Reply to the Letter by Some Huntington Medallists

Thank you for your letter of March 17th. Both it and the attached letter from Professor Metcalf were thoughtful contributions to the continuing discussion about the future of this Society and I hope to respond in kind. But first I should write why it is that I am responding when the letter was addressed to President Partrick. The Council has delegated the running of this institution to me so that I take responsibility for the day-to-day decisions and for executing our long-term plan. Although my tenure here has been severely constrained by our financial crisis, I want to assure all of the Huntington medallists that preserving the scholarly excellence of this institution is amongst my highest priorities. I emphasize this because you were all awarded your medals in consideration of your academic achievements and so rightfully stressed your concern that the ANS maintain its reputation in this regard.

I fully understand the strong feelings that recent reports about the Society have generated. Let me therefore take a moment to briefly cover the latest developments. We have advertised for both the Margaret Thompson Curator of Greek Coins and the Curator of United States Coins and Currency. I trust that you will all sympathize when I say that the job descriptions for these positions were the result of sustained discussion by the Council, talks that I fully participated in. It is not by accident that we listed holding of an advanced degree amongst the requirements for applicants. Scholarship will be the primary responsibility in their jobs. Of course, there will be increased emphasis on the mounting of exhibitions and other public activities when we move to the new building. This is because the future of this society requires more effective engagement with the public than we have achieved in the past. With these new hires in place we will have a curatorial staff of four, still too few given the diversity of our collection but a good a base upon which to build.

One issue from Professor Metcalf's letter needs direct response. He called the treatment of the curators "callous." I disagree. The financial crisis at the Society is real and staff cuts have been made in most departments. Members of the senior staff, including myself, took a 7.5 percent pay cut to help balance the budget. Only the curators were offered such large severance packages, and to me it is clear that this was the right and honorable thing to do. The council did not pick and choose between individuals but rather made a general offer that allowed each curator to consider his or her future plans with full knowledge of our financial condition. Nobody was forced out, and had curators other than Michael Bates chosen to stay I would have welcomed those decisions. Indeed I was particularly surprised that Dr. Arnold-Biucchi chose to leave despite my direct request that she stay. As you know her position is fully secured by a restricted endowment. Certainly, the offer as formally made included legal language but that is because employment law in this country and in New York State requires it. It has been disappointing to me then, that the Council's very real generosity in constructing these packages has been held against them. Should the Council have terminated curators and staff with the smallest, legally acceptable package? Surely not.

Our focus right now, however, is on the present and future. Amongst the strengths of this Society are its independence and single minded focus on numismatics. This does mean that in times of financial crisis we stand by ourselves without any annual contribution from governments or a sponsoring institution. It also means that hard math must sometimes prevail. The solution in this country is to seek funds from private philanthropy and we have been very successful in bringing in the money that has allowed us to keep our doors open while planning a substantial capital campaign. The initial steps of a modern campaign - hiring a firm to assess our potential and making sure that some major gifts are in place when the public phase begins - happen quietly but are already underway. I am also working to make sure that the move to William Street is fully funded, a budgetary approach not previously practiced by the Society.

Looking forward to the move, I firmly believe that this will strengthen the institution. A higher profile and a commitment to more effective public outreach will ensure the financial foundation that will allow us to strengthen the curatorial staff and thereby ensure the scholarly reputation of the Society. I know that there is disagreement on this point and that one letter will not change anyone's mind. We are, however, already seeing the potential of a proper museum. In the last few months we have put a greater emphasis on inviting school groups to the Society. The response of students to our galleries when given a clear and energetic introduction makes clear what we all already know: that coins, even if small, are an excellent doorway to the wider study of political and economic history and to an increased appreciation of cultural artifacts. Bringing this message to a wider audience will ensure our future and the William Street location is a far better home in which to pursue this goal.

We do understand, however, that we must build support for the move. Under the auspices of the Council's Long Range Planning Committee and its chair, Professor Jack Kroll, we are preparing a statement of our long range goals. We intend to circulate this document before the council meeting in June and I hope that the Huntington medallists and other members will provide us feedback.

As a scholar in the field of numismatics and as the Executive Director I value your views. I hope you will share them with me directly.