246 



SCIENCE 



[N. S. Vol. XXXIII. No. 842 



lapse makes clearly obligatory his enforced 

 (if not voluntary) retirement by a court 

 composed largely of his associates. 



And Stratton' says : ' ' The faculty alone 

 should normally have the power to dismiss 

 its own members." 



If the above views were accepted what 

 chance would there be for a change in a 

 chair occupied by an inefficient man ? Can 

 it be assumed even with any degree of 

 plausibility that there would be one change 

 per annum in the entire twenty-two insti- 

 tutions of this association? 



Throughout history it has been the de- 

 sire of the privileged classes to allow none 

 but the members of the class. itself to re- 

 move, reduce or punish its own members, 

 and oftentimes these desires have been rec- 

 ognized. But in modern times for the 

 majority of civilized nations, such privi- 

 leges have been taken from the nobility; 

 they are not likely to be instituted for the 

 class of professors in America. 



The responsibility of the governing board 

 and the executive educational officers to 

 the students and to the people is vastly 

 greater than any obligation to the pro- 

 fessor. The funds for the disbursement of 

 which they are responsible are trust funds 

 which to the best of their ability should be 

 expended to accomplish the purpose for 

 which the funds are available, and this is 

 true whether the money comes from the 

 public treasury or from private sources. 

 If a professor does not efficiently perform 

 his work he should not be continued. For 

 a given institution, if care has been exer- 

 cised in the building up of the faculty the 

 cases requiring so drastic action as request 

 for resignation or removal will be only oc- 

 casional. 



' George M. Stratton, " Externalism in Amer- 

 ican Universities," Atlantic Monthly, Vol. 100, 

 1907, pp. 512-519. 



In the great majority of cases when the 

 right of change is exercised because of 

 the ineiBcieney of a professor, it has made 

 no difficulty or comment; indeed, has 

 rather strengthened the confidence of the 

 faculty and the public in the governing 

 body. For my own part, it appears clear 

 that the ultimate authority to ask the 

 resignation of or to remove a professor 

 must rest with the governing body under 

 the advice of the officer or officers who 

 make recommendations as to appointments 

 and promotions. The exercise of this au- 

 thority should be clearly exceptional; but 

 certainly it should be performed whenever 

 a professor is clearly inefficient. 



The only cases which have occasioned any 

 serious discussion in reference to the ten- 

 ure of professors have been those in which 

 for some purpose, apparently not directly 

 connected with the duties of a man or his 

 good behavior, he has been dismissed. For 

 such extremely exceptional cases I would 

 propose no rule. Full responsibility must 

 rest with the appointing authorities. 



If they exercise the power of removal 

 arbitrarily, the public will hold them 

 sternly accountable, and their institution 

 will suffer, because good men will not be so 

 likely to go to a university in which the 

 power of removal has been exercised in an 

 indefensible manner, or exercised in a 

 manner in reference to which there is any 

 doubt. The public will always give the 

 professor the benefit of the doubt. 



In some eases where an institution has 

 had a fairly good defense for the removal 

 of a man, it has suffered for years in eon- 

 sequence of so doing. The punishment of 

 the offending university by public con- 

 demnation is the most effective protection 

 for the professor against arbitrary or 

 unjustifiable removal. 



Charles Richard Van Hise 



