Jane Lathrop Stanford Papers

44

August 1, 1897, if it be deemed desirable for the interests of the University.

April 8, 1897.

The document of earlier date to which Professor Ross refers and with the terms of which he was unwilling to comply reads as follows: (Original draft in President Jordan's handwriting is on file.)

MEMORANDUM.

To Dr. E. A. Ross.

It is understood that unless Dr. Ross should choose to do otherwise, he shall retain the Professorship of Social Science for 1897-98 on the present terms, and that in 1898-9 he shall have the usual sabbatical year on the same terms as other professors, if such leave of absence be then granted. It is further understood that in due time he shall file with the President of the University a letter of resignation, to take effect August 1, 1899, and that the President shall be free to accept or decline this resignation without criticism or prejudice, as he may think best for the good of the University.

Signed, David S. Jordan.

April 2, 1897.

The official memorandum of April 8th has been shown to members of the Faculty Council as evidence of Professor Ross's uncertain status in the University in 1897.

Signed, G. A. Clark,

Secretary to the University.

45

Copy

Exhibit "R".

San Francisco, Cal.,

1457 Clay Street,

June 11, 1901.

Dear Sir:

A copy of a circular letter dated May 28, sent by you to members of the Faculty of Stanford University, has come into my hands. Until I saw that letter I had believed that the circular letter of Dr. Ross, which you include in your communication, contained the exact facts regarding the appointment of Professor Ross in 1897. The additional facts disclosed by your letter were absolutely unknown to me. I did not know of the existence of the memorandum of April 8 nor of the memorandum of April 2; although I had heard of an alleged appointment of April 3, being in substance nearly the same as the document of April 2. I do not see that the position of the University authorities in the case of the enforced resignation of Professor Ross is in any way strengthened by these memoranda. On the country they, with the attendant circumstances, show beyond reasonable doubt that President Jordan was willing to punish a member of the Faculty for what he had said in the discussion of public questions.

As a matter of record I have deemed it just to make the foregoing statement. Will you oblige me by placing this letter on file and showing it, at your convenience, to President Jordan and to the Chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means?

Very truly yours,

George E. Howard.

Mr. G. A. Clark,

Secretary.

46

EXHIBIT ''S''.

OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT:

LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY

Stanford, Nov. 19, 1900.

Dear Mr. Clark:

Will you kindly call on Dr. Ross this morning in company with a witness and ask him to return certain papers in his possession?

1. A letter from President ****, lent him about a month ago.

2. A carbon copy of a letter to President *****, of which the first is an answer.

3. A copy of a letter written in defense of Dr. Ross to Mrs. Stanford

This copy was sent him by you at my request to enable him to write to her to better advantage in his own justification, and he had my permission to use either of these confidentially with college officials in event of his honorable withdrawal.

As he has intimated to me a purpose to make different use of these letters, and one which seems to the writer an unjustified one, I wish you to secure their return to the files of your office.

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.

48

contd.

Exhibit ''S''

---COPY---

San Francisco, Cal.

(About Nov. 19 or 20, 1900)

Dear Mr. Clark:

The matter of the letters seems to me to be very simple. I want the clearance paper to which I am entitled after years of faithful work. Dr. Jordan wants the letters to which he is entitled. I am willing enough to give up the letters if I have the clearance paper. I can conceive of no reason why he should object to giving me the clearance paper.

The most valuable clearance paper to me is not an estimate of my work addressed to me but an estimate of it addressed to the personage I have been serving these years.

Is there any reason, then, why I should not receive tomorrow a letter like that on the enclosed sheet?

I should return at once letter dated May 21, and May 26.

I know nothing of any carbon copy of the Eliot letter. If I find such a letter I shall let you know. I know of no reason which I should not return it. I have a letter received from Pres. Eliot which I shall, of course, return when I get back to Stanford.

I can only add that I shall keep no copies of any letters returned.

Please understand that this has nothing to do with the check episode.

Sincerely yours,

(Signed) Edward A Ross.