April 37, 1900.] 



SGIENGE, 



669 



A STATEMENT EEGAEDING THE SITUATION AT 

 THE UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI. 



To THE Editor op Science : — Letters re- 

 ceived by the writer from professional friends 

 in various parts of the country indicate more 

 than a passing interest in the university crisis 

 at Cincinnati. The reason is not far to seek. 

 The measure which has been here enacted 

 shows that it is possible in the United States of 

 America for nearly an entire college faculty to 

 be summarily discharged without specific rea- 

 son and without a hearing. This fact gives to 

 a local trouble an aspect of national concern. 

 The security of the tenure of office of every 

 professor in the country is responsive to such a 

 shock. 



One is naturally inclined to shield from pub- 

 licity a purely family trouble, but the common 

 interest in the present case leads me to submit 

 for the readers of Science a brief statement 

 that may be of service to all who desire to find 

 correct answers to several pertinent ques- 

 tions. 



What is the explanation of this revolutionary 

 procedure? Does the difficulty center in the 

 Board of Directors, in the Faculty, or in the 

 President? As one who has just resigned from 

 the Faculty, after a term of service cover- 

 ing nearly seventeen years, I may seem in a 

 measure disqualified to make an ex parte state- 

 ment, but the demand is for facts rather than 

 argumentation, and the main facts are best 

 known to the Faculty. 



A comprehensive view of the situation must 

 embrace the Board, the Faculty and the Pres- 

 ident. I restrict my attention to the most 

 salient features of these three phases of the 

 main question. 



The conditions as to each are somewhat ex- 

 ceptional. The Board of Directors consists, 

 normally, of nineteen members, including, ex 

 officio, the mayor of the city. They are nom- 

 inated by the judges of the Superior Court. The 

 term of ofiice is six years. The members are 

 generally men of considerable professional or 

 business experience, but frequently without 

 college training, or knowledge of university 

 management. 



The varied business of the Board is subdi- 

 vided and referred to special committees, in- 



cluding a committee on finance, a committee 

 on law, a committee on buildings, a committee 

 on academic department, etc. While the final 

 authority rests with the Board, the voice of 

 each committee is practically decisive in its de- 

 partment. The members have seemed disposed 

 to limit the expenditure of time and thought to 

 the special duties assigned to them. The majority 

 of them are seldom seen at the University even 

 on great public occasions like commencement. 



The educational horizon of members of the 

 Board may be discerned from the following cir- 

 cumstance. The special committee in closest 

 touch with the President met with a committee 

 of citizens in order to confer concerning the 

 present difficulty. The argument was advanced 

 that the Board was acting strictly within its 

 rights in the matter, inasmuch as it was simply 

 a question of discharging and hiring employees. 

 The changes contemplated were desirable, even 

 from a business standpoint, since as good, or 

 better men could be secured for less money. 



During the twenty-five years which have 

 elapsed since the organization of the university, 

 the institution has been without a president. 



The Dean of the Faculty has been charged 

 with administrative functions and the deanship 

 has been at times a rotary office. On several 

 occasions a difference of judgment arose be- 

 tween the Faculty and members of the Board 

 as to the internal administration. The Faculty 

 took a positive stand, incurring thereby the 

 displeasure of members of the Board. The 

 depth and implacability of this feeling were 

 never realized by the Faculty until the recent 

 publication of a lengthy statement, drawn up by 

 a special committee of the Board, in defense of 

 their present course. 



Again, the Faculty has received censure in 

 not having been able always to act as one man 

 in the government of the student body. 



The reportorial mind has been quick to at- 

 tribute any differences of opinion to personal 

 ambitions and jealousies. I do not doubt the 

 sincerity of members of the Board in asserting 

 that many members of the Faculty strove to 

 secure the deanship as a possible stepping-stone 

 to the vacant presidency. This view is so far 

 from the actual truth, however, as to be even 

 grotesque. The deanship has long been a th ank- 



