, 1875-02-25

TIE UN1vERsrTY.-The case Of A. b
Nicholson against the Board OF kegents
of the Territorial University, occupied
the District Court, in this city, the
greater portion of last week. ending late
OH Saturday night by the failure OF the
jury to agree on verdict. NO civil
action ever tried in this court exciteo
greater popular interest than this. 1he
cause of action was as follows: In June
last, at meeting of the Board, regularly
called by the President. by virtue OF his
authority, three members being present.
which constituted quorum, the fres-
ident wis instructed to make PROPOSE
tion to Mr.. Nicholson to take the Pres
idency of the University upon conditions
specifically stated, and TO request MIN
to telegraph his acceptance or rejection
- the time for correspondence being
limited. The editor of this paper was
at that time President of the Board OF
Regents and made the proposition to
Mr.. Nicholson BY letter, strictly IN
accordance with the instructions of the
Board. and by due course received
telegram from him accepting the same
Mr.. Nicholson was at that time at the
head of a Grammar School at Kingston
on-the~Hudson, in New York, on
liberal salary and with assurance OF con-
slant employment. He Immediately
resigned his position there and started
for this field. Before his arrival here,
Rev. George F. Whitworth, who had In
the meantime been thrown out Of en-
ployment as chief Clerk in the Office OF
Superintendent of Indian Affairs for
this Territory, made written applIca-
ton to the Board for the Presidency OF
the University upon the same terms as
those proposed to and accepted by Mr..
Nicholson. "A meeting of the Board
was held, at which, by vote OF three
to two, the proposition made to Mr..
Nicholson was rescinded and that made
by Mr.. Whitworth accepted. Mr.. Mich
olson had no information of this change
until his arrival here. He had resigned
a lucrative and honorable position, in>
Cured the expense of transporting him
self and family four thousand miles
upon the promise of the Board OF
Regents to elect him President of the
University upon conditions which he
had accepted and was ready to fulfil ON
his part, and found himself out of en-
pleyment, among strangers and his
means of support exhausted by the e1>
penses he had incurred in the attempt
to comply with his engagement.
These are the facts, substantially as
they appear in the testimony. The de-
fence, aside from the technical subter
fuges which were overruled by the Cour'
was: 1st. That the President transcend
ed his instructions. That point vas
abandoned by the Counsel after the tes
timouy was in. I'd. That the promise
to elect him President was not such {
promise as to constitute breach Of
contract in law. Sd. That he had ne
cause of action until he had been duly
elected President. 4th. That propo-
sition and acceptance did not constitute
a contract but only a basis for negotia-
tions.
All the material points of the defense
were overruled and the disagreement OF
the jury was on the measure of dam
ages, which will have to be determined
by another trial. The prosecution was
conducted by Messrs. Emery. Hall and
Andrews, and the defense by Messrs.
McConaha, Larrabes and White.
How TO L1E.-Frank Moulton. in his
testimony on. the Beecher trial says,
Beecher once advised him to lie, and
''lie sublimely." That was queer ad-
vice for a preacher to give, but even
preachers may sometimes, in their at
tenlpts at the snblime, make misstep
and land on the ridiculous side OF
the line. As. for example, Bishop
Bagley, in giving his testimony in the
case of Nicholson vs.. The Board of
Regents of the University, attempted to
discredit the testimony of D. T. Wheel
er, who testified that he was present at
the meeting of the Board and heard the
instructions given to the President to
make the propositions to Mr.. Nicholson
upon which the action was brought.
Mr.. Bagley swore that Mr.. Wheeler was
busily engaged at the time, in another
part of the room, in receiving and re
ceipting for taxes, which must have
occupied his entire attention. By ref
erence to the Treasurer's books it ap>
pears that no taxes were received or
receipted for while the Board was in
session.
Again, Mr.. Bagley swore that be had
taken q position in the rear of the room
for the purpose of warming his feet at
the stove. The meeting was held on
the 18th of June, in mid summer, when
fires in public Offices are not usually
regarded as seasonable or comfortable.
This statement gained as much credence
from the court and jury as the story of
the man who said he was moving when
a deer came into the meadow. He
dropped his scythe. gave chase to the
deer, and by running him into a deep
snow bank, caught and killed him with
q pocket knife.
Mr.. Bagley testified on the same ex>
animation that he is preacher of the
gospel" We have before had occasion
to quote the saying, that "clergymen
are either nearer TO God or nearer to
the Devil than any other class" One
is the fountain of truth, the other the
father of lies. From which source Bro.
Bagley draws his inspiration. we leave
fo. afharg k<, ;udra -, ooppoofiou With