Ross Affair: Notebook containing D. S. Jordan's statement with exhibits and ptd. report of Committee of Economists

4

no personal acquaintance with Mayor Phelan or with any of the Democratic managers, nor any particular interest in their plans. There are countless grave dangers behind the antiChinese agitation, but what he said was neither extreme nor revolutionary. Dr. Ross presented the usual protectionist argument for the preservation of an American scale of living. I doubt the soundness of this argument, but most public men are influenced by it. The same view has been lately developed by Justice Brewer and by Senator Bard.

In any case, Dr. Ross had nothing whatever in common with the anti-Chinese agitators. He has always been strenuously opposed to Socialism as well as to Anarchism; and he is totally opposed to the methods of violence by which the labor organizations are trying to carry their point.

At the University Dr. Ross has been a constant source of strength. He is one of the best teachers, always just, moderate and fair. He is beloved by his students and has risen steadily in the estimation of his colleagues, some of whom were pretty hard upon him four years ago.

In the times of trouble in the University he has been most Loyal, accepting extra work and all kinds of embarrassments without a word of complaint. The sickness of Dr. Warner, the failure of Dr. Clark, and the sudden departure of Dr. Powers, left him on each of three years with half the work of another man in addition to his own. But he took this uncomplainingly

5 and I did not know until it was over that he was not strong enough to stand up to lecture had to spend his afternoons in bed. If he had been a selfish man he would not have overtasked himself. If he had cared for himself alone, he would have kept clear of criticism.

I am sure that this is not a matter for hasty decision. I feel that all sides must be considered. I feel sure that if his critics would come forth to make their complaints to me in manly fashion, I could convince any of them that have no real ground for complaint. In this matter, I am in a better position to decide than any one else can be. I watch closely day by day every man who teaches here. I think that I know them all thoroughly. As you know, I have not retained for a day a man who seemed to me to be doing mischief. The honor of the University is dearer than life. It is my life. And this honor forces upon me the need of justice.

No deeper charge can be made against a University than that it denies its professors freedom of speech. Of all men in the country their opinions on public questions are most important.

This matter involves the whole future career of a wise, learned and noble man, one of the most loyal and devoted of all the band we have brought together. I must therefore ask to take my own time for a final decision, to be allowed to let the work go on as it has done for the present. if Dr. Ross fails

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)

35

-----COPY-----

Exhibit ''O''.

Stanford University, Cal. Mar. 19th., 1900.

Dear Mrs. Stanford:

Dr. Jordan has just told me you are in doubt about my reappointment. I gathered from him that you believe me at heart a socialist or anarchist bent on covertly spreading my views in my teaching. He suggested that a frank letter to you would be proper, and it is in this instance I venture to write you at such length.

I will not deny I was much surprised to learn of your disapproval for I have not been engaging in controversy or making many public utterances. Since my return from abroad, I have been here on the ground quietly attending to my duties and doing everything I can think to the further the interests of the University. I can think of nothing I have done that has (not) been dictated by the spirit of loyalty to the fame of this University and of devotion to the young people I am teaching. I have nothing to reproach myself with, and there would be nothing to say in this letter were it not that I believe you to be wrongly informed as to my own views and aims. I am willing to be held responsible for my own opinions, but I cannot afford to become responsible for opinions that people may tell you I hold.

It would be of no use for me to say "I am not this. I am not that''. I would rather you would gather my view from better evidence.

Now in the last ten years, I have published over twenty-

36

five articles, all in sober, high class periodicals, edited by conservative men. I know you haven't seen any of them, and I would rather have you gather my opinions from them than from what the sensational newspapers out here choose to put into my mouth when I speak in public. Therefore I send you herewith under separate cover, such articles as I have reprints of. Please glanse [sic] at them a moment. They are dry. They will bore you, but you will see at a glance that I am not dealing much of the time with burning questions. If you will but look at the pamphlet entitled "Uncertainty as a Factor in Production" or the article entitled "The Location of Industries" you will get an idea of the patient labor with which I with others am trying to make economics a science.

I do not write for the papers or for party organs of any kind. I write only for the great journals published by Harvard or Columbia or the other great institutions. The President of Yale would hardly invite me to write more articles for the Review he edits if I were a socialist or a dreamer. The University of Chicago would hardly have published two hundred pages of my writing in the last four years and be asking for more contributions at the present moment if I were a rash and dangerous man.

In my writing I have touched only once on socialism, and then in a particular connection and in way of condemnation. It appeared in the American Journal of Sociology published by the University of Chicago, and I enclose it in this envelope. You will observe that I speak of Bellamy's plan as a ''chimera''.