most of these occupations, men are looking for reward in other than financial returns. The lawyers begin to earn principally in the fourth year. Their income increases rapidly from $1,376 in the fourth year to $1,994 in the fifth. It is a presage of what awaits the lawyers in future years. It will be seen that in law, engineering and business, men who attended professional schools are differentiated from those who did not. In the two professions, law and engineering, the men who did not take the extra time at the graduate professional schools are in each case at the fifth year about $100 ahead of the men who did. There is hardly enough data in these cases to afford much. more than an indication, but this is interesting. The professional school men have hardly had an opportunity yet to demonstrate their capacity, but whether they will outdistance the others in the long run or not, it will be interesting to watch. The "non-graduate professional school men" among the engineers are largely the C.E. men from Princeton. The others are those who added a technical school course to their Princeton work. The "non-professional school men" among the lawyers are those who got their law chiefly in offices. The relation between the professional and the non-professional school men among the business men is reversed from that in the two professions. The few professional school men in business are ahead of the others by over $600. In the two tables of comparison of the Classes of 1901 and 1906, a study seems to reveal the fact that the chief differences between these or any other classes are not in the earnings of the general number of men. It is in the earnings of the minority, the comparatively few who are specialists and may enjoy peculiar advantages of special opportunities, that the chief differences in the final averages lie. These differences seem to be a matter of individuality varying rather widely in different classes. Thus, it will be seen by a study of Table 4, comparing the two classes by occupations, that in those pursuits wherein a large number of answers have been received, the results are strikingly even in the two classes. The manufacturers of 1906 in the fifth year, earned $3,008, with those of 1901 very close in earnings of $2,854. The business men are still closer, 1906 showing $2,452 and 1901, $2,344. In law, the difference is about the same with the order reversed, 1901 show ing $2,094 and 1906, $1,994. Between the engineers of 1906 with earnings of $1,877 and those of 1901 with $1,878.18, there is only the difference of $1.18. These are the largest groups of both classes. Many of the others differ widely. Whether the five years' difference between the two classes with the accompanying variance in conditions of rates of earnings as prevailing in the country at the two periods is responsible for the generally higher returns recorded for the younger class, is an interesting speculation. It can only, of course, be a speculation, but there appears to be some indication in the figures that the "high cost of living" of recent years is in a measure reflected. For instance, it will be noticed that the proportion of difference between the two classes is constantly decreased with progressing years. A glance over the first year returns in Table 4 shows that the first year returns for 1906 are decidedly larger than those of 1901 in all groups, large and small. This is not so in the large groups in the fifth year. It is true of course that the increased cost of living must necessarily show first and most prominently in the salaries and earnings of small amount. It would therefore seem to be a small indication that there has been a boost in the level of salaries brought about partly at least by the increased cost of living in the five years between 1901 and 1906. This reasoning would appear to fall to the ground by a comparison with the returns from the Class of 1906 at Yale, which are not far different from those of 1901. It must be remembered, however, that conditions may differ very materially in two universities, especially in those special pursuits which have been shown to differ so much between classes. Also, the detailed report of the Yale returns by occupations is not at hand. The fundamental revealed in the income tables is the steady increase that men in all occupations have made from year to year. By the fifth year, there is not an occupation in the list with an average below $1,100, with the exception of the special instance. of farming, in which there is no fair average. The number of individuals who have attained to positions of very decided financial comfort in the first five years out of college is shown in Table 5, as well as in Table 6 in the high level of the uppermost range of fifth year incomes. The class may boast that it has produced two of those men who Mr. George W. Perkins complains are so rare these days,-$10,000 a year men. TABLE NO. 5 NUMBER OF INCOMES AT THE FIFTH YEAR ABOVE $5,000 YEARLY, CLASS OF 1906 TABLE NO 6 The High and Low Incomes, Classified by Occupations, Class of 1906 5. Mining 1,000 1,800 1,800 7,000 1,800 6. Banking 780 500 2,500 600 6,000 800 7. Advertising 780 520 1,100 1,100 2,600 900 1,800 1,800 6,000 1,820 8. Real Estate & Insurance 1,000 700 800 800 1,500 1,500 5,000 900 HOW THE CLASS CHOSE ITS WORK. ITS SATIS FACTION In order to find out how many college men definitely plan for the work they engage in after college and what proportion leave it to be decided after they are graduated, the questions to which the following tables, No. 7 and 8, are the answers, were asked. The tables are self-explanatory. The following summary of the main points indicated in the tables is given. Fifty-one per cent of the Class definitely chose their work. After getting into the game, however, more than this number, or 68 per cent have determined to stick to the work they started at. However they got into their work, whether by direct choice. or through arrangement of circumstances, most of the Class, or 85 |