Page:A History of the University of Chicago by Thomas Wakefield Goodspeed.djvu/521

 THE DEVELOPING UNIVERSITY 455 unhappy by them, but as a rule he made no reply to them. Per- sonal injury he would not resent. When, however, the University was misrepresented and particularly when a charge was made which, if true, would destroy its claim to be a real University, he could not be silent. He at once took the most public way to vindicate the institution and to make plain, once for all, its position on the free- dom of teaching. In the Convocation statement of September 30, 1895, he spoke on the subject at length. It is impossible to repeat all he said, but the following excerpts will cover the points he made: In view of the many incorrect and misleading utterances which have recently been published in reference to the policy of the University of Chicago in its relation to its teaching staff, it seems wise to make the following state- ment: 1. From the beginning the University has believed in the policy of appoint- ing to positions in the same department men who represent different points of view. This policy has been very generally adopted, and consequently in many departments students have the privilege of selecting the courses of that professor whose point of view is deemed preferable. It is evident therefore that no instructor in the University has been or will be asked to separate him- self from the University because his views upon a particular question differ from those of another member of the same department, even though that member be the Head. 2. From the beginning of the University there has never been an occasion for condemning the utterances of any professor upon any subject, nor has any objection been taken in any case to the teachings of a professor 3. The University has been, in a conspicuous way, the recipient of large gifts of money from wealthy men. To these men it owes a debt of sincere gratitude. The debt is all the greater, moreover, because in absolutely no single case has any man who has given as much as one single dollar to the University, sought by word or act, directly or indirectly, to control or even to influence the policy of the University in reference to the teachings of its profes- sors .... or even uttered a syllable or written a word in criticism of anything advocated by any professor in any department 4 This public statement is made .... because it is clear that a serious injury will be done the cause of higher education if the impression should prevail that in a university, as distinguished from a college, there is not the largest possible freedom of expression a freedom entirely unhampered by either theological or monetary considerations. A candid man will easily under- stand that the University could not and would not make as strong a statement as this, if its executive officers had any question as to the policy it should pursue, or if there had been any effort on the part of its benefactors to influence this policy.