New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1888-11-29
THE DECISION AGAINST CORNELL


The decision of the Court of Appeals declar-
ing Cornell University incompetent to become
seized of the residuary estate of the late Mrs.
Jennie McGraw Fiske, by reason of clause
in the charter since abrogated, limiting its
maximum possessions to S3,0OO,0OO in value,
is a severe reverse to the institution as party
to Professor Fishes suit to break the will.
Points of law are involved on which the case
can be carried to the United States Supreme
Court, and the decision now rendered is there
fore not necessarily final. Mr. Henry w. Sage,
one Of the trustees and the most generous bene-
factor of Cornell now living is reported to have
said that an appeal would be taken, and on this
point his information and his wishes would
probably coincide. There is neither prOpriety
nor advantage in anticipating the ultimate
ISSUE but it is of course apparent that the
university has lost a great deal of ground by
the harmonious decisions of the General Term
and the Court of Appeals, and that if the
chances were reduced to the basis of wager
the odds would be heavily against It, Though
the lawyers who represent Cornell on the Board
of Trustees and before the courts still express
belief in ultimate success, they cannot fail
to recognize the gravity of the situation.
Undoubtedly a practical blunder was made
when the trustees, in anticipation Of large be-
quests from Mrs. Fiske and the reasonable hope
Of other legacies, postponed obtaining re-
vision of the charter, which would have made
the present suit impossible. Such a revision
was procured so soon as it was asked for, and
might as easily have been procured years be-
fore. As for the technical defence, that the
university, while enjoying the income Of the
land scrip, was not its owner in such form
and degree that the principal could be reckoned
as part of the $4,000, 900 to which the unre-
vised charter limited its propefty-there is
probably at least an intellectual satisfaction
to lay minds in finding that the eminent APP
peals Judges refuse to take that view of the
matter And such sense Of satisfaction is
not inconsistent with a sincere regard for the
welfare Of the institution, nor indeed with a
sincere regret that provision of the charter
should have put in peril so large an addition
TO its resources.
There has always been, and in the nature Of
things always must be, wide divergence Of
opinion as to the part which Professor Fiske
has taken in this litigation. Friends of Cor
nell who are not friends of his naturally feel
bitterness which they make no attempt to
conceal But, On the other hand, friends Of
Professor Fiske, who may also be friends of
the university, contend that decent self-re-
spect compelled him to adopt course by which
he designs to rebuke individuals rather than
to injure the institution which he served long
and devotedly. Undoubtedly they find support
for this view in the general belief that he is
now employing his leisure in the accumulation
Of literary and artistic treasures for its benefit,
and that he has devised all his property to its
treasury.
Whatever the final result Of the litigation
may be, every friend of sound learning will
rejoice to know that Cornell University is sure
to possess before many years one Of the nOblest
Libraries in the country, Mr.. Sage having guar
anteed the completion of the building without
regard to the issue of the suit, The broad
lines upon which tho foundations of Cornell
were laid, and the devotion and liberality of
many enlightened men, have combined to make
the institution credit to the State and Nation.