486 



SCIENCE 



[N. S. Vol. XXVIII. No. 719 



back had been objected to, but the objection 

 was not sustained. The group that I met 

 were all indignant at the whole procedure and 

 their talk drifted back to the meeting of 

 April 3, for which I had received no notice. 



It seems that at that meeting the governor 

 was present, as were all the ex-officio mem- 

 bers. The governor almost never attends 

 even the regular board meetings, but he was 

 at that special one. He presented a set of 

 laudatory resolutions on the president and 

 spoke so pointedly, on his wish that the board 

 should back up the president, that it excited 

 comment at the time. Shortly thereafter my 

 case was called, and discussed in my absence. 

 The president attacked me, then, behind my 

 back; and tried to get the board to pass 

 resolutions which would have led to my 

 resignation in self-respect. Action was only 

 deferred by the vigorous protests of some who 

 insisted that I had been promised a hearing; 

 that up to that time I had had no chance to 

 reply to anything that had been said, and had 

 not even heard it. 



After I was sure that there was no doubt 

 on this point, I showed those members my file 

 of the president's letters containing this one: 



XjNrVEESITT OF ItLINOIS 

 PEESmENT'S OFFICE 



De. G. T. Kemp, April 11, 1908. 



Natural History Building 

 My dear Doctor, 



The board of trustees at its last meeting on 

 Friday April 3 in the city of Chicago considered 

 at much length your communications to the presi- 

 dent of the university and the president of the 

 board. Through some misunderstanding it seems 

 you did not receive notice of the meeting. I urged 

 that action be deferred until you could be heard 

 if you care to be. 



Faithfully yours, 

 (Signed) Edmund J. James. 



As will be seen, in my resignation, I ac- 

 cepted the version of the trustees — not that of 

 the president. There is not a member of the 

 board from the governor down who can plead 

 ignorance after this. 



There is another thing which happened at 

 the meeting, on April 3, which has a very 

 ugly look. I was not there and did not hear 

 what the president said, but he certainly gave 



some of the trustees the impression that I 

 had referred him to three men at Johns Hop- 

 kins, that he had seen these men, and that all 

 three had spoken unfavorably of me. He did 

 go to Baltimore, and if he was as misleading 

 there, with those whom he saw, as he was in 

 his " secret report " to the trustees, I do not 

 know what sort of impression he created. As 

 a matter of fact, I knew nothing of his in- 

 tended visit to Johns Hopkins, and did not 

 refer him to anybody. If I had done so I 

 should have given him my card.^ 



The rest is soon told. The president's ac- 

 tions had made the whole affair a burlesque 

 on justice; the governor had aided and abetted 

 him, and was evidently keeping his influence 

 active. The sense of decency of about half 

 the board was outraged, and the others were 

 likely to stand pat. It was disagreeable for 

 everybody. I was disgusted and willing to 

 sacrifice my " job " for the dignity of my pro- 

 fession. A university professor is entitled to 

 more respect than to be subjected to such a 

 farce of a hearing. 



I was prepared to resign, but before I did 

 so, the president contributed one more serio- 

 comic feature, in the shape of a letter. It 

 was serious, because it came from a man in 

 his position; it was comic because of its form, 

 and because I received a letter of the same 

 date, from another official, and it would take 

 a pretty clever casuist to make the two agree. 

 The one letter was from the secretary of the 

 board of trustees giving me the words of the 

 president's resolution, which had been lost at 

 the last meeting, and also the vote. This 

 resolution has been quoted above. The presi- 

 dent's letter, on the same date, is as follows : 



^I can not pass this by, without expressing a 

 thought which will appeal to more than one 

 reader of Scienoe. I have known men to have 

 injustice done them when it was never so intended. 

 In judging the speed of a horse, you must see if 

 there is a handicap. A horse that can trot a mile 

 in 3:50, carrying weight over a heavy and broken 

 road, may have just as good stuff in him as one 

 that can make it in 2:25 on a good track in a 

 proper rig; and the fact that the 3:50 animal has 

 never quit, and refuses to have his racing-spirit 

 broken is not such a bad recommendation for his 

 old stable. 



