Ezra Hale

Mr. Hale, you were a graduate of the University of Rochester in the Class of 1916. How does the University differ today from the way it was in those days?

Mr. End, an attempt to compare the University of Rochester of my time, and that is the period from 1912 to 1916, with the University of Rochester of today would be like comparing Ping-Pong and football. Then, the University was a university in name only. Actually, it was a small, sectarian college of arts and science, catering to the young men and women of modest circumstances from the local community. There was no graduate program, no Ph.D.’s had ever been granted, there were no cyclotrons, no professional schools. Probably ninety percent of its students came from an area, the radius of which was not more than fifty miles from the center of Rochester. Wealthy families, among the socially conscious, preferred to send their sons to the prestigious colleges of the East such as Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Williams and Amherst, and their daughters to prominent finishing schools.

This was the era of the thé dansants when tea parties with dancing to the strings of famous orchestras were the rage. These were given in the afternoons during the holiday season by local matrons for the entertainment and social enhancement of their daughters, just home for school. It was the time of the Cotillion, <![if !supportFootnotes]> [2] <![endif]> thoroughly enjoyed by the popular, young ladies, resented by bashful swains. It was in this department that the local U of R gentry were at a distinct disadvantage. To this day I remember vividly one such party at a home on Arnold Park <![if !supportFootnotes]> [3] <![endif]> . I was dancing with a lovely thing when a tall, dark, and handsome gentlemen from one of these eastern colleges cut in. My annoyance was exceeded only by my humiliation as I saw the sparkle of pleasure and anticipation in the eyes of my lady fair as she glided away in the arms of the glamour boy. The memory lingers.

But those of us who spent four college year at Rochester received a good education in the arts and sciences, now referred to as the humanities. Under the leadership of Dr. President Rush Rhees <![if !supportFootnotes]> [4] <![endif]> such outstanding professors as Morey <![if !supportFootnotes]> [5], Forbes <![if !supportFootnotes]> [6], Burton <![if !supportFootnotes]> [7], Fairchild <![if !supportFootnotes]> [8], Slater <![if !supportFootnotes]> [9], and Perkins <![if !supportFootnotes]> [10] <![endif]> set the standard of excellence in undergraduate teaching that later was to come to the attention of the Rockefeller people who, together with Mr. George Eastman, started the University toward greatness.

It was the decade of the twenties that saw this small sectarian and basically local college blossom into a real university. The momentum then generated continues today and by any standard the University of Rochester is one of the great universities of this country. Momentous decisions were made. Two schools: the Medical School <![if !supportFootnotes]> [11] <![endif]> and the Eastman School of Music <![if !supportFootnotes]> [12] <![endif]> were established during this period, each to take its place in the top echelon of its field. The Medical School, under the leadership of Nobel Laureate Dr. George Hoyt Whipple <![if !supportFootnotes]> [13], and the Music School, directed by the distinguished Dr. Howard Hanson <![if !supportFootnotes]> [14]<![endif]>. Others along the way have left their imprints for which the University will always be in their debt.

Once the trustees had decided that the future of the University would best be served by moving it, at least the men’s college, to a new and larger campus, the question of where was paramount. The Board was not unanimous in its feelings. Two trustees, William B. Hale, an alumnus of the Class of 1885, and James E. Gleason <![if !supportFootnotes]> [15] <![endif]> , felt strongly that a location east of the city, in the approximate area of the present Oak Hill Country Club where plenty of acreage was available, would be far preferable to the eight-seven acres on the river. The record does not show whether or not the argument that “The Genesee” was the alma mater of the U of R and that the site on the river would be most appropriate was controlling. In any event, the choice was made, and in my opinion it was one of the great mistakes of that Board or any subsequent Board. One needs only to drive around the campus today and see how the buildings are crowded into this small area, and then try to park to be convinced. It is perhaps significant that Mr. Gleason, <![if !supportFootnotes]> [16] <![endif]> also a member of the Board of the Rochester Athenaeum Mechanics Institute <![if !supportFootnotes]> [17] <![endif]> – later changed to Rochester Institute of Technology – and for many years chairman of that Board, insisted, when the RIT decided to move its campus, that adequate acreage be purchased. The result was a future campus of thirteen hundred acres.

But to get back to the U of R, probably the next most controversial issue came during the administration of Dr. de Kiewiet, when he proposed moving the Women’s College, which was still on the old campus on University Avenue, to join the men’s college on the River Campus. <![if !supportFootnotes]> [18] <![endif]> Opposition was strong and vocal, starting with the Board itself where one trustee resigned in opposition. Of the alumni and alumnae, a limited number favored the move, but it seems that more were opposed. But President Cornelis de Kiewiet, a brilliant scholar and a magnificent speaker, almost singlehandedly succeeded. It was one of his greatest contributions.

And later, Joe Wilson <![if !supportFootnotes]> [19] <![endif]> . What can I say about him that has not already been said? It was my privilege to serve on the Board during the years that Joe was chairman. It was he who had the vision, it was he who had the money, and it was he who implemented his vision with personal and family funds, realizing that time was important and immediate action was necessary if the College of Arts and Science, the heart of the University, was not to be completely submerged by the two great new schools. His later benefactions made his contribution, together with Mr. Eastman’s, by far the greatest the University has ever received. To say that Joe was the Number One citizen of this community would merely be repeating what everybody already knows.

But now the country was becoming education-conscious and large state and federal appropriation of grants and aid, and also grants for construction, were being made to worthy institutions. Rochester was found worthy. We were on the move. First under the chairmanship of Joe Wilson and later carried on by his successor. The University is verging forth in its greatest expansion program in the last century and a quarter. During this period a new President had to be found to fill that position left vacant by the resignation of Dr. de Kiewiet, where personal health and that of his family was an ever-increasing worry and problem to him. As of the time of this interview, the last of his three children has just died – all of cancer. And both he and Mrs. de Kiewiet have been subject to the ravages of this disease. Fortunate indeed is the University that Allen Wallis <![if !supportFootnotes]> [20] <![endif]>  was selected to succeed Dr. de Kiewiet. <![if !supportFootnotes]> [21] <![endif]> But more fortunate still is the fact that Allen accepted the call. In the short time, measured in terms of years, he has surrounded himself with able assistants of the highest executive caliber-caliber. I refer of course to such men as Bob Sproull, now President <![if !supportFootnotes]> [22] <![endif]> – Allen is the Chancellor – Laroy Thompson, <![if !supportFootnotes]> [23] <![endif]> George Angle, <![if !supportFootnotes]> [24] <![endif]> and most recently Don Hess. <![if !supportFootnotes]> [25] <![endif]> It’s a great team. Mr. End, you asked me a single question and I have gone off into an elaborate exegesis of the highlights of the University for the past fifty years as I watched them.

And very well done, too, sir. Now, you were an outstanding athlete when you attended the U of R and one of the all-time greats in the history of basketball at the school. How do you think the college teams of those days would compare with the teams of today?

Mr. End, your question is very flattering. But I think it would be more accurate if you were to say that perhaps I was one of the better local players at that time. You further asked how do I think our teams of yesteryear would compare with those of today? I think today’s team would beat us at every department except two: spirit and drive. We developed a loyalty. Sometimes, I’m afraid, almost a belligerent loyalty to the University of Rochester. This loyalty I still have. It’s my college. My college, right or wrong.

What game or games stand out in your memory as being particularly interesting to you?

What games, or game stands out? I’d be less than honest if I didn’t admit that they were the games we won. But what particular game stands out would seem to be a difficult question to answer, as I happened to play in every varsity basketball game during my four years here. <![if !supportFootnotes]> [26] <![endif]> There was no freshmen rule at that time. But really it isn’t too difficult to answer that question, but I will mention just a couple of games. The first game of our 1912-13 season <![if !supportFootnotes]> [27] <![endif]> – that was my freshmen year – we played Cornell in the Alumni Gym. <![if !supportFootnotes]> [28] <![endif]> The final score: Rochester 13, Cornell 10. As you may surmise, there was body contact in that game. The U of R guards were coached to get the first man coming down the court. Johnny Carey <![if !supportFootnotes]> [29] <![endif]> was captain and played left guard, I right guard. Getting the first man coming down the court simply meant the offensive forward was forced by the defensive guard into the bleachers, hopefully into the lap of some charming lady fair, [laughs] as the bleachers came right down to the playing court. It wasn’t too bad an assignment. [laughs] In fairness to the visiting team, it should be admitted that the Alumni Gym was probably the most unfair court that any of them had ever played on. It was very narrow with bleachers I described, steel girders so low that they would block a high arch shot, poor lighting, wooden black-- backboards with heavy wire above, and an oblong court rather than a rectangular one. This unusual laboration [sic] made necessary to conform with the running track overhead. The home team knew all of these characteristics and played them. The visiting team didn’t know them and we didn’t tell them.

Probably the game that I really enjoyed the most of my four years was the game against Colgate at Hamilton, January the 20^th, 1914. The Rochester team was the best team on which I played during my four years. We lost only two games all season. Colgate was always good and we were playing on their home court. It was just a little band box and about as unfair to visiting teams as our own Alumni Gym. When the Colgate cheerleader led a cheer, the whole gym shuddered and reverberated. It was a din. Final score: Rochester 44, Colgate 9. <![if !supportFootnotes]> [30] <![endif]> The game ball – we only had one ball a game – is now resting in the trophy case in the Palestra, and I still get a warm glow of no- of nostalgia every time I go by it. When it comes to the U of R, I’m afraid I could go on indefinitely; probably I already have. But thank you, Mr. End for giving me this opportunity to reminisce about one of my favorite subjects.

Thank you, Mr. Hale.

[recording ends]

Transcribed by Megan Wilson (January 2014)