Page:A History of the University of Chicago by Thomas Wakefield Goodspeed.djvu/522

456 A HISTORY OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO It cannot fail to be observed that in this statement President Harper "wreaked thought upon expression" in the effort to make clear and emphatic the position of the University on academic free- dom. He was speaking in the presence of his Trustees and his col- leagues in the faculties who knew perfectly all the facts, so that it was doubly impossible for him to speak any word that was not in accordance with the truth. The statement was generally accepted as defining accurately the University's position. The time came, however, when charges of another kind were made. It was declared that professors ought not to enjoy too great freedom of teaching, and a newspaper war arose against the Uni- versity, because it was giving its professors too much freedom. This war extended to the pulpit and the religious press. This new attack drew from the President another statement on the occasion of the December, 1900, Convocation. He said among other things: I am moved to make a statement of fact and opinion concerning two related subjects which quite recently have attracted some attention in the public mind. The first of these is the freedom of opinion enjoyed in these days by members of the University. The second is the use and abuse of this right by professors of the University faculty. Concerning the first, I may be per- mitted to present a statement adopted unanimously by the members of the Congregation of the University on June 30, 1899: "Resolved: (i) That the principle of complete freedom of speech on all subjects has from the beginning been regarded as fundamental in the Univer- sity of Chicago, as has been shown both by the attitude of the President and the Board of Trustees and by the actual practice of the President and the professors. " (2) That this principle can neither now nor at any future time be called in question. " (3) That it is desirable to have it clearly understood that the University, as such, does not appear as a disputant on either side upon any public question; and that the utterances which any professor may make in public are to be regarded as representing his own opinions only." The President then repeated in substance what he had said five years before, and went on to say: When for any reason, in a university on private foundation or in a univer- sity supported by public money, the administration of the institution or the instruction in any one of its departments is changed by an influence from without, when an effort is made to dislodge an officer or a professor because the political sentiment or the religious sentiment of the majority has under-