THE STUDY OF ADMINISTRATION

MARSHALL E. DIMOCK
University of Chicago

It is now fifty years since Woodrow Wilson wrote his brilliant

essay on public administration.' It is a good essay to reread every
so often; there is so much in it that sounds modern, so much that
will hold permanently true. "It is getting to be harder to run a
constitution than to frame one." Was this said only yesterday?
No, Woodrow Wilson clearly saw the importance of governmental
administration half a century ago. "Administration is the most
obvious part of government; it is government in action; it is the
executive, the operative, the most visible side of government, and is
of course as old as government itself." Yet democracies have badly
neglected administrative principles and structural improvements.
"Like a lusty child, government with us has expanded in nature
and grown great in stature, but has also become awkward in move-
ment.... English and American political history has been a
history, not of administrative development, but of legislative
oversight-not of progress in governmental organization, but of
advance in law-making and political criticism.... We go on criti-
cising when we ought to be creating."2
Political scientists owe Woodrow Wilson a debt of gratitude for
opening their eyes to the broader importance and implications of
administration. His keen mind also discerned the task which would
occupy the attention of administrative theorists long after he was
gone: "The principles on which to base a science of administration
for America," he said, "must be principles which have democratic
policy very much at heart." More clearly now than then, we realize
that "we should not like to have had Prussia's history for the sake
of having Prussia's administrative skill.... It is better to be un-
trained and free than to be servile and systematic. Still there is no
denying that it would be better yet to be both free in spirit and
proficient in practice."3 Freedom and democratic effectiveness may
be one and the same thing. The ends of the state can be achieved
only through an efficient administrative instrument. Hence, as
Woodrow Wilson correctly observed, administration is "raised very

I Woodrow Wilson, "The Study of Administration," Political Science Quarterly,

Vol. 2, No. 2 (June, 1887), pp. 197-222.
2 Ibid., p. 203ff. 3 Ibid., p. 207.
28
 THE STUDY OF ADMINISTRATION 29

far above the dull level of mere technical detail by the fact that
through its greater principles it is directly connected with the last-
ing maxims of political wisdom, the permanent truths of political
progress. "4
Public administration is a process or a theory, not merely an
accumulation of detailed facts. It is Verwaltungslehre. The object
of administrative study should be to discover, first, what govern-
ment can properly and successfully do, and secondly, how it can
do these proper things with the utmost possible efficiency and at
the least possible cost both of money and of energy.
Administration is generic.5 It is a social science concept which
applies to all organized group activity. Administration arises when-
ever organization occurs. There are common problems and proc-
esses in the household, the school, the church, the business
corporation, and the vast modern state. After deciding upon objec-
tives, means must be devised for carrying out the program. This
latter process is administration. Anyone who is responsible for
directing the work of others thereby becomes an administrator.
An adequate theory of society must obviously be based upon a
knowledge of administration. The importance of administration is
in direct ratio to the complexity of inter-personal relationships and
the number and utility of joint services. The more things that are
done for the individual, the greater becomes the importance of
organization. Many of society's most difficult problems, such as
security for the individual and uninterrupted economic progress,
boil down largely to matters of proper organization.
Ours has become an "administered" society. In spite of our wish-
ful thinking to the contrary, complexity demands organization.
With the growth of large business units, our economic life is seen
as one whose results depend upon good administration. "Gradually
but steadily," says Gardiner Means, "great segments of economic
activity have been shifted from the market place to administra-
tion." In the development of further administrative coordination,
concludes Dr. Means, economists "must come to political scientists
for aid. We ask that you apply to the field of economic administra-
tion the technique of analysis and principles of organization which

I Ibid., p. 210.
6 It is significant that instead of qualifying the term with "public" or "govern-
mental," Woodrow Wilson wrote merely about administration.
30 THE AMERICAN POLITICAL SCIENCE REVIEW

you have developed in the study of the state."' Whenever social

organizations are formed, common problems of organization, lead-
ership, control, personnel, finance, and public relations are bound
to arise. It is no exaggeration to say that in the future the balance
of power among social institutions, and the survival value of each,
will depend upon the relative success which each attains in apply-
ing administrative principles to the increasing concentration and
complexity found in all fields of activity.
Because administration is the most obvious aspect of group
activity, those who are unfamiliar with it are apt to assume that
executive operations are not very difficult. By the same token, the
study of administration is sometimes thought to be dismal and
quite lacking in important theoretical considerations. These are
mistaken notions. The competence of administration sets the limits
of popular rule and democratic effectiveness. The state in action
comes up against the imponderables which make government the
most difficult of all fields of study. The carrying out of a program
depends, in the last analysis, upon citizen compliance and coopera-
tion. For every structural problem there are three or four psycho-
logical ones. Dry-as-dust administration does not do very much;
successful executive leadership requires the combination of the
best directive and personal qualifications which man can supply.
Administration is both social engineering and applied psychol-
ogy. It is apparatus and mechanics, incentives and human nature.
Let no one think it is merely the former. Nowhere is the need for
psychology greater than in the organization, direction, and inspi-
ration of men working in large groups. Outstanding administrative
results are produced by spirit, morale, atmosphere; these, in turn,
are the product of psychological mainsprings and invigorating in-
centives. As Benjamin Lippincott has recognized, both govern-
mental and business administration resolve fundamentally into the
role played by effective incentives.7
Modern governmental administration is a new synthesis. It is
necessarily concerned with all fields of knowledge and all matters
6 "The realm of political science is, or lies within, the realm of social associations
or administrative organizations," points out Dr. Means. Public administration, as
viewed by Woodrow Wilson or Gardiner Means, constitutes the bulk of govern-
ment-its very essence. See Means' article, "The Distribution of Control and Re-
sponsibility in a Modern Economy," in a symposium edited by Benjamin E.
Lippincott, Government Control of the Economic Order (Minneapolis, 1935), pp. 1-17.
7 In the "Conclusion" to the symposium cited, p. 118.
 THE STUDY OF ADMINISTRATION 31

which enter into the carrying out of official policies and programs.
Administration is a means to an end. Hence, as tasks and objec-
tives change, the instrument is also refashioned. That is why public
administration may properly be called a "new" synthesis. Fifty
years ago, with remarkable foresight, Woodrow Wilson visualized
the kind of synthesis it should be; we have just about caught up
with his concept.
Consider all of the fields from which administration must needs
draw. History and political philosophy tell us what government
has done in the past and what it is likely to do well. What the state
is expected to do today is expressed in the law. "Every particular
application of general law is an act of administration." The study
also has roots in sociology, anthropology, and economics. The
administrator seeks to solve problems; these are usually surrounded
by complex social situations which allied social science disciplines
help to explain. Administration does not operate in a vacuum. The
public servant's subject-matter is medicine, engineering, law,
finance, school-teaching, social service, or any one of dozens of
other fields. Somewhere or other in government, every vocation
and profession is represented. A knowledge of psychology is pecul-
iarly involved in leadership, personnel, and public relations. Are-
al delimitation, organization, and control make use of engineering
and rationalization factors. Economics supplies standards of meas-
urement and evaluation, while public finance indicates the lines
of fiscal policy.
Administration is concerned with "the what,' and "the how,
of government. The "what" is the subject-matter, the technical
knowledge of a field which enables an administrator to perform
his tasks. The "how" is the techniques of management, the prin-
ciples according to which cooperative programs are carried through
to success. Each is indispensable; together, they form the synthesis
called administration. It is estimated that sixty per cent of all
civil engineers are now publicly employed. What percentage of
them know the "how" of governmental operations? The same ques-
tion may appropriately be asked about school teachers, social
service workers, and many other groups of public employees. All
too many departments are filled with employees who "do not
know their way around." Government suffers for want of executive
leadership and aggressive administration.
The field of administration, then, is concerned with the problems
32 THE AMERICAN POLITICAL SCIENCE REVIEW

and powers, the organization, and the techniques of management

according to which policy and program are carried out. The major
policies are determined for the management either by a legislature,
a board of directors, or some other policy agency. But this does not
mean that the administrative side of the institution is unconcerned
with law and policy. Increasingly in all large enterprises, whether
business or governmental, the professional administrators are re-
lied upon for advice and proposed programs. Then too, the execu-
tive branch is called upon to fill in the details of general laws, by
means of sub-legislation, discretionary acts, the creation of stand-
ards, and decisions between the rights of parties in disagreement.
The starting point of every administrator is an understanding of
the law or laws that he is expected to carry out; he needs to inter-
pret law into terms of policy and program.
Today we cannot accept unqualifiedly the generalization of
Woodrow Wilson to the effect that "the field of administration is
a field of business. It is removed from the hurry and strife of poli-
tics; it at most points stands apart even from the debatable ground
of constitutional study. It is a part of political life only as the
methods of the counting-house are a part of the life of society."8
Many is the time that officials have wished that this were
true. But it is not; politics (in the sense of law or policy) runs all
the way through administration. Group pressures operate directly
and ceaselessly upon every branch and subdivision of public ad-
ministration. Professor Herring's new book shows that when in-
terest groups do not get what they want from the legislature they
pursue the administration, and that when the lawmaking body
capitulates, the organized interests keep tab on the executive
agency to be sure that it performs its work to the group's satisfac-
tion. One of the commonest expressions of the public servant is
"every bureau has its clientele."
Woodrow Wilson also erred in believing that administration has
no close connection with the constitutional system and the general
framework of government.9 Inadequate machinery is the principal
cause of administrative inefficiency and ineffectiveness. In the last
fifty years, there has been a remarkable improvement in the com-
petence of public personnel and the methods employed by govern-
ments. In these respects, public administration has greatly out-

8 Wilson, op. cit., pp. 209-210. 9 Ibid., p. 211.

 THE STUDY OF ADMINISTRATION 33

distanced business management. For example, in the installation

and use of office techniques and labor-saving devices, such agencies
as the United States Census Bureau and the British Post Office
Savings Bank have stood in a class of their own, leaders for industry
as well as for government. Where government fails is in the articu-
lation of the levels of government, failure to abolish or consolidate
needless political subdivisions, and in the discouraging slowness
with which individual governments are reorganized and modern-
ized. This is the realm of machinery. Until the mechanism is put into
working order, competent administrators and modern techniques
are ineffective, or at best only partially successful. Constitutional
reform is the condition precedent to most far-reaching administra-
tive improvements. If the basic design is wrong, minor repairs are
bound to prove disappointing. This means that federal decentraliza-
tion, regional devolution, county consolidation, the rationalization
of special districts, and the internal reorganization of our larger
governments are the most needed reforms in public administration.
The most brilliant executive is sometimes broken by an inflexible
and utterly unworkable organization system. Here government is
handicapped. Business corporations can change their organizations
whenever the president recognizes the need of it. Public officials
must await the slowness and uncertainty of constitutional change.
Political science would do well to level heavy guns on the amassed
lethargy which stands in the way of structural reforms.
The American constitutional system of checks and balances
makes it difficult to put into operation tried and tested principles
of public administration. The lines of responsibility are not clearly
marked. Unity of management is hard to achieve because of the
fact that the executive is not recognized as the indisputable head
of the administrative departments and independent establish-
ments. Executive leadership and administrative control are effec-
tive only when the confines of the administrative hierarchy are defi-
nite, all units are included, and the lines of authority are simple.
In the cabinet form of government, in the city-manager plan, and
in the corporate set-up, responsibility and unity are assured. The
same superiority is found in the use of staff services. It is the func-
tion of personnel, finance, and other staff officers to be helpful to
the chief executive; staff persons should never issue orders directly
to line officers. This is a universal principle of good administration.
When the constitutional system incorporates responsibility at its
34 THE AMERICAN POLITICAL SCIENCE REVIEW

center, all staff services can readily be made to occupy their proper
position. Not so, though, the American system of checks and bal-
ances: the civil service commission becomes a "control" agency;
the chief finance officer is the servant of the legislature.
If a democratic people really desires the government to seek as-
siduously the ends of the state, it will construct the constitutional
system so that the administration will be responsible and unified.
The checks and balances system makes it necessary and inevitable
to violate public administration's central principles. In a realistic
analysis, the intimate interdependence of the constitutional and
administrative structures will be closely observed.'0 The fixity of
our written constitution, the multiplicity of our governing units,
and the failure to provide for responsible leadership and adminis-
tration make our constitutional system a difficult one within which
to build principles of public administration.
Some may question whether we know enough about administra-
tive principles (or possibly whether there is enough that can be
learned) to make a comparison between the rival claims of consti-
tutionalism and administrative requisites. This is a fair question,
because first principles have been relatively slow in emerging. How-
ever, this backwardness is due more to neglect in research than to
the mysterious or impoverished character of the subject-matter.
What are the component parts of public administration? About
what subjects can principles possibly be formulated? The principal
questions concern objectives, area, organization, finance, personnel,
techniques of management, public relations, and external control.
Whenever a cooperative program is to be set in motion, the logic
and precedence are roughly as follows: what is to be done; what is
the proper area; what form should the organization take; how shall
it be controlled and operated; from what source shall its funds
come; how shall the personnel be chosen and its interests cared
for; what attention needs to be given to public interests and atti-
tudes; and what forms of external control, if any, are necessary?
Planning is the first and most important step in administration.
10 There needs to be a closer working relationship between public law and public
administration. I cannot agree with Woodrow Wilson that the distinction between
constitutional and administrative questions is that "between those governmental
adjustments which are essential to constitutional principle and those which are
merely instrumental to the possibly changing purposes of a wisely adapting con-
venience." Basic design controls, and unless altered will rob administration of its
vitality for social accomplishment.
 THE STUDY OF ADMINISTRATION 35

The objectives of the program must be carefully thought out, and

the administrative goals and procedures must also be given serious
attention. Only when objectives are formulated clearly is an enter-
prise likely to develop a corporate philosophy and institutional
esprit de corps. The goals determine, to a considerable extent, the
administrative methods which will be found most efficacious.
Strangely enough, many enterprises, among them some very large
ones, fail in the first and most important step, the planning func-
tion.
There are some objectives of good administration which are
sought by every form of enterprise, public and private, business
and non-commercial. In the first place, as we have already sug-
gested, there needs to be unity of management. This means that
there can be only one recognized head of the organization, that all
essential parts are joined and move forward together, and that con-
trol and direction of the going concern from the outside will not be
tolerated. Unity is necessary for planning, synchronization, con-
trol, effective leadership, and esprit de corps. In the second place,
the administrative entity should be flexible. It should be able to
respond to changes in markets, technology, and tastes. Stated
negatively, the enterprise should be free from red tape and rigid
regulations and procedures. This suggests a third desideratum,
namely, responsiveness. The establishment should look outward,
not merely inward. This is to say that all procedures and attitudes
should be attuned to consumer wishes and requirements. The out-
ward, responsive attitude on the part of administrators is the crux
of what has latterly been called "public relations." Finally, great
administration is characterized by atmosphere, spirit-an institu-
tional quality which is pleasing. This end-product of good manage-
ment is the result of a combination of factors, chief among which
are outstanding executive leadership, adherence to sound manage-
ment principles, and considerate treatment of employees and cus-
tomers.
It is not necessary to catalogue in detail principles of public
administration for all of the component parts of the field. Our
present purpose is to make it clear that theoretical formulations
are indispensable in this age of large-scale enterprise, that there
are universal rules to be uncovered, and that attention to the
theoretical systematization of administration is badly and urgently
needed. Concerning administrative areas, for example, we may
36 THE AMERICAN POLITICAL SCIENCE REVIEW

postulate the rule that boundaries should correspond as closely as

possible to the composite of major problems within an area, ade-
quate attention being given to administrative convenience, finan-
cial economy, and cultural attachments. Organization principles
aim at a structure in which all authority is concentrated in the
chief executive, lines of responsibility are hierarchical, staff officers
clear through officials of the line, adequate attention is given to
staff services, sufficient freedom is guaranteed to operating heads,
and the entire organization is meshed at hierarchical levels and
simply controlled at the top. There should be no more departments
than there are necessary functions, and in no case more than the
chief executive can control within the span of his attention and
competence. The greater a person's responsibility, the more he
needs to delegate tasks and the greater is the need for staff assist-
ance. Personnel work should never assume control functions; its
purpose is to help the executive plan and think. Accounting and
auditing are separate responsibilities and should be treated accord-
ingly in the organizational set-up. It is even more important that
the executive should lead than that he should control. Authority
and responsibility should be coequal. The objects of public relations
are to understand and to be appreciated. Finally, regular checks
should be provided for the prevention or punishment of illegality,
arbitrariness, discrimination, or discourtesy. The administrator
should serve all, and none with special favor.
Principles of administration are applicable to all fields of human
activity. Their equal applicability is particularly striking when
very large enterprises are compared. The management problems
and procedures in the American Telephone and Telegraph Com-
pany, for instance, are not unlike those which obtain in the federal
government. Officials of the A. T. & T. find their most difficult
management problems in the relation between headquarters and
field, in reconciling operating autonomy and over-all control, in
keeping delay and other evidences of red tape at a minimum. Any
large government is constantly struggling with the same problems.
Where is a sufficient supply of executive ability to be recruited,
and how are men of extraordinary ability to be pulled up to the
top without injuring the morale of those less gifted? Every large
enterprise is perplexed by these problems. Even the undue influence
of the Comptroller-General in federal administration has parallels
in large corporations; it is always difficult to keep the finance man
 THE STUDY OF ADMINISTRATION 37

effective and at the same time in his proper place. The larger business
enterprises become, the more like governments they are. "Bureau-
cracy is inherent," confess business executives; "the only question
is whether its objectionable characteristics are ineradicable."
None the less, there are important differences between large
corporate enterprises and our larger governmental administrations.
Democratic government creates distinctive problems for public
administration. As a rule, only one difference is emphasized: the
fact that most private businesses are judged by profitability and
most government departments seek only the greatest amount of
service. This difference is important, because, as we have already
said, administration is ultimately reducible to effective incentives.
However, we should not permit this factor of undoubted impor-
tance to withdraw our attention entirely from other governmental
differences.
Business administration is essentially a dictatorship, or at any
rate a monarchy. Administration under a democracy, on the other
hand, is deliberately limited and checked. This difference in what
may be called constitutional theory accounts, in part, for the unity
of management which business management easily achieves and
which government administration finds it so difficult to accomplish
within the confines of the democratic structure. Hence, too, the
greater freedom of corporate executives to make changes in organi-
zation, to be responsive to new situations, and to react quickly to
consumer desires.
Governmental administration is less responsive than business
management because it is more accountable. It must adhere to the
law; this being the case, meticulous regulations are promulgated.
Business executives are not so circumscribed. They may change
rules and regulations when it suits their convenience or when the
interests of the business seem to require it. The necessity of legal
compliance is the principal cause of government red tape. In its
name, of course, regulations and red tape may be carried much
farther than they need to be. One of the chief means of improving
governmental administration is to reduce the number of inflexible
regulations which, like a set of law-books, the administrator has
before him on his desk. How to make administration flexible and
responsive and at the same time legally accountable and consti-
tutionally responsible-this is one of the most difficult adjustments
of democratic government.
38 THE AMERICAN POLITICAL SCIENCE REVIEW

Another advantage enjoyed by business management is the

greater continuity of policy and executive leadership. It takes time
and continuity to give programs a fair trial, to build up a unified
administration, and to develop attachments to leaders and to the
service. There are few such unbroken periods in a representative
government. When one party is voted out and another in, old poli-
cies are likely to be stopped and new ones begun, whilst new faces
appear in executive posts. These starts and stops, changes of leader-
ship and losses of experience, are part of the cost which a people
must expect to pay for popular rule. The price is not too high.
Moreover, the upsetting consequences can be mitigated by pro-
ducing a permanent administrative corps and giving it a proper
amount of authority. We simply note this difference between gov-
ernment and business because it helps to explain the relative ad-
vantage, from an administrative standpoint, of one, and the
difficulty of the adjustment of the other.
Governmental administration is more complex because of the
nature of public duties. In large realms of social action, compulsion
is necessary. Government regulates, prohibits, prosecutes. This
means that public authorities must operate in a hostile or an-
tagonistic atmosphere. Very few such situations arise in business
administration; services are usually sought, or at any rate evoke
a positive pleasure-response. Then, too, business services are rela-
tively more simple because specialization is greater. Compare the
problem of administering a large organization which sells one serv-
ice or product, such as the telephone or a motor car, with that of
a national government, which has within each department literally
a score of diverse concerns. The United States Department of the
Interior, for example, is charged with responsibility for matters so
diverse as hospitals for the insane, oil wells, Alaskan bears, country
schools, grazing rights, and universities. Specialization makes it
easier to produce outstanding administration; concentration is one
of the laws of success. The opposite is likewise true: multiple in-
terests divide attention, make unity and cooperation difficult, and
militate against institutional homogeneity and esprit.
It was once thought that an outstanding difference between busi-
ness and government is that the latter is bureaucratic and the
former is not. We now know that bureaucracy is generic, the
result of size. Small governments are no more bureaucratic than
small business units. Large governments are not necessarily more
 THE STUDY OF ADMINISTRATION 39

bureaucratic than large corporations. Bureaucracy is a necessary

implication of large size. Some of its results are efficient, while
others are socially objectionable. The problem of administration is
therefore to eradicate, if possible, those consequences of bureau-
cracy which are undesirable. They are the very ones we have men-
tioned, namely, inflexibility, disunity, unresponsiveness. The ob-
jectionable features of bureaucracy can be made to dissolve when
sufficient amounts of principle are applied to large organization
units. The need of outstanding executive leadership, staff assist-
ance, decentralization, and functional specialization is in direct
ratio to the size and complexity of the institution. Woodrow Wilson
wisely remarked: "The object of administrative study is to rescue
executive methods from the confusion and costliness of empirical
experiment and set them upon foundations laid deep in stable
principle."11
The problem of the developing science of administration is like
that of other social science disciplines in that it needs to become
systematic and yet guard against insularity. The need for a con-
sistent theory of large-scale administration is even greater today
than it was when Woodrow Wilson wrote-less was known then,
but the problems were nowhere near as great. The creative state
and an "administered" economy have emerged within the last
half-century. One needs simply consider the staggering significance
of the administrative problems requiring solution and the empirical
nature of attempted solutions to recognize the crying need for a
systematic body of principles.
The answer is to be found in a broader view of administration
than has heretofore obtained and in concerted attention to an
underlying rationale. If the cultural view is steadfastly adhered to,
insularity can be avoided. We do not want efficiency for its own
sake; we want it for the sake of our democratic form of government.
If administration were allowed to develop in a closed compartment,
we should probably find that in a generation or so democratically-
inspired people would have to tear down or reconstruct much that
had been done in order to make the instrument conform to the
life and temper of the people. Public administration in a democracy
cannot expect to be concerned solely with efficiency.12
11 Ibid., p. 210.
12 "An individual sovereign will adopt a simple plan and carry it out directly:
he will have but one opinion, and he will embody that one opinion in one command.
40 THE AMERICAN POLITICAL SCIENCE REVIEW

The formulation of an acceptable theory and philosophy of ad-

ministration is likely to be less difficult than the education ol
legislators and voters in the necessity of applying these findings.
There is a natural distrust of a strengthened executive, and yet it
is perfectly obvious that most administrative improvements, such
as greater unity and flexibility, hinge upon the enhancement of
executive responsibility. We need to educate our fellow citizens to
see that the advantages of simplification, effectiveness, and responsi-
bility more than offset the theoretical danger of abuse of power.
Woodrow Wilson has stated the matter in his usual lucid manner:
"There is no danger in power, if only it be not irresponsible. If it
be divided, dealt out in shares to many, it is obscured; and if it
be obscured, it is made irresponsible. But if it be centered in heads
of the service and in heads of branches of the service, it is easily
watched and brought to book. If to keep his office a man must
achieve open and honest success, and if at the same time he feels
himself intrusted with large freedom of discretion, the greater his
power the less likely is he to abuse it, the more is he nerved and
sobered and elevated by it. The less his power, the more safely
obscure and unnoticed does he feel his position to be, and the more
readily does he relapse into remissness."'3
Administrators need to educate their masters. Democracy can-
not survive unless basic programs succeed in accomplishing their
objectives. On the other hand, the only kind of effectiveness which
is acceptable to a democratic people is that which is produced by
those who can be trusted. "The ideal for us is a civil service cul-
tured and self-sufficient enough to act with sense and vigor, and
yet so intimately connected with the popular thought, by means of
elections and constant public counsel, as to find arbitrariness or
class spirit quite out of the question."''4 The acceptability of public
administration principles is dependent upon their consistency with
and contribution to those democratic values which the community
is determined to preserve at all costs.

But this other sovereign, the people, will have a score of differing opinions. They can
agree upon nothing simple: advance must be made through compromise, by a com-
pounding of differences, by a trimming of plans and a suppression of too straight-
forward principles. There will be a succession of resolves running through a course
of years, a dropping fire of commands running through a whole gamut of modifica-
tions." Woodrow Wilson, ibid., p. 207.
13 Ibid., pp. 213-214.
14 Ibid., p. 217.