that one class can't raise the amount asked of it while other classes, contemporary to it, can. Why is it? Tell me, Chick. If we can ascertain the cause of our present condition, perhaps the ill may be cured.
And if there is any way in which I can be of help, do not hesitate to call upon me.
Regards, W. F. "NICH"OISONT
January 15, 1930
Mr. Will P. Nicholson, Colorado Springs, Colo.
Dear Nick: I have done considerable thinking and studying since receiving your letter, and I now think that I can answer it adequately.
The trouble is not so much in the number of contributors but in the amount which each one of them gives. By that I don't mean that our number of contributors is satisfactory. It isn't. We should have had twenty more subscribers this year to make our percentage of givers equal to that of the Fund as a whole. Sixty-two per cent of our class sent in checks, as compared with the 71% figure which the entire alumni body achieved.
This figure can and should be improved upon, to be sure. But we would have made our quota this year if each man had given $5 more than he actually did.
Some things about this past year's campaign that will probably surprise you: Out of our 151 contributors only 27 men gave more than $10, and of these only 4 gave more than $25. I am entirely confident that there are many more than thirty—and perhaps more than fifty—men in the class who can afford to give more than $25 each year, and that more than a few are able to make contributions of much more than that. And I know that if the men who can give substantially will only do so, we can make our quota easily.
The trouble with us is that we are still looking upon ourselves as alumni just out of college. We assume that we're no better off financially than we were back in 1922, and we are measuring the size of our Fund gifts accordingly. The number of men who are now giving the same amounts that they did their first year after graduation is surprising. This is all wrong. We're seven years out of college, and that's no joke (I'd like to know how many of 1922's offspring have begun to go to school). The College is rightly looking upon us as being capable of assuming heavier Fund obligations than we were seven years ago, and has set our quota accordingly.
Individually we must give according to our respective abilities if as a class we are to fulfill this obligation. That means, in almost every case, an increase in the size of our gifts.
You ask to be told what must be done. If we are to make our quota next year, it is going to be necessary for us to secure from each contributor a gift slightly in excess of $15.
You say that you will be glad to help dowhatever is necessary to bring the class to the position that it ought to hold. I am going to take you at your word. Will you take it upon yourself to head a committee to procure large contributions from such men as can afford to make them? I mean really large ones, say from $30 to $100 or more.
Sincerely, CHICK HOPKINS
Secretary, 38 West 9th St., New York
