Jane Lathrop Stanford Papers

34 6

to justify your good opinion, it is understood that he will seek another position and withdraw quietly from Palo Alto, and from the ''dearest hopes of his life.''. For no one can do good work where he fails to inspire confidence.

Very truly yours,

David S. Jordan

(Copy)

47

Exhibit "S". Contd

copy

Stanford University,

Nov.20, 1900.

Pres. David S. Jordan,

Stanford University.

Dear Sir:

Pursuant to your request I called this morning on Dr. Ross in company with Professor Green and made formal request for the letters loaned him and which you instructed me to secure and return to the files of the office.

Professor Ross declined to give the papers to me. He asked me to assure you that he would not take the papers with him and would not publish them; that before he left the campus he would return everything in his possession that did not belong to him. When asked if he considered the letters as belonging to him, he said he did; that the papers were given him for a definite purpose; that he needed them in vindication of his character, and that when he gave them up, if he ever did, it would be in exchange for a statement signed by you to the effect that you did and said the things expressed in the letters.

I incidentally asked him for the receipt for his salary, check for which to July 31 had been mailed him on Friday, the amount being $2625.02. He declined to give the receipt until, as he put it, he had ''time to call at the bank and ascertain if the check was good and had not been countermanded. ''

Very truly yours,

G. A. Clark.

14

based upon the statements first made in the public press. A mere denial of the truth of the statements made by him will not be apt to satisfy gentlemen who are not willing to believe that any of the parties concerned in the question would intentionally make a false statement, and facts alone will enable them to reconcile assertions that would otherwise seem contradictory. It is for that reason that we venture again to express the hope that a more explicit answer may be given to our questions.

Very truly yours,

Edwin R. A. Seligman,

Henry W. Farnam,

Henry B. Gardner.

Leland Stanford University, Cal.,

Feb.7, 1901.

Professors

Edwin R. A. Seligman,

Henry W. Farnam,

Henry B. Gardner.

Gentlemen:—

Your letter of January 30th is at hand asking further information as to the reasons for the dismissal of Professor Ross. When I expressed my willingness to answer further questions I did not mean to indicate that I would enter into any circumstantial description of events leading to or following from Professor Ross's dismissal. Nor do I consider it expedient or proper to go into a discussion of extracts from my letters or conversations or of my statements or alleged statements, or those of others, as published in the newspapers. There are, however, certain assurances which it is within the privilege of the public to ask, and which it is my desire to furnish, that the

15

public may be assisted in forming a judgment as to the position of the University upon important questions. It seems to me that I shall answer these questions best by certain plain statements which involve the important facts concerning the University. it will be necessary for you to assume my knowledge of all the facts, also that the interpretation herewith presented is authoritative from the University standpoint.

First: Professor Ross was not dismissed on account of his views on Oriental immigration nor on account of his opinions on any economic question.

Second: Professor Ross was dismissed because in the judgment of the University authorities he was not the proper man for the place he held. The responsibility for the correctness of this judgment belongs to the University authorities and to them alone.

Third: No ground exists for any interpretation of his dismissal reflecting on his private character, of which your letter seems to imply a fear.

Fourth: The judgment that Professor Ross was not the proper man for the place he held is not incompatible with my appreciation of many good qualities he possesses, nor with my wishes or efforts at any time to further his prospects. I have been neither ignorant of his professional shortcomings nor inappreciative of his good qualities. Of such appreciation Professor Ross has himself adduced several expressions from my letters.

In the hope that you may find in the above a substantial answer to the questions involved in your inquiries, I remain,

Very truly yours,

David L. Jordan.