In 1927, President Birdwell reported to the Board of Regents, "The college has enjoyed during this time slow but continuous growth." This modest assessment, one that is historically accurate in retrospect, was not the assessment Birdwell made two years earlier. The college in late 1924 and the beginning of 1925 seemed on the brink of an explosion. The enrollment figures were certainly very encouraging. Regular term enrollment jumped from 263 to 594, and summer enrollment went from 419 to 745. With the sub college and the Demonstration students added in, the figures were 1070 students in 1923-24 and 1528 in 1924-25. From these numbers and from the congestion, Birdwell concluded in 1925, that "the most pressing problems of the college" were that they were "literally crowed 'out of house and home'." The classrooms and laboratories were overworked; there was insufficient study room for the students and too few faculty. "Many things that seemed impossible have been done, and the new college faces the future with confidence. ... the future is, I think, full of promise."

This week's SFA Heritage Series discusses the major expansion of the college symbolized by the construction of the "Thomas J. Rusk Library." With the Rusk addition, the campus facilities doubled. The new classroom building would allow for an expanded faculty and programs, although it is hard to tell from the data whether the building permitted expansion or expansion necessitated the building.

The tradition in almost every college at the time was to have "a main building" and "a library." There is every indication that this was the original plan for Stephen F. Austin from the time it was projected in 1917. There is an early hand drawn map in the archive showing the basic layout of the campus, before the existence of a Vista; the map shows the main road with two buildings on it. There is a large X through the Rusk Building. This map has the date 1924 written on it, but it is impossible to know whether the drawing was projected into the date or was drawn in that year. As is discussed in the interview with Miss Edna Wilkin this week, everyone in 1924 when they moved onto the campus was already calling the Austin Building - the "Main Building." President Birdwell did not like this and insisted that the name "Austin Building" be used.

The geography of the campus was beginning to change. Excluding the home of the president, the principle buildings in 1925 were the Austin Building, the Aikman Gym, the Power Plant, the Ag Shacks. Construction of the Rusk Building began in 1925; this is discussed in detail elsewhere. There was also a field complex, consisting of Birdwell Field, a track, and tennis courts. A wonderful picture which does not appear in any of the Stone Fort yearbooks of an intercollegiate sports event is being included this week. The intercollegiate sports events, however, did not include women. The Board of Regents at a meeting in June of 1925, decided "that no intercollegiate athletic contests be engaged in by the women students of the State Teachers Colleges."

Birdwell asked the Board to allow him to build some more temporary buildings to solve the space shortage. He recommend a frame building to house the training school. It was only going to cost three to four thousand dollars, which he knew would have to come out of local funds, but he argued that the frame building could be used for a host of things even after the Rusk Building was completed. This temporary building was actually built and later became the Band Shack. Other needs listed for use of the temporary building were as an office facilities for student activities, such as, the college paper, the college annual.

The President also asked for permission to use local funds, between $ 3000 and $4000, to pay the University's part of paving North street along the thirteen hundred feet of campus. Additionally, he requested authorization to remedy the lack of heating in the new Aikman Gym.

At the dedication of the Rusk Building in November of 1926, the Daily Sentinel editorial waxed: "Rising amid the stately pines of East Texas hills, a second "living monument" to education was accepted here today." It is interesting to note, however, how different the coverage in the Sentinel at the opening of the two buildings. Back in 1924, the Daily Sentinel covered local events with enormous gusto. They devoted a full front page and many subsequent pages to the opening of SFA and almost as much to the dedication of the Austin Building. By the time the Rusk Building was accepted, the Associated Press wire service was working. It must have been very much like our reactions to the vast resources on the Internet or World Wide Web. The coverage in the paper changed dramatically. The headlines for the opening of the Rusk Building got lost in the world events and scandals which were rocking the nation at the time and being reported in the Daily Sentinel. Nacogdoches' windows on the world were being opened. The events of the Depression and the Second World War would show how different the periods of newspaper coverage were. Some things, on the other hand, never change. The Lufkin-Nacogdoches football rivalry still got top billing in the daily coverage.

The Rusk Building is often confused with the Austin Building. The picture of the construction of the Rusk Building which appears next to this essay is frequently shown (as recently as the 1998 Stone Fort yearbook) as the Austin Building under construction. The two buildings did have the same architect, W. E. Ketchum, and used the same brick and the same general nineteenth century eclectic, beaux-arts style. The Rusk Building, however, has much more decoration than the Austin. The Building's front has elaborate stone work and many symbols, topped by the open book to represent its library function. The torches are symbolic of education as the stars are representations for the State of Texas. The end sections on the front are more pronounced than on the Austin Building. While done in this antique style, it was considered to be very modern inside, especially the circulating cold water. The Rusk Library is discussed in detail in a separate essay, as is the "rare book room" which was a part of it.

An expanding faculty

New faculty were being hired each year. The personnel problem was almost as difficult to solve as the space problem for Birdwell. In May of 1926, he told the Board, "Every inch of space is being used practically every hour of every day. We have not had enough teachers. The teachers have been carrying full loads, and it has been necessary for the president to teach two or three classes each term. This lack of teachers could not be helped. Our appropriations bill for last year did not provide enough money to secure sufficient faculty members. As a matter of fact, when the budget was made up it was thought by the college authorities that it would amply take care of the situation. Our growth, particularly of college students has been more than we expected....We must have sufficient teachers." Birdwell hoped the new building would relieve the pressure.

Some professors changed their departments. William R. Davis is a good example. He was hired as an associate professor of history; in 1929 he became the first director of the education department and remained so until retirement in 1947. He attended Peabody College as did many of the early SFA faculty and did not receive his Ph.D. until 1934, from Columbia.

There were, however, many new professors on the 1925-26 list. For example: Leora McNess, Art; M. Jessie Hickman, Business Administration; Harmon Lowman, Education; Leila Brown, Critic Teacher: Barbara Birdwell, Critic Teacher; Edna Phillips, Critic Teacher; Henry A. Pochmann, English; Ruth Virginia Fouts, English; Elizabeth Tucker, Home Economics; Lela Oxsheer, Mathematics; Lucile Summers, Piano; Thelma Jagoe, Physical Education For Women; Rosalie Biggio, Physical Education For Women; C. C. Johnson, Chemistry; Mary Ann McKinney, Biology And English; L. C. Harling, History; Fay Hamilton, Assistant Librarian.

One new faculty member in 1926, Dr. William Chambers in geography, was interviewed by Dr. Joy Reeves back in the 1970s. Chambers remembered meeting Birdwell for the first time. "I walked up to the college [Austin Building], entered, and found a room on main floor labeled Library. There I met the librarian, Loulein Harris. ... Somehow word reached President Birdwell that I was on the campus and he came, found me in the hall by the library room, told me who he was, and I recalled he said, 'Your qualifications for the position here are just about perfect. You are a graduate of a teachers college, you have the Ph.D. degree, and you have taught at Peabody College.' I want you to know he said 'that the sky is the limit.' You can go just as far here as you are able."

Birdwell addressed Chambers as "Doctor." Chambers continued, "That was quite new to me and I said 'You don't need to call me doctor.' To that he responded, "I will call you doctor."

Women teachers were forced to resign if they got married. Miss Virginia Broadfoot had to resign due to school policy when she married Joe Dalton in 1929. Thelma Jagoe became the head of the Physical Education Department upon Broadfoot's forced resignation, but the next year Miss Jagoe was forced to retire when she married L. C. Harling, a member of the history faculty.

Salaries and retirement were important issues in 1926. The presidents in the system were worried that they were becoming second class citizens; the senior college funding was pulling away from that of the teacher colleges and were enticing the faculty away to better paying positions. To Birdwell's disgust, the salaries for his faculty did not get any better, but then, neither did his. There was an attempt by the Board to raise the salaries of the presidents to $6,000 in 1926, but the Legislature did not approve this move. The Board set a mandatory retirement age of 70 in 1926. Birdwell was instrumental in getting this feature validated, but later when he reached 70, he did not think it was such a good idea.

The Board of Regents frowned on political activity among the faculty and upheld the dismissal of a teacher because it was shown he had "taken an active part in practically all partisan politics during the seven years he had been at San Marcos." The Board requested that another professor "refrain from further political activities." The resolution was passed in 1925 "that each President of each State Teachers College in Texas, notify all members of their faculties that they are employed by the State to teach, and are not employed as politicians; and that they should refrain from participating in partisan politics, and that to do so will jeopardize their positions."

The student body, according to one of Birdwell's reports, was improving during the 1925-27 period. The number in the upper classes was increasing. The President said, "Many of the students receiving these degrees began their college career with us when we were in the shack on the high school campus." The first graduating class was modest. Of course, in 1925, anyone who graduated had to have had credits transferred from some other college. The first class and enrollment are also discussed in separate articles this week. Once again, however, the mercurial nature of the statistics being used and cited are a problem. This report is based on the official ledger that J. H. Wisely produced, but even with this document, one cannot get any consistency from the formulas being used. To reach the totals which are reached in Wisely's charts, different elements must be added from year to year. The figures are not doctored; on the contrary, they are understated frequently. The problem: where do you count the students in the sub-college? The melding of the sub-college students into the Demonstration School solved the issue after 1930.

An Inventory

As of May 30, 1926, at the end of the SFA's third academic year, about mid-way through the construction of the Rusk Building, J. H. Wisely, the college auditor, did an inventory of the school's assets. This inventory dated June 21, 1926, contains several interesting facts worthy of comment. Wisely assigned book or appraised values, a total of $419, 965.85 for the entire campus.

Administration Building and Power House .................................$176,708.14

Thomas J. Rusk, Under Construction, (Cost to Date) .................106,328.09

Athletic Field......................4,611.72

Land and Improvements....... 27,801.55

Aikman Gymnasium............17,960.23

School Farm (Appraised)......25,000.00

Temporary Shack....................891.08

Department Equipment .........23,680.83

General Equipment .............13,659.25

Office Equipment..................3,375.91

Library Books ...................17,258.39

Library Furniture..................1,145.34

Shop (Auto Mechanics)..........1,145.32

Total..............................419,965.85

Projected for the years 1928-29, Birdwell summarized that the college would need major paving improvements, a farm house and dairy barns, a home economics practice cottage, and an auditorium and fine arts building. The estimate for the last item was $250,000.

Reflections

What Birdwell could not know in 1925 as he began the push for the expansion of the campus facilities, or even in 1927 as he made plans for the future, was that the enrollment at the college was about to level off at the 2,000 student mark. The enrollment totals remained remarkably even in the range of 1900 to 2200 for more than a decade, with one small dip in 1932-1933 during the height of the Depression. In other words, the growth rate which was felt in 1925 could not be sustained in subsequent years. His fight in the 1930s was to keep the doors open. Construction of an auditorium and fine arts building would have to wait until the end of the Boynton presidency in the late 1950s. The initial building era at SFA was over. The later Birdwell buildings, which will receive attention in later editions, came in the mid-to-late thirties and were federally funded programs during the Depression. The state funds for building at SFA were exhausted with the building of the Rusk Building. Birdwell saw the funds drying up even in 1927: "The Fortieth Legislature was not very liberal with the college. ... Nothing was allowed for permanent improvement or for repairs, and very meager appropriations were made for maintenance and miscellaneous items. However, with the strictest economy the college can be maintained and grow."