Americans might have taken some comfort from the fact that these critics also expressed similar misgivings about Rhodes Scholars coming from elsewhere. Isis, a student publication, lampooned Australians as good-for-nothings who badly needed education. The university's Public Orator feared an outbreak of boomerang throwing in the quads. Varsity warned that a handful of German Rhodes Scholars would initiate a Teutonic invasion. A poem in Oxford Magazine feared that some of the arriving colonials would be primitive head-hunters set on decapitating the dons or “mussulmen” who would insist on bringing along their “thirty-seven moon-eyed wives.”7
In the United States the response to the will likewise was divided, but for different reasons. Most newspapers and magazines were mildly favorable. Only a handful of writers were enthusiastic. One of these was Louis Dyer, whose article in The Outlook expressed the hope that the program would foster further international student exchanges and help the United States to fulfill the Renaissance dream of a “Republic of Letters.”8
Many American academic and business leaders were dubious. Several university presidents said that students would be better off studying at American universities. This was especially true for those interested in science, an area in which even Oxford admitted it lagged far behind the better American institutions. Moreover, several university presidents noted that Oxford was still primarily an undergraduate teaching institution. Only in the 1890s had it instituted some advanced degrees, which did not as yet include a doctorate.
Harvard President Charles William Eliot suggested that Rhodes Scholars would benefit much more if they studied in German universities. Stanford President David Starr Jordan resigned himself to the existence of the program by noting that “the chief value of a scholarship at Oxford is the opportunity of studying in Germany during the vacation.”9 The universities there were reputed to be the best in Europe, especially for students pursuing doctorates. Thousands of Americans had already obtained advanced degrees in Berlin, Heidelberg, and elsewhere – compared to a much smaller number of Americans in Oxford and Cambridge. Most of the founders and early leaders of the American Historical Association in the 1880s and 1890s, for example, were products of German universities. As American universities expanded in the twentieth century, they would mostly follow German models. (It should be noted that within a few years, except for Eliot, Jordan and most other college officials surrendered their doubts and became ardent proponents of the Rhodes Scholarships.)
Other Americans raised yet additional objections. Some claimed that virile young men would be corrupted by the effete, sterile classicism of Oxford. The number of Anglophobes in the United States was higher than usual when the will was made public, owing to the Boer War. Many Americans thus objected to any scheme that would foster closer relations with Britain and perhaps even weaken the patriotism of young Americans for their native country. Andrew Carnegie stoutly proclaimed that no young Americans would even want the scholarships. Americans, he said, were interested in money and could not afford to postpone their careers by spending three years at Oxford. The zealous Anglophile Henry James also opposed the scholarships, though for a starkly different reason. He agreed with many in Britain that Oxford would be sullied by the advent of unwashed, unlettered rustics.10
The subsequent history of the Rhodes Scholarships would show that some of the apprehensions expressed on both sides of the Atlantic were groundless but that others were prophetic.
Selecting the “Perfect Men”
In the spring of 1902 the Rhodes Trustees held their first meetings under the leadership of Lord Rosebery, who had served as British prime minister from 1894 to 1895. The trustees took charge of disposing of Rhodes' real estate and investing the liquid capital. They quickly decided that they themselves would not be able to handle the actual management of the scholarship program. Therefore they appointed two other individuals to perform those duties. They were Dr. George Parkin and Francis Wylie. Parkin would be Organizing Secretary and Wylie the Oxford Secretary. The trustees could not have made better choices. The Rhodes Scholarships were not a sure thing in 1902. That the program survived and prospered was in no small part due to Parkin and Wylie. Each of them over the years was often called the second founder of the scholarships. Eventually their work was recognized by the government, with each man being knighted.
Parkin's selection seemed odd at first to some observers. He was a fifty-six-year old Canadian. Prior to his appointment as Organizing Secretary he was serving in Toronto as headmaster of Upper Canada College, a prep school along the lines of the best British public schools. But Parkin proved ideal for his new job. He was an Oxford graduate. In fact, he had matriculated on the same day as Cecil Rhodes in 1873, though there is no evidence that the two knew each other then or later. In his first term at Oxford Parkin had been elected secretary of the Union, and in its chambers he won fame for his debates on behalf of the British Empire. Following graduation he pursued a career in Canada, Australia, and England as a spokesman for the Church of England and for the Imperial Federation League. His interest in bringing colonials into closer relations with Britain made him ideally suited to carry out Rhodes' dream of Anglo-Saxon unity and world peace. His eloquence, good humor, and personal charm would also be important. From 1902 until his retirement in 1920, Parkin administered the program and spent much of his time traveling to the United States, Germany, and the dominions and colonies within the Empire.
When it became clear that Parkin would not be able to watch over the scholars once they had arrived at the university, early in 1903 the trustees appointed Wylie to the post of Oxford Secretary.11 Wylie was a fellow of Brasenose College, where he tutored and lectured in philosophy. He gave up the security and perquisites of an Oxford don to take on the risky challenges of making Rhodes' plan work. The fact that he was a well-respected, academic “insider” would prove to be of immense importance for his new work. Until his retirement in 1931 it was he who labored to gain admittance for Rhodes Scholars into the various colleges – for the latter insisted that the foreigners meet the same requirements as other students. Wylie and his wife would also serve as confessors, mentors, travel advisors, and tea party hosts.
Parkin's immediate task in 1902 and 1903 was to establish a system for selecting the scholars. Germany presented no problem, for Rhodes' will stipulated that the Kaiser would choose the five annual winners. South Africa also had a fairly simple mechanism for its seven scholars. Rhodes had specified that the four scholars from Cape Colony would come from four schools that he listed. The heads of those schools could nominate one of their students each year. Natal had one scholarship and Rhodesia three. Parkin immediately appointed the Directors of Education in those two territories to select the winners. As for Canada, Jamaica, Bermuda, and the United States, Rhodes had outlined no selection procedure. For this and for most other aspects of the administration of the program Rhodes gave his trustees – and through them Parkin – great leeway.
Parkin immediately corrected what he saw as several flaws in Rhodes' scheme. Concluding that Canada had been given too few scholarships, he increased its number from three to nine.12 Regarding the United States, the will had simply specified two per state.
Some detractors have accused Rhodes of being so ignorant about the United States that he assumed there were still only thirteen states. However, his financial calculations indicate that he anticipated supporting up to one hundred Americans. After his death the trustees and Parkin quickly decided that they could support thirty-two new Americans per year, this making ninety-six residing in Oxford at any given time.13 One final revision Parkin and others deemed necessary concerned the age of the scholars. Rhodes clearly expected that they would come to Oxford straight from secondary school. In Oxford they would join other eighteen-year-old “freshers” for three years of study. Parkin wisely judged that most eighteen-year-old high school graduates from the United States and elsewhere would be unprepared emotionally and academically for the experience. He decided that all scholars must have completed at least two years of university study prior to going to Oxford. Their added maturity and training would better prepare them for separation from their families and for the rigors of Oxford.
Henceforth