Untitled Page 51

2

This resignation was not acted on until November
12, when it was accepted by President Jordan in the fol-
lowing letter:

"I have waited till now in the hope that circumstances
might arise which would lead you to a reconsideration. As
this has not been the case, I, therefore, with great re-
luctance, accept your resignation, to take effect at your
own convenience. In doing so I wish to express once
more the high esteem in which your work, as a student and
a teacher, as well your character as a man, is held by
all your colleagues.''

On November 14, Professor Ross authorized the pub-
lication in the newspapers of a statement setting forth
the cause of his resignation and its acceptance, attribut-
ing it to a dissatisfaction felt by Mrs. Stanford with his
expressions of opinion on questions of public policy, par-
ticularly coolie immigration and municipal owner-
ship of public service corporations. On the following
day, President Jordan wrote Professor Ross to the ef-
fect that, in view of his published statement, it was de-
sirable that his connection with the University should
terminate immediately.

The evidence which we have been able to obtain indicated
clearly also the following facts:

(1) The causes which led to the dismissal of Pro
fessor Ross existed in May, 1900.

(2) Although the dismissal of Professor Ross
may have been occasioned by his published statement of
November 14, his resignation was practically forced by
the wish of Mrs. Stanford. This fact is distinctly stated
in the report of the Alumni Committee of Investigation,
which report apparently has the full endorsement of the
University authorities.

(3) Mrs. Stanford wishes in the matter were expressed
as early as May, 1900.

(4) The delay in the acceptance of Professor
Ross's resignation was due to an effort on the part of

3

President Jordan to overcome Mrs. Stanford's object-
ions.

The question in regard to which we have been called
upon to express an opinion is: What were the reasons
which led Mrs. Stanford to force Professor Ross's resig-
nation?

Two classes of reasons have been alleged:

(1) Dissatisfaction on the part of Mrs. Stanford
with Professor Ross's expressions of opinion on ques-
tions of economic policy, notably in regard to the free
coinage of silver in the campaign of 1896, and more re-
cently in regard to coolie immigration and municipal
monopolies.

(2) It has been asserted or suggested that Pro-
fessor Ross had made statements before his classes re-
flecting upon Senator Stanford, that he had shown him-
self selfish and lacking in loyalty to the University, that
he was erratic and frequently overstepped the bounds of
academic propriety in the manner of giving expression
to his opinions, that his publication of November 14th
was a violation of confidence, and that there are facts
which, if disclosed, would reflect upon his personal char-
acter.

While it is, of course, impossible for us definitely to
determine what facts, or reports of supposed facts, may
have weighed with Mrs. Stanford, the evidence in the
possession of the committee seems to justify the following
conclusions:

(1) There is no evidence to show that Professor
Ross gave occasion for his dismissal by any defect in
moral character. On the contrary, President Jordan
states in his letter of February 7 to the committee: ''No
ground exists for any interpretation of his dismissal re-
flecting on his private character."

(2) There is no evidence to show that Professor
Ross gave occasion for his dismissal by incompetence.